In the town square, any and every citizen can post his opinion to the “liberty tree” or speak up openly for or against whatever he chooses. He may challenge anyone he chooses to challenge. He doesn’t have to be eloquent, educated, polite or respectful. Issues are not considered “settled” just because some of the citizens in the community believe that to be the case.
The limits on the free speech in the town square are a matter of decency. Pornography is not allowed, profanity is not allowed, etc. Propaganda is allowed. Lies are allowed.
Some are thrilled by what is said in the town square. Some are offended. Some ignore. Some take notes.
The “town square” is a free exchange of ideas. The “liberty tree” is part of our American roots.
Fast forward to the Religion Forum.
There may be changes in the guidelines as a result of this discussion, but for now all posters on the RF should realize that the “open” threads are like the “town square” except that in addition to profanity and pornography being disallowed so is “hate mongering” which includes such sources as Jack Chick, KKK, Aryan Nations, National Alliance, VDare, Jesus-is-Lord.com, the false Jesuit Oath.
A poster does not need to be a member of X to post an article or Holy writ of X or to claim what the Xes believe or used to believe. However, to avoid being a trouble-maker and ending up on the moderator’s radar as a disturber of the peace, he is wise to be polite and to present his ideas as his own.
The problem.
When a gentile person walks into the “town square” or reads the posts on a “liberty tree” he might become deeply offended. No doubt that was also the case back in the day of the actual “liberty tree.”
On the Religion Forum, gentile members of X may become offended by the town square frontal assaults on their deeply held beliefs. That is to be expected. And for that reason, the “closed” threads exist so that they can find “safe harbor.” The closed threads – devotionals, prayer threads and caucuses – are moderated as if the discussion was occurring behind the closed doors of a church.
But when those gentle members of X refuse to retreat to the safe harbor and instead stand in the “town square” insisting on the silence of others, they become disturbers of the peace. More importantly, such insistence challenges whether the concept of a “town square” is workable when the subject is religion.
I realize that many think there is nothing more contentious than religious debate on this forum. If so, they’ve probably not spent much time on the Civil War threads – or the Creation/Evolution (Crevo) threads. And the same initiatives happen there also. On the Crevo threads, some of the science community used to insist that only scientists should have a voice. And on the Civil War threads, one side or the other asserts political correctness.
And because this is a conservative forum, the “town square” does not permit the socialist or fascist voice except as a piñata to be shot down by the contributors.
But conservatives come with various religious beliefs. There is no “official” belief on the forum.
So I would appreciate all of the contributors on this particular thread to reconsider their thoughts in light of the “town square.”
Should the “town square” be eliminated on the Religion Forum?
Should all threads be “closed” to debate?
Should all debate be ecumenic?
Propaganda is allowed, lies are allowed...well, I always used to avoid those. Things that make you go "hmmmmmm..."