Religion Forum threads are "open" by default, i.e. posters may argue for and against beliefs, dieties, authorities, etc - and they may ridicule on "open" RF threads. They are in a town square format and are therefore often contentious.
Posters who cannot handle that type of debate should IGNORE "open" RF threads altogether and instead read and post to threads labeled "prayer" "devotional" "caucus" or "ecumenical."
“If the original poster had used the label ‘(ecumenical)’ in the title, no antagonism at all would have been allowed on this thread.”
I thought I posted this under religion and I thought I checked the ecumenical box. The problem is that this article is newsworthy, timely, and involved non profits and religious organizations (among others). Had I marked it “ecumenical” only a few people (if any) would have read it or paid any attention to it. That’s kind of a catch 22.
If the original poster had used the label “(ecumenical)” in the title, no antagonism at all would have been allowed on this thread.
Religion Forum threads are “open” by default, i.e. posters may argue for and against beliefs, dieties, authorities, etc - and they may ridicule on “open” RF threads. They are in a town square format and are therefore often contentious.
Posters who cannot handle that type of debate should IGNORE “open” RF threads altogether and instead read and post to threads labeled “prayer” “devotional” “caucus” or “ecumenical.”
****
RM now you know there is no such thing anymore for the LDS since the day that JR himself removed the label off on our thread because he thinks our religion is phony and stood firm on that thread with anti LDS and even attended an anti LDS picnic in Utah.
Since that day there has never been a close thread label.