New Religion forum rules - effective now.

[Narrow Back]

If you are going to tell me that you think that Christianity is every bit as valid as Atheism, TDA, I am going to openly call you a liar.

Everybody is entitled to their own beliefs, and they are entitled to think that they are correct in those beliefs.

I think your Atheistic beliefs are invalid. But, I would fight tooth an nail against anyone saying you couldn't hold them.

Get the difference?

I do. I mistook your use of the word valid. Although I will say that, as a skeptic, I do look at beliefs different than someone who happens to believe one or more of them. And as you might expect, I don't think skepticism is a belief, it's the exact opposite of a belief, in my point of view.

Sorry, I just thought of something I wanted to add. Hopefully it doesn't muddy the waters furthur, as it were.

I'm considering, as a skeptic, the point of view that all beliefs are inevitably false. Doesn't that sound like a skeptic, saying that all beliefs are eventually proven untrue? That being the case, you could say that they are all equally valid--or equally unvalid, in that way. Their validities all equal zero.

Someone answers you simply and honestly. You respond by being pedantic.

I was trying to make sure Connie understood my point of view and where it was coming from. If that's hair-spliting to you then so be it.

So be it then.

[Post Tenebras Lux]

If you are going to tell me that you think that Christianity is every bit as valid as Atheism, TDA, I am going to openly call you a liar.

Everybody is entitled to their own beliefs, and they are entitled to think that they are correct in those beliefs.

I think your Atheistic beliefs are invalid. But, I would fight tooth an nail against anyone saying you couldn't hold them.

Get the difference?

I do. I mistook your use of the word valid. Although I will say that, as a skeptic, I do look at beliefs different than someone who happens to believe one or more of them. And as you might expect, I don't think skepticism is a belief, it's the exact opposite of a belief, in my point of view.

DA - everybody is a "believer". It is just that as a skeptic you choose to believe in other things than someone else. But you are no less a believer.

Quite apart from any religious connotation, philosophically speaking, it is impossible to believe in nothing.

I occasionally make assumptions, but I can't think of anything that I truly "believe" in, like that I have faith in. Do you mean it like I have trust in things?

Yes. Things (material). Situations. People. Circumstances. Providence. and so on.

If you did not you would be morally and physically incapable of any action whatsoever.

I recommend you start a new thread on this topic. It is a great one. Post your premise, and let's discuss it.

We can keep this one to dealing with "rules of FD".

[centrestage]

not all beliefs are equally valid?

Heavens, no

'Not all beliefs are equally valid' is probably how the Church of Sciencetology feels as well as its head Priest, Tom Crews.

And its all tax free

[J.B. Stone]

I second that emotion.

[J.B. Stone]

not all beliefs are equally valid?

Heavens, no

'Not all beliefs are equally valid' is probably how the Church of Sciencetology feels as well as its head Priest, Tom Crews.

And its all tax free

Please.

The Cult of Scientology is NOT any sort of "religion" at all, but a mechanism to destroy families and drain them dry financially. They're the ONLY so-called "church" that makes its recruitees PAY through the nose to belong and advance. They don't even mention "god" as it's their intention to REPLACE any belief in God with a dependence on their scam.

sheesh.

[J.B. Stone]

This Catholic/Protestant thing is totally foreign to me. I went to a Protestant Bible College and we went to a Monestary for the weekend on a school trip. It was one of the most amazing experiences of my life. We go a chance to talk to the Priest about our theological differences, and I came away with a much better understanding of the Catholic faith. We also had a chance to eat with the Monks (every single thing on the table came from their own farm), and we listened to their beautiful chanting. We all felt close to God there.

I also have Catholic friends who put some of my Protestant friends to shame when it comes to how they raise their chldren, live their lives, and work to make a political difference in this country.

I have no patience for the "holy" wars that erupt on here between Protestants and Catholics. It is a distraction, and it does not honour God.

This is my thinking exactly, and I am thankful that you have stepped in and commanded people to quit the mud wrestling. I grew up in a religious family that respected all points of view (while debating them -- which is considerably different from fighting about them) and attended a Bible college where it was possible for educated people studying for the ministry to invite Mormon missionaries to address a group of interested people and not turn it into a lynch mob. I continue to labour under the delusion that this is still possible.

