Posted on 05/14/2008 9:06:42 AM PDT by Religion Moderator
In late April, markomalley and gamecock made a trial run at a “respectful dialog” category for threads on the Religion Forum. The trial failed due to the inability of the posters to agree on what is or is not “respectful.” Then in early May, several other posters appealed for the elimination of posts which seek to tear down other poster’s beliefs (iconoclasm.)
Meanwhile, the situation on the Religion Forum has been exacerbated by posters on the News/Activism forum inadvertently being exposed to religious debate as a result of choosing the “everything” option on browse instead of the “News/Activism” option.
In response to the pleas for a “respectful dialog” and/or the elimination of “iconoclasm” (attacks on other people’s beliefs) – I’m opening the floor for trial postings of a new type of semi-open thread which we shall call “ecumenic.”
Unlike the caucus threads, any poster could reply to an ecumenic thread. And the article on which an ecumenic thread is based could include contrasts and challenges of other beliefs. However, on the ecumenic thread, the poster must not argue against any other beliefs. He can only argue for what he believes – or ask questions.
While we test this new type of thread, be sure to tag every article so that posters will know when to avoid a thread. The tags during this trial run are “prayer” “devotional” “caucus” “ecumenic” or “open.”
Devotional threads are closed to debate of any kind.
Caucus threads are closed to any poster who is not a member of the caucus. If it says “Catholic Caucus” and you are not Catholic, do not post to the thread. However, if the poster of the caucus welcomes you, I will not boot you from the thread.
Ecumenic threads in this trial run are closed to all “anti” arguments. Posters who try to tear down other’s beliefs – or use subterfuge to accomplish the same goal – are the disrupters on ecumenic threads and will be booted from the thread and/or suspended.
Open threads are a town square – posters may argue for or against beliefs of any kind. They may tear down other's beliefs. They may ridicule, similar to the Smoky Backroom with the exception that a poster must never “make it personal.” Reading minds and attributing motives are forms of “making it personal.” Thin-skinned posters will be booted from “open” threads because in the town square, they are the disrupters.
When you see a post which is inappropriate for an ecumenic thread, ping me. Do not bother the Admin Moderators with an abuse report unless the situation requires immediate attention.
WWFSMD?
Yes, the 22 Churches of the Catholic Church.
not the Roman edifice
Whatever that is, it's not part of the Catholic Church.
I bet he can, but he'll have to dig her up first.
In the spirit of the ecumenism rules, I am not aware of any churches/Church that have benefited from harboring various beliefs. Historically, at worst it destroys or at best it water down the belief system of the church/Church. For the Catholics, the disagreement with Vatican I versus Vatican II is an illustration of the divisiveness brought on by inclusion. Protestants have a host of problems themselves (pick a denomination).
Even the vines that are reaching for the sunlight are grounded in the dirt.
LOL! Do it!
Oh...sad. I do love all dogs, in general, and many specifically. Sorry about your dog.
Are the new rules in effect NOW?
On OPEN threads too? (rubbing hands together and cackling evilly!)
The point of my simile was that such a designation might serve to lift the debate (the vines) out of the dirt and into the sun and open air, that they might bear fruit.
Of course all living vines are rooted in soil, I did not mean to imply dead or hydroponic vines.
The “new rules” amount to the availability and enforcement of a third category of thread as described herein.
RM has already clarified that THIS thread is open.
It’s part of the Roman Catholic church.
On the other hand, if there is to be dogfighting, I want to see Pelosi v. Hillary.
So it's a part of a part of the Catholic Church? Which part?
But will the “thin-skinned disruptors” on open threads get the boot now?
LOL!
We shall see, shan’t we?
You first!
I’s askeered.
Put your big toe in...real slow......
Well you might be able to lurk and enjoy theological discussions if we were ever allowed to have them anymore
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.