[Religion Moderator]

Guidelines to the Religion Forum

[Persevero]

“Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath:

For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.”

James 1:19-20

[se_ohio_young_conservative]

How much time did it take you to type that out ? It is sad you even had to because its all common sense. Debating theology is a lot different than attacking an individual person because of their faith.

[smokingfrog]

It is ok to express hatred towards SatanISM and Satanists both because no Freeper is Satanist.

Can we consider islam and satanism to be synonymous?

[Kevmo]

You’ve been doing an awesome job.

I perceive that mormonism is heresy. Anyone who follows it is a heretic. I would not vote for a heretic for president, because if a person cannot shake such an easily disproven philosophy then they would proceed from such an invalid position to make very poor choices. In Romney’s case, he is also a faux conservative, so I wouldn’t vote for him anyways.

Is the above considered flamebait?

[pastorbillrandles]

Keep up the good work, I love this forum!

[greyfoxx39]

There seems to be a practice of some RF posters ignoring your warnings on "making it personal" and using the same language in subsequent threads.

Can we now look to these posters and the "thin-skinned" posters being told to leave the thread as in the past?

There is also a marked increase in new RF posters using obscenities in the RF, including acronyms denoting obscenities. I would suggest forbidding that be a part of your rules.

There have been several FReepers banned due to accusations of others in the RF either being "nazis", suggesting nazi behavior and especially accusations that some FReepers want to "see members of a certain faith killed". I suggest that a warning that these practices could affect a FReeper's membership be made a permanent part of the RF rules.

Thanks for this thread and your exemplary monitoring of the FR during the past few years. It's much appreciated.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

HUGE support for the Religion Moderator Bump!

You have something of a thankless task, so I am stopping to say thanks. Your rules are reasonable and appreciated.

[nuconvert]

“It is ok to express hatred towards ProtestantISM on “open” Religion Forum threads. It is never ok to express hatred towards Protestants because some Freepers are Protestant.”

Does that go for Islam and muslims too?

[Godzilla]

Thanks for your efforts - again as in the past.

[roamer_1]

Some political posters are now venturing onto the Religion Forum probably because Romney’s beliefs are at issue in this election.

If you don’t know whether you are on the Religion Forum, look at the top of your internet browser window. If the current address (URL) begins with http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/ then you are on the Religion Forum.

As a comment toward operations, I wonder if it would be possible to auto-add a red-letter line to the top of any RF thread OP informing the reader he is 'in' the RF and point a link to RF rules?

I have engaged posters in the past that did not realize they were in the RF, or that there is a special rule set governing the RF.

Considering that special case, I think the forum identification should be more noticeable than the std. means... Just sayin'...

[Linda Frances]

Was this post I made ok? Feel free to publicly critique me.

You are so right, unfortunately. Obama has so called, “men”, so afraid of him, they will ruin the country for their kids and grand kids because they are electing a socialist who no one can stand, but is a little less worse than obama. The fear that obama has put in their hearts is palpable. They give him power when they fear him that much. It's exactly what Nancy, and all the left does; scare their voters into doing what they want them to do. The gop and romney and all his people in the media have been successful in brainwashing these people into being voting for the man THEY want; a man no one likes and they can't even see that they are being used. If you can put enough fear in people's heart, you control them. Isn't that a communist principal?

If someone told me a year ago that conservatives would settle for a proabortion, progay marriage, progay adoption, tax & cap, global warming, cheat, liar and thief, I would not have believe it. Fear is a strong emotion and can make a man grown man wet his pants; apparently. What would have happened if good men were too afraid to stand up to the British or to Hitler? We might be speaking German.

I know for a fact that some of these people, some who have been on FR a while, are working the romney campaign. I was up really late one night; most people had dropped out. There was three or four guy posting. One was really excited, like a little kid seeing a movie star, saying just how exciting it was to actually talk to someone who was working with romney. He said something like, can you imagine what it would be like in closed door meeting with him. Something like that. I think, these people really think he's god. I know, they will cry mormon hater. Being a victim is so obama, sharpton, Jackson. Do they really want mormon’s behind those names?

[polkajello]

Helpful thread, thanks.

[Salvation]

Ecellent addition.

[Notwithstanding]

Some people love to discuss sects with perverts ad nauseum.

[Jeff Chandler]

Could you add a rule against rehashing the same arguments over and over for years on end? Reading most open discussions on the Religion forum makes me feel like Bill Murray in Groundhog Day.

[afraidfortherepublic]

I think that it is anti Christian to express hatred at all. You can dislike, or disapprove, someone’s actions, but hatred is a very strong word.

[Condor51]

Thank you for the clarifications — again :-)

[samtheman]

Thanks for the explanation. It makes everything very clear.

I made the mistake a year or so ago of not paying attention and became too argumentative on a Religion thread until one of the posters I was arguing with pointed out the distinction to me.

I’ve since wised up. :)

Anyway, thanks for posting this. In this political season, it’s an important distinction for FR posters to be aware of.

[Notwithstanding]

What about this situation:

Mr. Z is known claim no label at all regarding his own religion, but has a habit of critiquing other religions .

Mr. Z replies to Mr. X (an adherent of Religion X) by posting “Religion X sucks canal water” or “Religion X is of the devil” or “Religion X is filled with malingerers and criminals” or “People of Religion X love sin” or some other derogatory remark.

Mr. X replies to Mr. Z “Your religion also sucks canal water” (etc.)

_________

Please explain how the RF rules apply to that scenario.

The adherent of Religion X then RESP

[Notwithstanding]

What about this situation:

Mr. Z is known claim no label at all regarding his own religion, but has a habit of critiquing other religions .

Mr. Z replies to Mr. X (an adherent of Religion X) by posting “Religion X sucks canal water” or “Religion X is of the devil” or “Religion X is filled with malingerers and criminals” or “People of Religion X love sin” or some other derogatory remark.

Mr. X replies to Mr. Z “Your religion also sucks canal water” (etc.)

_________

Please explain how the RF rules apply to that scenario.