Also, when one belief spawns from a previous one it is common for each of them to condemn the other in the harshest terms possible, e.g. heretic, anathema, apostate, cult, Satanic.
Those terms often become part of the official doctrines and Freepers' deeply held religious beliefs - and whereas some conservatives take no offense at the use of the terms against their beliefs, others do.
For all these reasons, the Religion Forum approximates the venues available for free religious speech by providing these thread types in the RF:
2. Only members of a specified caucus are to post on RF threads tagged "caucus" - e.g. "Catholic Caucus." These are treated as if they were occurring behind the closed doors of a church. It would be inappropriate to tear down the doors of another's church in order to protest his beliefs. But because a cyber-church is transparent or visible, the beliefs of any non member must not be mentioned in either the article or in the replies. When that happens, the thread must be "opened" so that the non-members can speak for themselves.
3. Antagonism is not allowed on threads labeled "ecumenical." These threads are treated as if they were an open panel among polite academicians. Loud, abusive, antagonistic behavior is inappropriate for that venue and thus disruptors are instructed to leave the thread.
4. All other threads are "open" and are treated like a town square. Antagonistic beliefs can be aired. Posters may argue pro or con. Deities, religious authorities, authors and documents may be cruelly ridiculed. It can become rowdy and contentious. Thick skin is required. Thin skinned posters are the disruptors on open RF threads and they may also be instructed to leave the thread.
Since both of you are "old-timer" Freepers, you may find the open threads more to your liking.
>>These are treated as if they were occurring behind the closed doors of a church.<<
Yeah, I read the rules when I started seeing those early morning things from Vision. I have a problem with the phrase above becuase of the 800 lb gorilla in the room. Specifically, they are NOT behind closed doors.
What they potentially allow is someone to say anything they want in their “not closed door” area and nobody is allowed to call them on it. No problem, I just ignore the threads. I responded today to a new post on an old thread, but kept it out of the context of the thread itself to obey the rules.
>>Since both of you are “old-timer” Freepers, you may find the open threads more to your liking.<<
That’s been my MO on these. My only concern is that it implies that one really could open an Islamic “devotional” thread and pretty much say whatever they want and the rest of us would be forced to “ignore” it. Without getting into specifics, that sort of thing - but at a much “reduced” level - has sometimes happened in the religious “closed door” threads.
You can’t ignore them because they come up in “recent posts”. Yet you are required to.
Anyway, just sayin’.
I’d love to see a feature where “devotional, etc.” threads did not show up in “recent posts”. But I ramble. I’m done here and will continue to ignore these threads until I think someone actually does cross a line. Then I’ll just post something to the religious moderator in freepmail.