Religion is an important part of my life and my character, and I do not see why we cannot discuss the Catholic religion without somebody jumping in and turning it into a discussion about sex. WE DO NOT HAVE TO MAKE EVERY SINGLE DISCUSSION ON THIS BOARD ABOUT SEX.

Thank you, Connie. I hope everyone follows these rules.

I pretty much stay OUT of the discussions being described because I'm not interested in running anyone else's life or demanding that they believe certain tenets.

Along those lines, would you [Connie & Mark] ask EVERYBODY to post stuff in the religious forum that involves thread hijacking and changing the topic to the "end times" and other obscurities to which NO ONE has the "correct answer" anyway....??? I say "obscurities" because there are endless "arguments" to be had about whether the Bible is a "literal" source and that's JUST the sort of conflict I find exceedingly tedious.

My contention in these situations is that people should be out ACTING as good Christians, Hindus, Buddhists or what have you instead of attempting to rip each others eyes out or preach on to the point of hypnosis and the cessation of any actual thought process. If that's what YOU call "doing something" to fix the world's ills, at LEAST have the decency to contain your arguments or "beliefs" or whatever you think they are to a forum where folks live for that sort of thing.

Am I being too presumptuous in my request...???

[Narrow Back]

This Catholic/Protestant thing is totally foreign to me. I went to a Protestant Bible College and we went to a Monestary for the weekend on a school trip. It was one of the most amazing experiences of my life. We go a chance to talk to the Priest about our theological differences, and I came away with a much better understanding of the Catholic faith. We also had a chance to eat with the Monks (every single thing on the table came from their own farm), and we listened to their beautiful chanting. We all felt close to God there.

I also have Catholic friends who put some of my Protestant friends to shame when it comes to how they raise their chldren, live their lives, and work to make a political difference in this country.

I have no patience for the "holy" wars that erupt on here between Protestants and Catholics. It is a distraction, and it does not honour God.

This is my thinking exactly, and I am thankful that you have stepped in and commanded people to quit the mud wrestling. I grew up in a religious family that respected all points of view (while debating them -- which is considerably different from fighting about them) and attended a Bible college where it was possible for educated people studying for the ministry to invite Mormon missionaries to address a group of interested people and not turn it into a lynch mob. I continue to labour under the delusion that this is still possible.

Religion is an important part of my life and my character, and I do not see why we cannot discuss the Catholic religion without somebody jumping in and turning it into a discussion about sex. WE DO NOT HAVE TO MAKE EVERY SINGLE DISCUSSION ON THIS BOARD ABOUT SEX.

Thank you, Connie. I hope everyone follows these rules.

I pretty much stay OUT of the discussions being described because I'm not interested in running anyone else's life or demanding that they believe certain tenets.

Along those lines, would you [Connie & Mark] ask EVERYBODY to post stuff in the religious forum that involves thread hijacking and changing the topic to the "end times" and other obscurities to which NO ONE has the "correct answer" anyway....??? I say "obscurities" because there are endless "arguments" to be had about whether the Bible is a "literal" source and that's JUST the sort of conflict I find exceedingly tedious.

My contention in these situations is that people should be out ACTING as good Christians, Hindus, Buddhists or what have you instead of attempting to rip each others eyes out or preach on to the point of hypnosis and the cessation of any actual thought process. If that's what YOU call "doing something" to fix the world's ills, at LEAST have the decency to contain your arguments or "beliefs" or whatever you think they are to a forum where folks live for that sort of thing.

Am I being too presumptuous in my request...???

No, you are not.

Well put JB.

[Grig]

This Catholic/Protestant thing is totally foreign to me.

Try being a Mormon around here some days.

So, unless the person starting the thread specifically states the thread is open to those who disagree, it is akin to an Ecumenical thread on the FR Religion Forum? Is that how it works? What if the poster decides later on they want to close the thread from disagreement?

