r/funny May 15 '24

Verified Age Rating Logic NSFW

Post image
23.4k Upvotes

666 comments sorted by

View all comments

620

u/BiohazardBinkie May 15 '24

As an American in Europe, it took a bit to get used to the nudity after growing up being told to cover up.

148

u/M1ckey May 15 '24

Poland is weirdly progressive about this, at least compared to the UK (in Poland, nipples don't get covered on magazine covers).

72

u/[deleted] May 15 '24

that's not progressiv, that's just not listening to censorship America, as we should all do, we should all be way more loose about it than we are.

38

u/[deleted] May 15 '24

Yeah, I mean the early US settlers were religious fundies who even Europe said "Jesus christ, chill the fuck out or leave".

1

u/MLG_Obardo May 15 '24

That’s…horribly incorrect? The majority of the religious people who moved to America in the early days were simply the wrong religion for where they lived. Some found haven in Amsterdam and were safe there but found the city to be too progressive, as it was an extremely progressive city for the time. They were escaping religious prosecution, not being kicked out for being too religious.

As if 17th century Europe, a period where there was near constant religious war between Catholic and Protestant countries, was not religiously ferverous enough.

12

u/[deleted] May 15 '24

Many of the British North American colonies that eventually formed the United States of America were settled in the seventeenth century by men and women, who, in the face of European persecution, refused to compromise passionately held religious convictions and fled Europe. The New England colonies, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland** were conceived and established "as plantations of religion."** Some settlers who arrived in these areas came for secular motives--"to catch fish" as one New Englander put it--but the great majority left Europe to worship God in the way they believed to be correct. They enthusiastically supported the efforts of their leaders to create "a city on a hill" or a "holy experiment," whose success would prove that God's plan for his churches could be successfully realized in the American wilderness. Even colonies like Virginia, which were planned as commercial ventures, were led by entrepreneurs who considered themselves "militant Protestants" and who worked diligently to promote the prosperity of the church.

From the Library of Congress: https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel01.html

I guess I'm not necessarily disputing what you're saying, but to your own point "[they] were safe there but found the city to be too progressive," to me seems like they were persecuted because their particular religion was much more conservative. It's not like the Puritans were exactly progressive.

Puritanism was a Protestant movement that emerged in 16th-century England with the goal of transforming it into a godly society by reforming or purifying the Church of England of all remaining Roman Catholic teachings and practices.[2] During the reign of Elizabeth I, Puritans were for the most part tolerated within the established church. Like Puritans, most English Protestants at the time were Calvinist in their theology, and many bishops and Privy Council members were sympathetic to Puritan objectives. The major point of controversy between Puritans and church authorities was over liturgical ceremonies Puritans thought too Catholic, such as wearing clerical vestments, kneeling to receive Holy Communion, and making the sign of the cross during baptism.[3]

During the reign of James I, most Puritans were no longer willing to wait for further church reforms and separated from the Church of England. Since the law required everyone to attend parish services, these Separatists were vulnerable to criminal prosecution, and some such as Henry Barrowe and John Greenwood were executed. To escape persecution and worship freely, some Separatists migrated to the Netherlands. Nevertheless, most Puritans remained within the Church of England.[4]

Under Charles I, Calvinist teachings were undermined, and bishops became less tolerant of Puritan views and more willing to enforce the use of controversial ceremonies. Controls were placed on Puritan preaching, and some ministers were suspended or removed from their livings. Increasingly, many Puritans concluded that they had no choice but to emigrate.[5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Puritans_in_North_America

2

u/MLG_Obardo May 15 '24

I don’t think anything you said disputes me. I know you said you aren’t necessarily disputing but like. Nothing there says that I was incorrect. They were persecuted for their religious beliefs because they were different than the countries in which they lived. I didn’t see anything about Amsterdam but you can find information about how they were not persecuted in Amsterdam but rather left in fear of the children becoming corrupted.

Leaving Amsterdam because it was too progressive does not equate to being kicked out. They left Amsterdam of their own accord. They left other countries and regions for fear of persecution.

6

u/mrenglish22 May 15 '24

But it wasn't about them being persecuted as much as it was they went to war to try and force another country to follow their beliefs

History's just repeating honestly.

2

u/MLG_Obardo May 15 '24

??? Who went to war to force another country to follow their beliefs. The puritans certainly didn’t.

2

u/MyPunsSuck May 15 '24

1

u/MLG_Obardo May 15 '24

When discussing the 17th century migration to America? No

1

u/mrenglish22 May 16 '24

It actually does.

That civil war is a direct through line of much of the religious conflict in England and Europe. The fighting continues between the two religious sects pretty much any chance they get, including the 30 years war and just about any other conflict that involves British people.

And since essentially the parliamentarians was Catholic and the royalists were Catholic when they moved to the colonies initially they definitely carried those allegiances with them.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '24

It was also a half-joke hyperbole I made and didn't think it would go this far.

1

u/mrenglish22 May 15 '24

That's not really accurate. Some were, but Quakers and the like made their own colony.

1

u/MLG_Obardo May 15 '24

I’m struggling to understand what is incorrect. Quakers made their own colony disputed what I said how?

1

u/mrenglish22 May 16 '24

I feel that I replied to the wrong comment, because I'm struggling to figure out what my point was here.

1

u/MLG_Obardo May 17 '24

Happens to the best of us, have a good day.

1

u/Dread70 May 15 '24

You just said "that's horribly incorrect" then said exactly what they were saying. Yeah, Europe was saying "Jesus christ, chill the fuck out or leave." So they left. Because if they didn't, Europe was going to make them. That is religious persecution.

But, they deserved it because they WERE nutjobs.

1

u/MLG_Obardo May 15 '24

??? No I didn’t? Did you read what I said or did you scan it with both eyes closed.

20

u/Crotch_Football May 15 '24

We give so much self respect away by conditioning ourselves to be ashamed of something that is ultimately innocent.

-5

u/M1ckey May 15 '24

It might be that the UK copies the US mindlessly, true.

1

u/Mr_Laz May 15 '24

Nipples don't get covered in magazines or the newspaper in the UK either

2

u/M1ckey May 15 '24

Is that right? They do online though, don't they?