I don't enjoy deliberately blasphemous portrayals of God.
Of course, one person's blasphemy might be another's canon.
...
Well I think the whole point of showing God in that situation is probably to be blasphemous. They have that right but WB also has a right to say what he genuinely thinks about it.
Thank you for that.
As I said, I have no problem with stories that offer a dialogue between the two sides on the subject. But when creators of a story live in a country that identifies in annual polls as about 78% Christian, and more broadly over 90% "believe in God" in some form, it is not reasonable to just rabidly/angrily attack Christians in a story. But to instead more respectfully approach the subject. If the creator of a story critical of religion has no interest in civility, they might at least want to tell the story in a way that has a chance of persuading someone, beyond simply insulting the reader's beliefs.
I think that is a problem both religiously and politically in the U.S., is that both sides often go for "red meat" rhetoric that only appeals to their political base who already share their beliefs. But the rhetoric is so poisonous that it could not possibly persuade anyone who doesn't already share their beliefs.
Needless to say, as a conservative, I see the rhetoric of the left as far more often insulting, hate-filled, demagogic and spiteful. But it embarrasses me when people I agree with use the same kind of poisonous/partisan rhetoric.