I've seen FR try this king of approach and it hasn't worked out well IMHO. Rules have been twisted and become applied in a very one sided way. What I think made FR fail is that the moderators on the Religion Forum there were often unwilling to single out specific individuals as being the guilty party. If a thread went bad, most of the time it would just be pulled and no action taken against those who deliberately provoked. It's lead to a situation where there are now groups of posters who seek out threads on a specific faith they don't agree with for the sole purpose of poisoning the thread with their bigotry. Or if a thread starts talking favourable about some teaching offensive to them, they call it an attack and demand the right to retaliate so some topics can not be discussed by like minded posters without their antics entering in. It is worse now than before.

I think it may be better to have clear guidelines for posters, and strict, unbiased enforcement. Some suggestions:

Thou shalt not provoke contention.
Thou shalt not use mockery
Thou shalt not question the sincerity of another's faith
Thou shalt not call the intelligence or character of another into question on the grounds of their religion
Thou shalt stay on the topic the thread began on
Thou shalt only argue for your own beliefs and provide your reasoning for your position rather than attack others while hiding what your position is.
Thou shalt not speak on behalf of faith not your own, to state what their beliefs are
Thou shalt not post the same accusations in multiple threads
Thou shalt not stalk a religion, seeking to 'do battle' on any thread about that religion.
Thou shalt hold truth a greater value than scoring debating points.

[Grig]

not all beliefs are equally valid?

Heavens, no

I agree, but is FD interested in determining what beliefs are valid and what ones are not? Are Connie and Mark going to pass down a ruling on if Mormons are Christians or not and require posters to work within the limits of what they decide is valid?

[One Truth]

It's what you get when you have two groups both insistent that they, and they alone, are 100% correct, and therefore, everyone else is 100% wrong.

I don't know of anyone who is asserting that.

Everyone who uses the term "one true church", or other such phrases, is asserting that very thing.

Not at all. If you are excellent at addition but useless at calculus, I wouldn't say you have no understanding of math.

[J.B. Stone]

not all beliefs are equally valid?

Heavens, no

I agree, but is FD interested in determining what beliefs are valid and what ones are not? Are Connie and Mark going to pass down a ruling on if Mormons are Christians or not and require posters to work within the limits of what they decide is valid?

Freak Out when it HAPPENS.....not bloody likely, however...

[Grig]

not all beliefs are equally valid?

Heavens, no

I agree, but is FD interested in determining what beliefs are valid and what ones are not? Are Connie and Mark going to pass down a ruling on if Mormons are Christians or not and require posters to work within the limits of what they decide is valid?

Freak Out when it HAPPENS.....not bloody likely, however...

I'm sure that Connie and Mark have no desire to play that kind of role, but Scientology or Islam is fair game, so is every other religious system unless they take on the job of crafting a list of allowed and disallowed targets.

[Edward Kennedy]

ALL religions have elements of error imposed by the addition of man made doctrines that are unscriptural.

[MIGHT MAKES RIGHT]

Faith is by its nature unprovable. I think that if someone truly believes something and lives it to the best of their ability Bravo to them. Whether the belong to any faith or not. I also apply this logic to political circles, I would rather deal with a sincere honest leftist than a pretend rightist. Morally repugnant behaviors exempt. Leave judging to the judge and I need to worry about the person in the glass most of all!

[D. Johnson]

I am hereby dismissing myself from all such valid threads as applicable to the new rules.

I don't do so out of anger, excitement, or otherwise despair.

I do so because I know I cannot abide by those rules, and I request all those who would like to see me hold true to this word to remind myself should I ever cross them.

I spent a considerable amount of time tonight thinking about this.

I do this as I am well aware of what I hold true to my belief system, and that is that one is close, if not 100% correct, and the other is close, if not evil incarnate.

I appreciate why these rules were created, but I do not agree with the spirit or the letter of them.

Thank you Connie and Mark for taking the time to adjust the surroundings that this website finds itself in.

Disclaimer: As far as I am can see, I am not bowing out of religion discussions altogether, just Catholic vs. Protestant.

Self-censorship is an unusual thing. I have an unprecredented feeling arising from this...