All together now: Don't feed the...

[Jami]

Here's how I saw it. Picture an old man asking, "What's with kids today?" He's not looking for a response from a kid. He wants other old timers to chime in and say, "Yeah, look at them putting crazy-colored streaks in their hair and listening to that rock n' roll music."

 

But I've come to realize that I obviously read Phred's posts in a totally different way than most people. :tongue_smilie:

 

I guess I don't see why this sort of discussion, one that is obviously meant to criticize others within their earshot, isn't taken somewhere private. Use PMs, you can send them to multiple people at one time, then Phred and whoever else would like to discuss the foolishness of those of us who believe in the divine, may do so without the obvious intent to offend and harm.

[Plaid Dad]

I was just trying to remind people that they don't need to play along just because someone posts something deliberately provocative. If it's the same darn thing that the person harps on constantly, then at a certain point you can choose to ignore it rather than raising your blood pressure. That could be Phred bashing religion and conservatives, or me bashing television, video games, and over-reliance on Dorothy Sayers.

 

On the other hand, if you actually enjoy going around and around over the same territory for the sake of debate, then great. Everyone needs a hobby. :D

[Jen500]

Here's how I saw it. Picture an old man asking, "What's with kids today?" He's not looking for a response from a kid. He wants other old timers to chime in and say, "Yeah, look at them putting crazy-colored streaks in their hair and listening to that rock n' roll music."

 

But I've come to realize that I obviously read Phred's posts in a totally different way than most people. :tongue_smilie:

 

That's how I read his post too.

[PariSarah]

I always think of the Philly Phanatic.

 

:D

[Parabola]

. . . posting a CC warning is intended to allow those who don't care to read Christian threads to avoid them, not to exclude non-Christians from participation.

 

Theoretically perhaps, but for the most part I'm not interested in CC threads so I don't go there, and I appreciate the labelling by the christians who do that. If I was an atheist label and I was a devout christian I would only open that thread for two reasons

one, I really want to learn and hear what is being said by others who see the world differently then I do, I would mostly open the thread to read

two, I want to be upset at someone because they don't see things the same way, I would moslty open the thread to talk

 

There is a double standard, when someone opens a CC labelled thread, the atheists do not converge to get upset about it.

 

As for having a conversation with only people who agree with you...are you really trying to tell me that you never enjoy that? I like to debate and argue with the opposing side, sure. But it wears me out, and I get just as much, if not more, enjoyment sharing a point of view with similar people. And sometimes, I just want to wonder and discuss possibillities without a debate getting in the way.

[Colleen]

Here's how I saw it. Picture an old man asking, "What's with kids today?" He's not looking for a response from a kid. He wants other old timers to chime in

 

Yep, there are times when each of us wants to jam solely with like-minded folks, but it ain't gonna happen on an eclectic board like this. It's downright silly to make in-your-face comments, especially about a "hot" topic, and then demand that no one who doesn't share your thoughts on the matter reply.

[genie]

I guess I don't see why this sort of discussion, one that is obviously meant to criticize others within their earshot, isn't taken somewhere private.

 

Probably for the same reason a thread is started, within earshot, suggesting to people that they stop posting replies to someone on this board who is then called a derogatory name. I guess it's just human nature. ;)

 

(Sorry, Drew, I really do love you! But it is a little ironic, isn't it?)

[Parabola]

I was just trying to remind people that they don't need to play along just because someone posts something deliberately provocative. If it's the same darn thing that the person harps on constantly, then at a certain point you can choose to ignore it rather than raising your blood pressure. That could be Phred bashing religion and conservatives, or me bashing television, video games, and over-reliance on Dorothy Sayers.

 

On the other hand, if you actually enjoy going around and around over the same territory for the sake of debate, then great. Everyone needs a hobby. :D

 

The thing is, we can't ever get to NEW TERRITORY because of the SAME OLD DEBATE. I want to discuss certain topics from an atheist point of view but I've never been able to get there because THIS SAME OLD DEBATE rears its ugly head.

[Gretchen in NJ]

Here's how I saw it. Picture an old man asking, "What's with kids today?" He's not looking for a response from a kid. He wants other old timers to chime in and say, "Yeah, look at them putting crazy-colored streaks in their hair and listening to that rock n' roll music."

