That is an outrageous calumny.
It is also more precise to say that the emphasis is non-religious, rather than anti-religious or anti-Christian.
There are many members who feel quite free to express themselves on religious matters, and do. Members, I might add, who are no longer permitted that privilege here.
But it is accurate to say that discussions run to the scientific or evidential side in such matters, rather than emotionalism.
Calumny ?
Had to look that up.
Thanks for the new word.
I rememver one thread where the subject came up that Jesus dying on the cross was no big deal -- the consensus was "anyone could do it if they believed eternity in paradise with God was just around the corner" or words to that effect.
I haven't lurked there -- even irregularly -- for quite a long time, so I don't know if that thread is still accessible to public view.
There are many members who feel quite free to express themselves on religious matters, and do. Members, I might add, who are no longer permitted that privilege here.
You mean like DaveLoneRanger? /sarc>
And if we are going to play the guilt by association, several of the most prominent and influential DCs are explicitly, self-proclaimed atheists. Many of the camp followers are such as well.
Cheers!
But, also for the record, I really miss 95% of the DCers both here and there. Lots of bright educated good people with excellent humor. I left there, only with the greatest reluctance.