Replies

I wonder if we could have Christian Caucus thread which basically asks "So, what do YOU believe in?" -- let's face facts, we don't agree with Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses or others, but they have a right to a place where they can say "we believe in Xenu" and the rest of us can ask to learn more, but we can't go "Ha! Ha!".

If the religion forum is to work, there need to be periodic places where anyone, even those with way-out UFO, 2012 beliefs can express what they believe in and the rest of us can read, ask questions, but not mock or insult or even debate.

We could, indeed, and you could start it; the overall topic, though, is huge. It might be an idea to compare/contrast one particular area of belief, ie sainthood, and compare/contrast two or three groups. And as the RM said, it would be under the “Ecumenical” heading, meaning no antagonism allowed, no criticism of others’ beliefs, only a statement of one’s own beliefs or civil, open questions about others’ positions, as I recall.

It is true that I am sleepy, so if I haven’t been clear in this post, please let me know and I’ll try to do better tomorrow.

If you click on the RM’s name at the bottom of an RM post, you will see the definitions pertinent to the Religion Forum.

Here’s the RM’s definition of Ecumenical threads:

*******************

Ecumenic threads are closed to antagonism.

To antagonize is to incur or to provoke hostility in others.

Unlike the “caucus” threads, the article and reply posts of an “ecumenic” thread can discuss more than one belief, but antagonism is not tolerable.

More leeway is granted to what is acceptable in the text of the article than to the reply posts. For example, the term “gross error” in an article will not prevent an ecumenical discussion, but a poster should not use that term in his reply because it is antagonistic. As another example, the article might be a passage from the Bible which would be antagonistic to Jews. The passage should be considered historical fact and a legitimate subject for an ecumenic discussion. The reply posts however must not be antagonistic.

Contrasting of beliefs or even criticisms can be made without provoking hostilities. But when in doubt, only post what you are “for” and not what you are “against.” Or ask questions.

Ecumenical threads will be moderated on a “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” basis. When hostility has broken out on an “ecumenic” thread, I’ll be looking for the source.

Therefore “anti” posters must not try to finesse the guidelines by asking loaded questions, using inflammatory taglines, gratuitous quote mining or trying to slip in an “anti” or “ex” article under the color of the “ecumenic” tag.

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.

**********************

So, one or another topic could be proposed in an Ecumenic thread (they are very much under-used, in my opinion) and FReepers could be invited to share their own confession’s positions.