 

But I've come to realize that I obviously read Phred's posts in a totally different way than most people. :tongue_smilie:

I wish that was the case. If it was the purpose then that would have been okay. But, Phred used the same title of a CC thread and replaced it with AC and then excluded Christian people.

 

I thought this board was inclusive. It is. That is why it is not here anymore.

[Jami]

Theoretically perhaps, but for the most part I'm not interested in CC threads so I don't go there, and I appreciate the labelling by the christians who do that. If I was an atheist label and I was a devout christian I would only open that thread for two reasons

one, I really want to learn and hear what is being said by others who see the world differently then I do, I would mostly open the thread to read

two, I want to be upset at someone because they don't see things the same way, I would moslty open the thread to talk

 

There is a double standard, when someone opens a CC labelled thread, the atheists do not converge to get upset about it.

 

As for having a conversation with only people who agree with you...are you really trying to tell me that you never enjoy that? I like to debate and argue with the opposing side, sure. But it wears me out, and I get just as much, if not more, enjoyment sharing a point of view with similar people. And sometimes, I just want to wonder and discuss possibillities without a debate getting in the way.

 

 

Debate and reasoned arguments are fantastic! But that's really not what this was...who debates that someone feels God (or Zeus or Allah) blessed them when something good happens in their life??? If we want to have threads (and we have) on the origins of life or political leanings or the existence of any sort of supernatural being, then fine, I would say those are fabulous places for respectful debate. But criticizing someone's JOY in their belief system? That's where Phred routinely crosses the line.

[PariSarah]

even with that French stuff.;)

 

. . . except the only word I could think of was schadenfreude, which is totally the opposite.

 

Well, no. It's exactly the same, only it's directed toward oneself.

 

There isn't a kicky German phrase that means "joy in one's own suffering, especially largely imaginary suffering" is there?

[genie]

Yep, there are times when each of us wants to jam solely with like-minded folks, but it ain't gonna happen on an eclectic board like this. It's downright silly to make in-your-face comments, especially about a "hot" topic, and then demand that no one who doesn't share your thoughts on the matter reply.

 

Oh, I think it happens all the time. I've had great discussions about LOST with other Losties on this board, without the need for people who don't like LOST to come in and say so.

 

BUT, yeah, if someone posted a thread with in-your-face negative comments about LOST and asked for LOST fans not to reply, I would most likely be the first one to pipe in with my opinions. That doesn't make me a troll feeder, just a stubborn, opinionated LOST fan. :D

[Colleen]

criticizing someone's JOY in their belief system? That's where Phred routinely crosses the line.

 

Exactly. And in this case, it was downright disrespectful for Phred to take the exact same subject line used the other day by Traci. It was provocation, no two ways about it. Discussing faith or lack thereof is always interesting. I have zero trouble with people who question my faith (I do it myself on a regular basis). But it's juvenile ~ and actually smacks of a deep-seated jealousy ~ to mock people who are genuinely content in their belief system.

[Mamagistra]

There isn't a kicky German phrase that means "joy in one's own suffering, especially largely imaginary suffering" is there?

 

Isn't that Fahrvergnügen?!? :auto:

 

:lol::lol::lol:

[Colleen]

There isn't a kicky German phrase that means "joy in one's own suffering, especially largely imaginary suffering" is there?

 

Not sure, but if so, my name may very well be in that dictionary entry.:tongue_smilie:

[Colleen]

Isn't that Fahrvergnügen?!? :auto:

 

:lol::lol::lol:

 

:D:D:D

[PariSarah]

There is a double standard, when someone opens a CC labelled thread, the atheists do not converge to get upset about it.

 

Because it seems to come up an awful lot when Phred gets disagreed with. "You people get your threads. Why can't we have threads for us?" That's not the question of someone who doesn't mind that "we people" get "our" threads.

 

As for having a conversation with only people who agree with you...are you really trying to tell me that you never enjoy that? I like to debate and argue with the opposing side, sure. But it wears me out, and I get just as much, if not more, enjoyment sharing a point of view with similar people. And sometimes, I just want to wonder and discuss possibillities without a debate getting in the way.

