🦊 Furry Furry Convention Drama - Because you can't have a couple thousand dog fucking enthusiasts under the same roof without shit hitting the fan

phattie said:
ANE updated their medical policy for 2026.

Masks still required, LMFAO, you can't make this shit up. Why is ANE the only furry con still requiring this? "ohh we take place in the winter" So do a ton of other cons. That shit should have been optional years ago.

Edit: Looks like I sorta mis-read it, you only need to mask in certain areas. But still. Lols
Click to expand...
Last year it was half heartedly enforced and by Saturday night it wasn't at all. At least that what my experience was.
 
moocow said:
It does.

Deuteronomy 22:5, New International Version (NIV): "A woman must not wear men’s clothing, nor a man wear women’s clothing, for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this."
Click to expand...
Not something you'll find in Neo Spiritual Christianity or any religion Bluesky users worship.
 
Rukario said:
Not something you'll find in Neo Spiritual Christianity or any religion Bluesky users worship.
Click to expand...
lol of course not. It's the classic tactic people have used against religions of all kinds since time immemorial: quote the parts of [insert holy book of your enemy here] that suit your purpose, and pretend the rest doesn't exist (or try to invalidate it, as some like to do with the Old Testament, claiming it's "bogus" now that the New Testament introduced a God who was more chill about things, implying He doesn't still enjoy the occasional Wrath of God type stuff to get a major point across here and there).

They don't believe any of it anyway; they're just hoping you do and that they can hold you to it. Christians put up with that shit. Muslims just fucking kill you for being a smartass that way (which is why they only ever do it to western religions).

I've been muted/banned from Nextdoor on several occasions for informing my neighbors of the passages of the bible they're ignoring when they get into pro/anti-fag arguments (it's fucking fun -- they never have a comeback, they just report you for "religious discrimination" to trigger an auto-ban :story:). I rub salt in the wound by pointing out I'm an atheist and even I know the text better than they seem to. I've taken to including a gentle swipe at the end of such posts, "The 'report' button is right over here -->". The irony of clicking it never hits these people.
 
Shitted Scaredless said:
Are you that bitch from 101 Dalmatians?
Click to expand...
No, Sorry to dissapoint you, I was just getting high at work thinking about how many wild foxes it would take to make a fursuit out of wild foxes.

I mean it would like take 30-50 foxes (I can get those in a year, wild ethical fox), no furfarming, to make a real high end fursuit disneytrademark-Robin Hood, wear it to one convention, cause a huge stir, and then quietly sell the suit to some degenerate American Rich Furry for one million dollars. It could work.
 
Apustajan apustaja said:
Would a fursuit made from real fur be tollerated? Asking for my trollsona.
Click to expand...
A long time ago there was a controversy about people making suits out of real fur. One of those involved had posted photos of a bearskin rug they owned on FurAffinity, if I remember correctly.
 
In actual convention news, Arizona Fur Con was unable to secure a new venue after the DoubleTree in Mesa backed out of their contract. Since March this year, Arizona Furcon had been looking for a new venue with people suggesting moving to Tempe, back to Scottsdale, downtown Phoenix or even as far as Glendale or Peoria. Given their past issues with IBFC and now this, I think Arizona Fur Con may be done for

Facebook / archive

Announcement Regarding Arizona Fur Con 2025

We apologize for the delay in posting this message on our Meta services. We had to resolve a few technical issues on our website, and we wanted to get those sorted before posting our final update. Those took longer to resolve than we'd hoped.

Many of you have reached out to us via email, telegram, via DM, or other means. We're still in the process of answering those messages, and you can email info@arizonafurcon.com with any additional questions.

We want to thank everyone that's supported us since we first opened our doors in 2013. Every guest, attendee, vendor, artist, dancer, fursuiter, musician, and anyone else that helped make our dreams a reality over the many years. We made friends with so many of you, and we hope to continue seeing you within the community, whether they're at other conventions in AZ, furry meetups by community leaders, or any number of popup events where we're allowed to relax and truly be ourselves.

Every one of you is precious. Continue making friends, growing the community, and keep moving forward.

*The same photo announcement has been posted to arizonafurcon.com - if the site is stuck perpetually loading for you, clear your browser's cache and reload the page.
To our beloved Arizona Fur Con Community,
I write to you today to give you the update that none of us wanted to come to. Unfortunately due to rising costs we are unable to attain a venue, and as such we will no longer be pursuing a restart of the convention. This is a difficult decision as over the last few months we had a dedicated team and progress was being made towards bringing a bigger and better convention back to our community. With a change in the industry and costs increasing we are unable to continue with our current goals and budget. Even downsizing our goals we were still finding a venue difficult to attain. We want to take the time to thank our community board for the tremendous amount of hard work they did behind the scenes. The artwork and theming ideas were plentiful and we were excited to have a more hands-on theme for our attendees. Some of our leads went to other conventions and reached out to the community for feedback and cross promotions. We also want to give a heartfelt thank you for the continued support from all our attendees over the last few months. This is a difficult decision, as we wanted to continue this beloved con. We know this is a disappointing decision, and we hope that our fur con attendees will still attend our other cons such as Saboten Con, Kikori Con, and Con Nichiwa where we welcome the furry fandom alongside other attendees. A few leads from the AZFurs community board have stated they may still hold large community events in the fall/winter, to keep the fun times going. So be sure to look out for group events hosted by them.While this is goodbye for now, we hope you remember our last few years together and continue to be a part of our community.
 
