Uncomfortable with issue language

[The Remnant of James]

Hey, sorry if this is the wrong place for this, I glanced through the issues subforum and didn't seem to be the right place, and I guess this is a tech thing over a moderation thing I think? Ofc move or delete and lmk if this is wrong though.

Anyways, I just got served a MUCH older issue, like issue 39 I think, called "Scandal Rocks The Remnant of James’s Government!" Overall, I don't think it's that bad. However, the second decision on the issue explicitly mentions the Catholic church:

“Unbelievable!” says Reverend Liam Montgomery of the local Catholic church. “Our government officials must be held to a higher standard than this! Mr. Lotsalovin must be removed from office and prosecuted. We cannot allow such disgusting corruption within the halls of justice!”

Honestly, it's a fairly tactful writing all things considered. However, I'm really uncomfortable with the use of a real-world religion on an issue, especially with so much "Order of Violet" and what have you that is on newer stuff. Granted, I'm Catholic, so I may be a bit biased, but I think I would be just as (if not even more) uncomfortable if it referenced any other modern and real organized religion, such as Islam, a form pf Protestantism, etc.

I don't know if this is really actionable or anything, but I did want to bring it up in case it could be changed. Definitely understand if the decision is to leave it but I don't know/can't find policy on it, and it just made me feel a little weird.

[Sedgistan]

Thread moved to Got Issues.

[Trotterdam]

However, I'm really uncomfortable with the use of a real-world religion on an issue, especially with so much "Order of Violet" and what have you that is on newer stuff.

Why is this a problem? Do you not think that this is an opinion that the actual Catholic church would support?

[The Remnant of James]

My guess is if there was a political scandal of that nature there might be some disapproval but nothing that extreme; it’s not like the church is a fan of affairs.

However, my discomfort stems primarily from the use of the organization as opposed to how they’re represented; maybe I’m misunderstanding, but I had come to the understanding that these issues were supposed to be satirical and not directly attribute things to real world people or groups?

[Verdant Haven]

There are a few issues amongst our very earliest that reference specific real-world religions: Catholicism appears in 3 issues, Judaism in 2, and Jehovah's Witnesses in 1. All of these issues are 18-20 years old, and I think the style moved rapidly away from such inclusions as it became clear that the site was lasting beyond its original purpose. That, I think, is why these issues existed like that in the first place: this website was first created to promote a book that is a dystopian satire of real world economic and social systems, including corporations and groups using their real-world names. The site followed that lead.

We don't include real religions these days, but what I think is most important about those early issues where they do come up is that they are never mocked or treated disrespectfully. In all instances, speakers thus identified are presenting positions in keeping with their formal teachings, and where otherwise referenced, it is in acknowledgement of their real-world practices. We try to avoid going back and changing our oldest issues if we can help it - we largely only do so in cases where something genuinely doesn't make sense any more, runs afoul of later technical developments, or we discover an actual error that slipped through for a decade or two. Hopefully you can take comfort in knowing that such appearances will be quite rare given the overall bulk of the issue base, and that there is no statistically tracked version of any real-world church behind the scenes that will be turning up later or used for or against you based on your previous responses to issues featuring that church.

[The Remnant of James]

It does, and I appreciate the response and the thought.