 

I absolutely do! But I don't really ever expect that of an open online forum. I'd go either to a closed one (and I've never actually been part of one of those--maybe they're just as bad?) or to a real, live human being.

 

I'm not dissing the merits of a nice coze with people who agree with you. I just don't get ever get that here myself, unless I'm asking for green bean recipes. And even then, you shoudda seen the recipe Aubrey posted!! (j/k, Aubrey!!!)

[Parabola]

I wish that was the case. If it was the purpose then that would have been okay. But, Phred used the same title of a CC thread and replaced it with AC and then excluded Christian people.

 

I thought this board was inclusive. It is. That is why it is not here anymore.

 

With all due respect Gretchen, and you know I love you, threads with CC automatically are somewhat non-inclusive because those who don't wish to discuss CC simply stay away. For the most part. Its not intentional exclusion, its natural.

It would be nice if the opposite could be true as well. Yeah Phred could probably benefit not only himself but his causes, if he were a little less inflammatory,but lets not throw the baby out with the bath water. Phred has great things to say...could you please be a little less in your face about it Phred, please? Its hurting your fight.

 

Anyway, it would be nice if an atheists could discuss things from AN ATHEIST POINT OF VIEW without having to defend that point of view, or their right to discuss it. A good discussion is rarely gotten to because first we have to debate like we're doing now. It rarely happens that the content, the issue of a CC thread is not gotten to because non-believers jump in and try to shut it down or call the OP of a CC thread a troll.

 

I see the double standard, its there.

[genie]

I wish that was the case. If it was the purpose then that would have been okay. But, Phred used the same title of a CC thread and replaced it with AC and then excluded Christian people.

 

I thought this board was inclusive. It is. That is why it is not here anymore.

 

There have been similar situations where there would be a big thread about Something, and then a new thread would come up with the title "Am I the only one who doesn't like Something". Then that person would get raked over the coals for being critical of the first thread. Those threads often get deleted.

 

But I am seriously curious, would Christians have a problem with "AC" being used on thread titles as a heads up in similar manner to "CC"? (If the posts were less inflammatory than the one currently being discussed.) I know not everyone (Christian or not) cares for the CC designation, but it seems to be used often enough. Would AC bother people?

[Kris]

One person thinking something weird... that's a nut. A whole bunch of people thinking something weird, that's a church...

 

I guess I miss a lot. I had no idea what everyone was talking about -- and didn't care enough to dig around to find out.

 

But I think your statement above pretty much sums up why this thread was created in the first place.

 

I don't read the CC threads simply because I'm not interested. But when Christian content finds it's way into the threads I *do* read, I have yet to see anyone bash the non-Christians on these boards. There was quite a conversation recently about pagan beliefs, and as far as I can recall not a single person claiming to be Christian said anything negative to the people who were participating in that thread.

 

I don't think God cares who wins a football game or gets a raise or survives a car accident. I'm not an athiest (I don't really think I could be -- or want to be -- "classified"), but while I agree with you on some of your points, you don't make it easy. I just can't fathom why you insist on taking pot shots at people like the one above.

 

You seem to feel alienated because you don't appreciate the overt religious preferences of the people on this board. I admit, when I pull up a thread that "praises God" I usually close it pretty quickly. But never would I even *consider* bashing these people as you seem to want to do. They are entitled to their beliefs -- and they are also entitled to express them in a way that is comfortable for them and those in their "group," for lack of a better word. The Christian community here does seem to be very tight-knit and I am not a part of it. But so what?! I don't understand why you would begrudge them that. It certainly doesn't seem to me to be something to get so worked up over.

 

I have gone back and looked at the threads you've started and you do like to initiate provocative conversation, though you certainly wouldn't be classified as a "Troll" on any newsgroup or message board that I frequent. However, it seems that you are simply initiating these discussions to give you an opportunity to argue with people about something that isn't worth arguing about.

 

Why anyone would want to waste their time with that is beyond me.

[Colleen]

Oh, I think it happens all the time. I've had great discussions about LOST with other Losties on this board, without the need for people who don't like LOST to come in and say so.

 

True, although I can't say a tv show generates quite the same emotion as religion. Some may very well disagree.;)

 

BUT, yeah, if someone posted a thread with in-your-face negative comments about LOST and asked for LOST fans not to reply, I would most likely be the first one to pipe in with my opinions.