moocow said:
(or try to invalidate it, as some like to do with the Old Testament, claiming it's "bogus" now that the New Testament introduced a God who was more chill about things, implying He doesn't still enjoy the occasional Wrath of God type stuff to get a major point across here and there).
Click to expand...
This is called Marcionism, by the way. It's considered a variant of Gnosticism, and it's one of the oldest heresies.
 
California Newt said:
This is called Marcionism, by the way. It's considered a variant of Gnosticism, and it's one of the oldest heresies.
Click to expand...
Anti-Religious debate really is the arena of edgy left-wing flamewars (and as an Atheist myself, I can sit by the sidelines and laugh at it). But just to chip my bit in, i'll point out one main point of this theory is that the vicious and malevolent God of the Old Testament (Yahweh) is different from the all-loving God of the New Testament (just called God, or Jehovah). How Yahweh lost his job in Christian Canon is unknown, as far as I know the Bible doesn't describe a CEO change after Heaven's stock price crashed or something.
 
Rukario said:
Anti-Religious debate really is the arena of edgy left-wing flamewars (and as an Atheist myself, I can sit by the sidelines and laugh at it). But just to chip my bit in, i'll point out one main point of this theory is that the vicious and malevolent God of the Old Testament (Yahweh) is different from the all-loving God of the New Testament (just called God, or Jehovah). How Yahweh lost his job in Christian Canon is unknown, as far as I know the Bible doesn't describe a CEO change after Heaven's stock price crashed or something.
Click to expand...
In modern day we just call this a rebranding.
 
Rukario said:
Anti-Religious debate really is the arena of edgy left-wing flamewars (and as an Atheist myself, I can sit by the sidelines and laugh at it). But just to chip my bit in, i'll point out one main point of this theory is that the vicious and malevolent God of the Old Testament (Yahweh) is different from the all-loving God of the New Testament (just called God, or Jehovah). How Yahweh lost his job in Christian Canon is unknown, as far as I know the Bible doesn't describe a CEO change after Heaven's stock price crashed or something.
Click to expand...
Jesus explicitly identifies Himself as Yaweh multiple times in the New Testament ("before Abraham was, I AM"); it's a big part of why the Jews wanted Him dead. The God of the Old Testament is not "malevolent", and also isn't noticeably different from the God of the New Testament.

A big theme people miss is that God condescends to meet humanity where it is at various developmental stages: "He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so" (Matthew 19:8 ). That's why you had OT polygamist patriarchs, for example. Marriage is the easiest way to track this, because it gradually moves from polygamy to thr NT monastic ideal (as explained in 1 Corinthians 7).

In the OT, God was dealing with a bunch of bronze age semites and babylonians: it was a struggle to stop them from burning their kids alive to Moloch. It makes sense that on a surface-level skimming the tone would look different.

Nations are still destroyed and people still die for opposing God in the NT (Jerusalem's destruction being the most obvious example). This also applies to individuals such as Ananias and Sapphira who die for lying to the Holy Spirit in Acts.

The Law is harsher in some areas, but more lenient in others; large chunks of the New Testament are dedicated to explaining its provisional and pedagogical character. You'd have to ignore all of these chunks to come away with the Marcionite conclusion, which is exactly what Marcion did—he compiled his own biblical canon rejecting a lot of material, including much or all of St. Paul if I remember.
 
Last edited:
Elderly beef taco said:
I feel like i have learned more about the bible from this thread now then many years of church and one at a catholic school ever managed to get into my head.
Click to expand...
Actual theology is a fascinating field of study. It's a vicious shame modern churches take the role they do instead of actually teaching the real stuff. Imagine if more Christians of every flavor could argue theology better with, say, atheists or jews. I can't say there'd be less conflict, but it'd be a lot more entertaining.
 
moocow said:
Actual theology is a fascinating field of study. It's a vicious shame modern churches take the role they do instead of actually teaching the real stuff. Imagine if more Christians of every flavor could argue theology better with, say, atheists or jews. I can't say there'd be less conflict, but it'd be a lot more entertaining.
Click to expand...
As someone with an interest in Biblical canon and it's history/intricacies, it's difficult to find someone who is willing to teach it without trying to convert whoever is listening.
 
Colress said:
As someone with an interest in Biblical canon and it's history/intricacies, it's difficult to find someone who is willing to teach it without trying to convert whoever is listening.
Click to expand...
Are you having trouble finding relatively objective information? Books etc.?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom