A really good persuasive description of roleplaying

[Captain-Captain]

Roleplaying is an activity that allows people to learn how to look at things from the perspective of another person, in this case the character being roleplayed. This in turn encourages 'out of the box' thinking and can give someone insight into the motives and feelings of other people.

[Nemi3e]

Originally Posted by quarkstomper

Here is a site with a lot of good pro-gaming resources written from a Christian point of view: Christian Gamers Guild. Yeah, I know you're looking for something pithy and easy to pass on, but seriously, there's a lot of good material here for countering the "D&D = Satanism" canard.

*reads some stuff there.*

Wait. Wait. Christians have a problem with dice rolls being random?

Wat.

[Ts_]

Originally Posted by Nemi3e

Wait. Wait. Christians have a problem with dice rolls being random?

Oh, I didn't see that. Well, the article I found on that site addresses "trowing dice = gambling?", which might be a concern. However the article then goes off into a different direction:

Originally Posted by that site about dice rolls

Are we trivializing God's omnipotence by believing that He chooses the outcomes of our games? Are we minimizing his omnipresence by believing that He doesn't care about such things?

Which, you know, is a fun philosophical question. I would just flip a coin to determine the answer. ;)

Ts

[Nemi3e]

Originally Posted by Ts_

Oh, I didn't see that. Well, the article I found on that site addresses "trowing dice = gambling?", which might be a concern. However the article then goes off into a different direction:

Yeah, I have friends who can't use dice because of that. They live in a woman's shelter and so aren't allowed to have dice for fear of gambling. I think they are going to use cards instead.

Originally Posted by Ts_

Which, you know, is a fun philosophical question. I would just flip a coin to determine the answer. ;)


Ts

But. but...It's so freaking Calvinist. Didn't they learn better the first time around? Or wait, that explains why Tea Partiers are all pro Ayn Rand Bible Thumpers.

God Controls Everything. If you make money it's because God wants you to. God rewards the good and wants us to be good. Making money is good, or a sign of goodness. The slave trade makes a hella lot of money. Slavery is good!

*hair pull*

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Nemi3e

God Controls Everything. If you make money it's because God wants you to. God rewards the good and wants us to be good. Making money is good, or a sign of goodness. The slave trade makes a hella lot of money. Slavery is good!

You clearly have not read any Ayn Rand.

Bill Stoddard

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by whswhs

You clearly have not read any Ayn Rand.

Bill Stoddard

Bill they (A brand of Social Darwin/Capitalist Christian) ignore that aspect of her writest just like they ignore the inconvenient parts of Christianity. Basically they don't base them selves off Ayn Rand's works more uses aspects of it to justify their actions.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

Bill they (A brand of Social Darwin/Capitalist Christian) ignore that aspect of her writest just like they ignore the inconvenient parts of Christianity. Basically they don't base them selves off Ayn Rand's works more uses aspects of it to justify their actions.

Likely enough true of some of them. I don't have a statistical sample; I won't offer an opinion as to how many, except that I don't think it's "all."

Bill Stoddard

[Irish Wolf]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

Bill they (A brand of Social Darwin/Capitalist Christian) ignore that aspect of her writest just like they ignore the inconvenient parts of Christianity. Basically they don't base them selves off Ayn Rand's works more uses aspects of it to justify their actions.

It's called Prosperity Theology, and it certainly does ignore certain inconvenient aspects of Christianity, especially those parts of the Gospels where Jesus had rather derogatory things to say about the rich.

I don't think I've ever heard a PT preacher mention Rand, but then again I tend to start frothing at the mouth and screaming counterarguments at the radio or TV every time I'm exposed to one for more than a few seconds (praise be to [insert deity of choice here] I've never confronted one in person!), so they might have mentioned her and I just missed it...

[Nemi3e]

Originally Posted by whswhs

You clearly have not read any Ayn Rand.

Bill Stoddard

Sorry for lack of clarity. I know Ayn Rand was against slavery. I was referring to how Calvinist doctrine was used to support the Slave Trade.

God controls everything. If God disapproved of slave trade he would not make it so profitable. Since God made the slave trade profitable then he wants us to do it.

[dwightemarsh]

Originally Posted by Nemi3e

God Controls Everything. If you make money it's because God wants you to. God rewards the good and wants us to be good. Making money is good, or a sign of goodness. The slave trade makes a hella lot of money. Slavery is good!

*hair pull*

At the risk of further derailing this tread, there is a difference between people who take a idea and follow that idea to a logical conclusion and those who have a conclusion they want to reach and cast around for ideas that support it. I submit that people in the second group are not capable of being convinced until they decide they want to. They know something is right or wrong, they just have not found the right reason yet.
If the parents involved are of the second type of people, those who look for ideas that support the conclusion they have already reached, nothing you can present will make any difference. So, for the purposes of providing helpful advice, maybe it would be best to work on the assumption that they don’t have the unability to listen. If they are putting forth arguments this flawed, it will not be the argument which is holding them back, so refuting it will not convince them either.
Presumably the original poster interacts with these parents in some circumstances or other and thinks they trust him enough that they will not dismiss his offer to be responsible for their children for large blocks of time out of hand. To me, that suggests that the original poster doesn’t consider the parents as incapable of being reasoned with. So arguments explaining why the more ridiculous complaints about roleplaying games are in fact ridiculous are probably not needed.
Not that Nemi3e or anyone else has done that. I thought what Nemi3e first posted was particularly good. I am just hoping this does not devolve into something were we start refuting the sillier arguments against RPG that no one involved in the current situation is likely to make.