 

Right! If you read: "Warning: This post contains anti-LOST content. If that's going to offend you, stop reading now. Okay, I think LOST is a lame. Who watches this crap? I really want to understand how anyone can like this show." What do you do? You chime in and explain why you like the show. At which point the o.p. adds, "Oh, I don't want to hear from you. This is only for people who hate LOST." And of course you say, "Well, pardon moi. Since you were insulting my fav show and wanted to know why anyone would like it, I thought I'd toss in my two pennies." And so on. But again, I think insulting a tv show and insulting those who are commited to a particular belief system are worlds apart.:)

[Kelli in TN]

 

But I am seriously curious, would Christians have a problem with "AC" being used on thread titles as a heads up in similar manner to "CC"? (If the posts were less inflammatory than the one currently being discussed.) I know not everyone (Christian or not) cares for the CC designation, but it seems to be used often enough. Would AC bother people?

 

 

I honestly would not be bothered by it at all.

 

And if one of the other Christians began mocking it or bashing the posters in it then I would probably send them some negative rep. Maybe anon since I am just sneaky that way.

 

We have had people of faiths other than Christian have conversations about their belief system on here and it was done with respect and they were treated with respect.

 

I think it mostly comes down to respecting one another. This is not an appropriate place to try to convert people and if we all keep that in mind and respect each other we can learn so much from one another.

[Parabola]

But I am seriously curious, would Christians have a problem with "AC" being used on thread titles as a heads up in similar manner to "CC"? (If the posts were less inflammatory than the one currently being discussed.) I know not everyone (Christian or not) cares for the CC designation, but it seems to be used often enough. Would AC bother people?

 

I think this is what I'm trying to get at too. Anyone care to answer?

[Gretchen in NJ]

There have been similar situations where there would be a big thread about Something, and then a new thread would come up with the title "Am I the only one who doesn't like Something". Then that person would get raked over the coals for being critical of the first thread. Those threads often get deleted.

 

But I am seriously curious, would Christians have a problem with "AC" being used on thread titles as a heads up in similar manner to "CC"? (If the posts were less inflammatory than the one currently being discussed.) I know not everyone (Christian or not) cares for the CC designation, but it seems to be used often enough. Would AC bother people?

 

Not sure. It doesn't bother me. As long as it is use to inform people about content and not to exclude people.

[Twinmom]

But I am seriously curious, would Christians have a problem with "AC" being used on thread titles as a heads up in similar manner to "CC"? (If the posts were less inflammatory than the one currently being discussed.) I know not everyone (Christian or not) cares for the CC designation, but it seems to be used often enough. Would AC bother people?

 

I personally don't much like either the CC or the AC thing...wish we could just post away respectfully. However, since CC seems to be here to stay and I do see some good reasons for it, I have no problem with someone using AC. As a Christian, I'd just open those threads if I was interested in learning about the point of view...sort of like those recent threads about Wicca that caught my eye. Intellectually interesting.

 

That's my two cents. I care not what someone posts or how they designate it, as long as it is respectful of those around them, KWIM?

[Colleen]

Would AC bother people?

 

Aside from the fact that many people use the letters "AC" in reference to air conditioners, nope, it wouldn't bother me. It would bother me if the content included derogatory comments about one's faith (whatever faith that may be). In Phred's case, he's proven himself incapable of talking about faith without insulting Christianity and those who practice it. Case in point is his comment in this thread, describing church-goers as a whole bunch of people who believe something weird. Comments like that are inflammatory ~ to some. And to others of us, they're so juvenile as to simply be amusing.;)

[Erica in PA]

Here's the difference, Phred. When someone posts praising God, it has nothing to do with you, your beliefs or what you think of their post. It just doesn't. It's not about you. It really really isn't.

 

When you post one of your famous, "I don't believe in God and think those of you who do are fools" posts, it IS about other people. It's not about what you believe or don't believe, it's about publicly bashing Christians. When people post their praise for God, they're not bashing non-believers. When you post about NOT praising God, it's all about bashing believers.

