Me and my brother wanna mess with some Christians on Easter and we’re considering acting out the scene from every exorcism movie and walking in on the last five minutes of mass and sitting conspicuously in the last pew and then afterwards we’re like “father…we don’t normally come to church to be honest but…well can we talk in private? We need help” and then convince him we have a possession we’re dealing with and we’ll have brought in EVPs we made and everything.

Should we do this y/y




I just had a series of four nested nightmares in each of which I woke up from the last one and if this turns out to be a fifth one I’m done I give up




(Source: yo-tori, via heyfunniest)




hostilehottie:

celestia:

remember

if you can watch this entire video straight through you have the most iron fucking will on the actual planet, in the actual universe. you have gigantic balls of steel. i would not fuck with you. you could come in my house and slap my mom and take my cats and i would just let you. if you can watch all of this you scare the shit out of me

(via thatsmoderatelyraven)




dulect:

wow they really did adapt frozen well

(via ssleepyhollow)




gaypee:

animalsandtrees:

"Very important. General rule for English speakers - if you don’t do it in the human context, don’t do it in the nonhuman context.
Just make a little effort to say “she or he” or “her or him” if you don’t know the sex. It’s a little effort with a very important social message.
Nonhuman animals are *persons*, not *things*. Therefore, we should refer to a nonhuman animal as a “she” or “he,” never as an “it.””

gaypee:

animalsandtrees:

"Very important. General rule for English speakers - if you don’t do it in the human context, don’t do it in the nonhuman context.

Just make a little effort to say “she or he” or “her or him” if you don’t know the sex. It’s a little effort with a very important social message.

Nonhuman animals are *persons*, not *things*. Therefore, we should refer to a nonhuman animal as a “she” or “he,” never as an “it.””

image

(Source: facebook.com, via katara)




(Source: maggiesiffs, via johanna-slayson)




interquast:

i have all the right opinions, you’re all lucky to know me




Obviously a sociological analysis of Mormonism as Christianity is appropriate, but anthropologically it’s not really clear-cut how Mormonism represents less diversity as compared to general Christianity than Islam and Judaism do, especially if you make some attempt to segregate religious beliefs and rituals from cultural practices of non-religious origin and motivation.




newsweek:

A surprising map of the world’s most and least religiously diverse countries

I’ve love to find out how the hell Japan got on the diverse end of the scale.  My guess is the raw data suggested diversity because some people called themselves Buddhist and some called themselves Shinto and some called themselves unaffiliated.  It’s not really an accurate portrayal of Japanese religious beliefs to separate Buddhism and Shintoism into distinct religions and distinct identities though.  And many Japanese are functionally atheist anyway, which complicates the reality of religious diversity even further.
I imagine situations like that arise in many countries, so this data/map strikes me as misleading or a little untrustworthy.  The article does outright acknowledge that the data’s failing to identify diversity within larger categories of Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, etc. poses a major problem in interpreting the data.  Obviously Amish and Southern Baptists and Mormons are all quite different and represent significant diversity, but all of that is erased as simply “Christianity”.

newsweek:

A surprising map of the world’s most and least religiously diverse countries

I’ve love to find out how the hell Japan got on the diverse end of the scale.  My guess is the raw data suggested diversity because some people called themselves Buddhist and some called themselves Shinto and some called themselves unaffiliated.  It’s not really an accurate portrayal of Japanese religious beliefs to separate Buddhism and Shintoism into distinct religions and distinct identities though.  And many Japanese are functionally atheist anyway, which complicates the reality of religious diversity even further.

I imagine situations like that arise in many countries, so this data/map strikes me as misleading or a little untrustworthy.  The article does outright acknowledge that the data’s failing to identify diversity within larger categories of Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, etc. poses a major problem in interpreting the data.  Obviously Amish and Southern Baptists and Mormons are all quite different and represent significant diversity, but all of that is erased as simply “Christianity”.

(via truth-has-a-liberal-bias)