"Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won't mistake for the real thing."
In other words, No matter how bizzare, outrageous, or just plain idiotic a parody of a Fundamentalist may seem, there will always be someone who cannot tell that it is a parody, because they have seen similar real ideas from real religious/political Fundamentalists.
Pretty image 'ethically sourced' from here, (thank you). Isn't it better than those horrible smileys that you try to get by struggling to find the right combination of keystrokes? :)
A more general case of Poe's Law is
"It is impossible to tell for certain the difference between genuine stupidity and a parody of stupidity."
[You should know that intuitively from reading this blog!]
It seems that this version of 'Poe's law' was created by Nathan Poe in August 2005 at the website christianforums.com (deliberately not linked from here because I doubt that you will want to go there). Apparently it was in the the section of their forum which focuses on creation vs. evolution debating.
Another version - independent from the others - is a Christian theological principle that states:
"Elements of the Gospel speak to different levels of spiritual concern in different cultures at different times."
This one was named after theologian Dr. Harry Lee Poe, a cousin of Edgar Allan Poe. It is taught to modern evangelists as a way to better target the message of 'The Gospel' to different audiences for 'maximum salvific efficacy'.
In other words - feel free to indulge in cherry picking of verses that seem to prove what you want to prove here and now, and ignore the possibility that they really mean something else - or indeed nothing at all. Elsewhere it is known by the expression 'lying for Jesus'.
So next time you hear someone quoting Poe's Law, ask them which version they mean.
Do they suggest a lack of sense of humour or lack of total open honesty?
Small note: And remember that expression 'maximum salvific efficacy'. Mind you it is quite hard to forget it as it is so utterly awful!