 

You may be sincerely struggling with all this; with Christianity, with God, with faith. And if you are, I truly hope you find answers. But my feeling is (and granted, feelings are simply feelings) that you simply want to irritate people then point out how flawed they are. If you find joy in that, well, that's sad. And frankly, I'd think you'd be bored with it by now.

 

I hope the truth of the matter is that you're struggling. Because if the truth is that you just want to irritate people, what a sad statement that is.

 

:iagree::iagree:

 

So well said! You hit the nail on the head, especially in the second paragraph! That sums things up perfectly.

 

Erica

[genie]

 

Aside from the fact that many people use the letters "AC" in reference to air conditioners, nope, it wouldn't bother me.

 

I can imagine the possible confusion with the thread a couple of weeks ago... "Am I turning my Atheist Content UP or DOWN when I want it cooler?" :lol:

[Scarlett]

 

Right! If you read: "Warning: This post contains anti-LOST content. If that's going to offend you, stop reading now. Okay, I think LOST is a lame. Who watches this crap? I really want to understand how anyone can like this show." What do you do? You chime in and explain why you like the show. At which point the o.p. adds, "Oh, I don't want to hear from you. This is only for people who hate LOST." And of course you say, "Well, pardon moi. Since you were insulting my fav show and wanted to know why anyone would like it, I thought I'd toss in my two pennies." And so on. But again, I think insulting a tv show and insulting those who are commited to a particular belief system are worlds apart.:)

 

Well said. I tried to rep ya, but I'm fresh out.

[Gretchen in NJ]

With all due respect Gretchen, and you know I love you, threads with CC automatically are somewhat non-inclusive because those who don't wish to discuss CC simply stay away. For the most part. Its not intentional exclusion, its natural.

It would be nice if the opposite could be true as well. Yeah Phred could probably benefit not only himself but his causes, if he were a little less inflammatory,but lets not throw the baby out with the bath water. Phred has great things to say...could you please be a little less in your face about it Phred, please? Its hurting your fight.

 

Anyway, it would be nice if an atheists could discuss things from AN ATHEIST POINT OF VIEW without having to defend that point of view, or their right to discuss it. A good discussion is rarely gotten to because first we have to debate like we're doing now. It rarely happens that the content, the issue of a CC thread is not gotten to because non-believers jump in and try to shut it down or call the OP of a CC thread a troll.

 

I see the double standard, its there.

 

Parabola, I love you too. Please remember that I am a math person. I don't like to write, so I try to post with as few words as possible.

 

I didn't mean to say Phread used AC to exclude people. He didn't. He stated in his post that started the thread that certain people of a certain belief were not welcome to post in his thread.

 

I forgot some did not read it and should have inculded that.

[Parabola]

Not sure. It doesn't bother me. As long as it is use to inform people about content and not to exclude people.

 

I personally don't much like either the CC or the AC thing...wish we could just post away respectfully. However, since CC seems to be here to stay and I do see some good reasons for it, I have no problem with someone using AC. As a Christian, I'd just open those threads if I was interested in learning about the point of view...sort of like those recent threads about Wicca that caught my eye. Intellectually interesting.

 

That's my two cents. I care not what someone posts or how they designate it, as long as it is respectful of those around them, KWIM?

 

I don't think it would be used for exclusionary purposes, or to be disrespectful (Ya hear that Phred??), but mostly as a respectful warning to christians et al that what is inside may not be something they want to read.

For example, I may want to discuss something similar to what Phred posted, I may want to speculate on the psychological need humans have for a supreme being. I don't think this is disrespecting anyone, but the AC in the title should let everyone know that its not a discussion from a biblical perspective and its going to be assumed in this ATHEIST thread that the supreme being in question is non-existent. To the posters.

 

Am I making sense? Is this asking too much?

[jacqui in mo]

& having a reasonable discussion, but I do think the wording of the post would need to gently & explicitly state that debate from Christians is NOT sought. I know there have been a few posts where some have overtly let us know that they were not looking for Christian input to their problem/request & that seems to have been respected. As a Christian, I enjoy seeing what atheists & other groups have to say (including Phred) so I would probably lurk on those threads as would many others.

 

Why don't you try a thread like that now?:)

 

Jacqui

[Erica in PA]

. If there's room for CC in a thread, why isn't there room for AC?

 

Because the threads with Christian content do not normally contain derogatory comments toward those with other beliefs, the way Phred's do consistently. There is a huge difference between on poster saying, "Praise the Lord!," and another starting a thread soon after saying, "Isn't it so ridiculous and pointless when "they" say 'praise the Lord'?!?!" Even if you agree with Phred in principle, and like what he says, and maybe even appreciate a good slam against the Christians like Phred does, surely you can see the difference.

 

Erica

[Colleen]

Yes, in an ideal world there'd be no need of "CC" or "AC" or "BC" or "IC" or any other "religious content" warning. But people who aren't Christian have in the past complained, "Golly, I feel in the minority here. It bothers me to open a post and feel like it's directed solely toward Christians, praising their God and so on and so forth. I wish there was some kind of warning about that!" So some folks, in an effort to be thoughtful, have labeled their subject lines accordingly.

 

Now we have people asserting that their rights are being diminished by posts that are "specifically" for Christians ~ when in reality, they aren't specifically "for" Christians, but they do contain Christian content. So, woo-hoo! Let's roll out the political correctness carpet and everyone come up with "warning labels" such that we address the right folks, don't offend the wrong ones, yada yada yada. How's this:

 

DC ~ "dairy content" ~ may contain references to dairy products and/or farms where dairy animals are raised

 

MoBO ~ "moms of boys only" ~ the poster does not have experience raising girls

 

n-SBM ~ "non-scrapbooking mom" ~ do not read if Creative Memories weekends are your idea of a heaven-sent getaway

 

The list goes on and on!:)

[genie]

He stated in his post that started the thread that certain people of a certain belief were not welcome to post in his thread.

 

Did he? I really thought I remembered him saying something more along the lines of "If you don't like atheist content, you probably don't want to read this." Oh well. It's gone now. And I really should be doing something other than posting all afternoon. :tongue_smilie:

[Parabola]

Now we have people asserting that their rights are being diminished by posts that are "specifically" for Christians ~ when in reality, they aren't specifically "for" Christians, but they do contain Christian content. So, woo-hoo! Let's roll out the political correctness carpet and everyone come up with "warning labels" such that we address the right folks, don't offend the wrong ones, yada yada yada. How's this:

 

DC ~ "dairy content" ~ may contain references to dairy products and/or farms where dairy animals are raised

 

MoBO ~ "moms of boys only" ~ the poster does not have experience raising girls

 

n-SBM ~ "non-scrapbooking mom" ~ do not read if Creative Memories weekends are your idea of a heaven-sent getaway

 

The list goes on and on!:)

 

I think someone pointed out, was it you?, that tv shows (and I assume scrapbooking, etc) are not on the same emotional level as religion. I'm sure we have enough sense to avoid "slippery slopes".

[Colleen]

Did he? I really thought I remembered him saying something more along the lines of "If you don't like atheist content, you probably don't want to read this."

 

The initial post stated that those who were offended by having their faith questioned should read no further. After a couple of Christians replied, Phred asked why they were replying and stated that he was not looking for input from Christians.

 

And I really should be doing something other than posting all afternoon.

 

Really? Not me...:tongue_smilie:

[Gretchen in NJ]

Yes, in an ideal world there'd be no need of "CC" or "AC" or "BC" or "IC" or any other "religious content" warning. But people who aren't Christian have in the past complained, "Golly, I feel in the minority here. It bothers me to open a post and feel like it's directed solely toward Christians, praising their God and so on and so forth. I wish there was some kind of warning about that!" So some folks, in an effort to be thoughtful, have labeled their subject lines accordingly.

 

Now we have people asserting that their rights are being diminished by posts that are "specifically" for Christians ~ when in reality, they aren't specifically "for" Christians, but they do contain Christian content. So, woo-hoo! Let's roll out the political correctness carpet and everyone come up with "warning labels" such that we address the right folks, don't offend the wrong ones, yada yada yada. How's this:

 

DC ~ "dairy content" ~ may contain references to dairy products and/or farms where dairy animals are raised

 

MoBO ~ "moms of boys only" ~ the poster does not have experience raising girls

 

n-SBM ~ "non-scrapbooking mom" ~ do not read if Creative Memories weekends are your idea of a heaven-sent getaway

 

The list goes on and on!:)

:lol::lol:true.:lol::lol:

[Colleen]

I think someone pointed out, was it you?, that tv shows (and I assume scrapbooking, etc) are not on the same emotional level as religion. I'm sure we have enough sense to avoid "slippery slopes".

 

I dunno about that. In my world, such sense would deem the Christian content labels (or any other such subject line labels) themselves unnecessary.

[Kate CA]

Phred's not a troll. But I guess it has been awhile since we thoroughly bashed him, so this was due huh?

I would've loved to chat in his thread, its something I've wondered about myself. I'm sad it got deleted, a good discussion with other atheists would've been fun for me.

 

There's plenty of room here for all world views, everyone keeps saying that. If there's room for CC in a thread, why isn't there room for AC? Oh, and I've said it before: if you don't like to read Phred, don't open his threads.

 

It is not about not reading his threads. It is about respect for other humans because they are human. If a person of faith posted how foolish and idiotic those who didn't have it were those with no faith would be ALL OVER that poster. I mean it is a total double standard you are asking for. All those of us with faith are asking for is courtesy and kindness in our discourse and no bashing someone for their faith.

 

I don't agree with many people here on matters of faith, but I don't tell them they are a bunch of stupid idiots for believing what they believe. I don't *think* they are idiots either. I respect those of differing faiths here--that is what makes this board so different! That is ALL we of faith are asking for.

 

If people want to bash Christians there are plenty of places on the net they can go to do it. WTM Boards are enormously diverse and full of people of many faiths. This isn't the place to bash us.

[Tree House Academy]

I am a Christian. I didn't read his thread. And I am new here but I feel compelled to say this...

 

I think of Jesus and what He encountered when He walked this earth as a man. How many spit in His face? How many scoffed at Him? And those who murdered Him, drove nails through His hands, beat Him - did He not love them? Did He not instantly forgive them?

 

"Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do."

 

My ex husband, my oldest son's dad is an athiest. And when my son cries and asks me why Daddy doesn't believe and if he is going to Hell for not believing, I tell him this, "Even though Daddy has given up on God, God will never give up on daddy." And I believe that, with all of my heart.

[Kelli in TN]

. If a person of faith posted how foolish and idiotic those who didn't have it were those with no faith would be ALL OVER that poster. .

 

 

Honestly I think that person would have quite a few people of faith crawling all over them too. I get just as offended by Christians attacking non-Christians as I do when it goes the other way.

[genie]

 

Now we have people asserting that their rights are being diminished by posts that are "specifically" for Christians ~ when in reality, they aren't specifically "for" Christians, but they do contain Christian content.

 

(You pulled me right back into posting, Colleen!) I hope nothing I've said is coming off as implying that I think my rights are being diminished. I don't even think that's what Parabola is saying. It's not a question of rights being diminished, but more along the lines of "Could we do the same here?"

 

Is this board big enough to have threads devoted entirely to Christian content alongside threads devoted entirely to atheist content (and clearly labeled as such) and coexist peacefully? That's, I think, the question being asked now.

 

And as that relates to the original question, I think (and hope) that the reactions Phred gets to his posts are because of his style, not simply the non-religious nature of them.

[Scarlett]

I don't agree with many people here on matters of faith, but I don't tell them they are a bunch of stupid idiots for believing what they believe. I don't *think* they are idiots either. I respect those of differing faiths here--that is what makes this board so different! That is ALL we of faith are asking for.

 

Same here. In fact, I was AGREEING with some of Phred's reasoning, but he doesn't even 'hear' that or care. Which is why I am irritated that I even bothered to respond. I would think that if he was interested in a debate even he would have said to me, 'really? I've never heard that viewpoint expressed by a Christian before.'

 

So....there ya go.

[Twinmom]

I don't think it would be used for exclusionary purposes, or to be disrespectful (Ya hear that Phred??), but mostly as a respectful warning to christians et al that what is inside may not be something they want to read.

For example, I may want to discuss something similar to what Phred posted, I may want to speculate on the psychological need humans have for a supreme being. I don't think this is disrespecting anyone, but the AC in the title should let everyone know that its not a discussion from a biblical perspective and its going to be assumed in this ATHEIST thread that the supreme being in question is non-existent. To the posters.

 

Am I making sense? Is this asking too much?

 

Meaning this with all good intentions and with all sincerity (hopefully, you know I luv ya! ;)), I do have a question. Should a Christian desire to participate in the thread, would they be welcome? Assuming that there was not an intent to inflame, nor a thread hijack going on, would you welcome a dissenting viewpoint on such a thread or would it be no CC wanted, thank you?

 

I think that there is a slippery slope here, both with the CC and the AC labeling. I think that a post like the one in question today that simply was saying "Praise the Lord" is not a place for dissenting debate. Neither would I think that a post simply stating, "you know, I found this interesting site on atheistic thought today" or something similar would be a place for debate. However, if you posted a genuine discussion on why do people feel the need to have a supreme being, I'd kind of think that would be open to all respectful posts from differing positions, KWIM?

 

I guess you could say, "No CC desired," but I guess I don't really like to see that nor would I like to see the opposite on any posts. Just my opinion, and my rambling thoughts as I fix dinner. What say you?

[PariSarah]

I think this is what I'm trying to get at too. Anyone care to answer?

 

I mean, what does it mean? I hate to keep harping on this, but CC does not mean "non-Christians don't post." It means, "look out--I'm getting all Jesus on ya!" Christians don't get a free pass to spout whatever they want without anyone they don't like answering them. If you choose not to read or respond to them, great! If you choose to respond, great! If you choose to call people idiots for believing something that they, well, believe, then not so great.

 

If you want to use a parallel label, have at it! Phred posted AC, which I took to mean, "Look out--I'm getting all atheist on ya!" I thought it was fine. I tried to respond to his questions--because he did ask a few--in a respectful but direct manner, without calling his atheism into question.

 

But are you instead saying that AC should mean "non-atheists don't post"? Yes, I would have a problem with that. In a way that I don't have a problem with Michelle T or Eliana saying, "Hey, Sarah, I appreciate your chattitude. I hope some Jewish moms will reply, too, though." Or you or Phred saying, "Hey, that's . . . well, that's a little too-too for me, girl, but I'm glad you're happy. Hope some atheists will chime in, though."

 

And I'm not in favor of any label that means "I intend to insult people in this thread--nobody gets to call me to account for it!"

[Twinmom]

 

My thoughts exactly. I care not what his opinion is, at least from the perspective of being offended by it. What bothers me about his posts is the tendency to be disrespectful to others. I know and respect many atheists and the like on this board (I think some of you know who you are! ;)) and have never seen the need to criticize their posts because they are respectful of others.

 

It's all about how you approach people. My DH "the consummate politician" always says that everyone should leave the table feeling that they've gained something. Should we do that here, we'd be amazed at the results.

[Kelli in TN]

"look out--I'm getting all Jesus on ya!"

 

Can I get that inscribed on my coffee mug?

[Kate CA]

Honestly I think that person would have quite a few people of faith crawling all over them too. I get just as offended by Christians attacking non-Christians as I do when it goes the other way.

 

I absolutely agree!

[LisaNY]

With all due respect Gretchen, and you know I love you, threads with CC automatically are somewhat non-inclusive because those who don't wish to discuss CC simply stay away. For the most part. Its not intentional exclusion, its natural.

 

Maybe I am misunderstanding, but I thought Christians began adding CC to their subject line in deference to others who did not want to wade through Christian posts? Please understand, I am not at all trying to be argumentative here, but this was my genuine understanding of this subject.

 

Anyway, it would be nice if an atheists could discuss things from AN ATHEIST POINT OF VIEW without having to defend that point of view, or their right to discuss it. A good discussion is rarely gotten to because first we have to debate like we're doing now. It rarely happens that the content, the issue of a CC thread is not gotten to because non-believers jump in and try to shut it down or call the OP of a CC thread a troll.

 

I see the double standard, its there.

 

I have never had a problem with atheists sharing their POV. I don't have a problem with ANYONE sharing their POV, as long as it is done with respect, keeping in mind that there are others on this board that do not necessarily share that POV. To clarify, I did not read this thread in question. Have Christians on this board started threads that basically knock what atheists believe, or don't, in a not-so-kind way, or in a way that could be construed as offensive?