Hypocrisy (IMO I guess)

[Moco Loco]

^ Since we're being so politically correct now.

I was joking earlier about how many new threads there are related to what's going on right now and how they should be consolidated somehow or everyone should just continue posting in the main one in Suggestions, but I have been repeatedly ignored in a few of my points. Mods can delete this today or whenever, I just feel I have some valid points which have been looked over.

1. I believe it is blatant hypocrisy to propose a Spirituality subforum and be against a Secular subforum. Can you imagine how upset many of you would have been had the seculars proposed the Secular subforum and denied you a Spirituality subforum? I can't even imagine it, and I truly never thought many of us would be actively opposing that Secularism be treated the same as Spirituality. It is blatant discrimination and I don't care how many of you fall into the category, I don't care if a majority of us would want one without the other, it doesn't make this right.

2. The only reason many of you didn't spring for the Ideology idea is because you want a place where not all ideologies are accepted. Correct me if I am wrong on this one, please. That's right, I am asking for criticism. I am not afraid.

3. A subforum for Spirituality would be fine if it were really just for spirituality. That's right, you read correctly. However, it is obviously not going to be for ordinary discussion. It will be a hiding place for those who can't even bear to see it from the other side, can't bear to hear about other perspectives though they very much exist. I have never denied spirituality its right to be in the room, and I always expected the same courtesy would be given to me.

I never thought it would come to this. I haven't been here very long and I haven't known you all as long as you've known eachother, but I am utterly shocked by what is happening. I never would have considered leaving before, and didn't think anything could ever make me want to leave, but this prejudice and condoning of prejudice is really making me think.

[LOVEavatar]

By Eywa, I have never seen so many threads based around the same problem, created on a single day!

^ What I wrote before I even glanced at the text.

[iron_jones]

Originally Posted by Moco Loco

Since we're being so politically correct now.

Woah. Woah. What?

[iron_jones]

Alright, Jesus Christ, what's the big deal?

If a lot of people want a spirituality sub-form, then make one.
If you're worried about unnecessary arguments, then moderate the hell out of it.

There just seems to be a lot of tension and self criticism towards the forum coming from a lot of members. There's nothing wrong with this forum whatsoever.

Lot's of people disagree and I see very few people here hold grudges from an argument that they previously had.

Just my thoughts for a penny.

[Moco Loco]

Originally Posted by LOVEavatar

By Eywa, I have never seen so many threads based around the same problem, created on a single day!

^ What I wrote before I even glanced at the text.

I know, in fact, I mentioned just that at the beginning, and that is why I gave mods my full consent to get rid of it when my points are addressed. The important thing is, I've mentioned these many many times and have had no response in IRC or in other threads, and they are valid points and deserve to be at least considered.

Originally Posted by iron_jones

Woah. Woah. What?

Because everyone is lately so concerned with feelings, the proper way to debate, being considerate of other's opinions, etc. These are fine concerns of course, I just think generally everyone might be taking things a little too harshly when they need not be. I was mostly joking.

Originally Posted by iron_jones

Alright, Jesus Christ, what's the big deal?

If a lot of people want a spirituality sub-form, then make one.
If you're worried about unnecessary arguments, then moderate the hell out of it.

There just seems to be a lot of tension and self criticism towards the forum coming from a lot of members. There's nothing wrong with this forum whatsoever.

Lot's of people disagree and I see very few people here hold grudges from an argument that they previously had.

Just my thoughts for a penny.

Those are my thoughts as well, as said in point three. I am in complete agreement with everything you said, except that there is absolutely nothing wrong. I hope you're right about there being nothing wrong with the forum, nothing really wrong. I never thought there was before. However, discrimination of any kind is morally wrong.

[Tsyal Makto]

A question for you, Moco Loco. How do you know a Secular subforum wouldn't be used as a hiding place, as well?

I'm for both being made, but I'm just asking out of interest.

[Moco Loco]

Originally Posted by Tsyal Makto

A question for you, Moco Loco. How do you know a Secular subforum wouldn't be used as a hiding place, as well?

I'm for both being made, but I'm just asking out of interest.

I don't know that it wouldn't, unfortunately. Perhaps it would be for some people-- I don't know. From what I've read, those on the side of secularism haven't been as offended by comments those on the side of spirituality have made, so for that reason only, I think it's less likely.
I would equally prefer no new subforum, or for the new one to be Ideology, where everyone is still welcome, much over dividing us into subforums for our separate extremes.

[Theorist]

I mean I like exchanging ideas with people of different beliefs, and atheists giving me their best arguments so I can try to defeat their argument (in my personal opinion of course), thus making my personal faith stronger. But that is only when these discussions are not in an aggressive manner, and are more than people simply shouting their opinion, but are actually multi-sided discussions.

I also often feel that I have to be very careful of what I say so that it doesn't offend people or go against forum rules, frequently forcing me to retype my statements, which is kinda annoying.

Now I know i've done it too, but it gets annoying when I write an overly spiritual/religious post and the response is simply hateful and ignorant, such as calling religion superstition and self-induced ignorance.

I also don't see a problem with a religious and a secular sub-forum. Why not put them in the same sub-forum? I just would like a place where I have to be so cautious in editing my posts to be 'relgiously free.' I would be all for a place with lower restrictions on what we can and can't say.

[Moco Loco]

Originally Posted by Theorist

I mean I like exchanging ideas with people of different beliefs, and atheists giving me their best arguments so I can try to defeat their argument (in my personal opinion of course), thus making my personal faith stronger. But that is only when these discussions are not in an aggressive manner, and are more than people simply shouting their opinion, but are actually multi-sided discussions.

They aren't aggressive, and if they are, a new board won't change that. I believe at many times, some of us perceive a potential threat and call it aggression. Also, no one shouts in a forum; there's caps, but I've never seen anyone use caps on anyone else for more than a single word or phrase, and it's generally always obviously for emphasis when it's done.

Originally Posted by Theorist

I also often feel that I have to be very careful of what I say so that it doesn't offend people or go against forum rules, frequently forcing me to retype my statements, which is kinda annoying.

I agree, that is annoying. No one should ever have to feel afraid to make a mistake like that, and I'm sorry we all seem to. I think the first step is not to take the beliefs of others so personally.

Originally Posted by Theorist

Now I know i've done it too, but it gets annoying when I write an overly spiritual/religious post and the response is simply hateful and ignorant, such as calling religion superstition and self-induced ignorance.

Who has ever said that (If it was HNM, I totally believe you )? What matters most, I believe, is whether or not that is in the past. If someone says something offensive but later apologizes for it and perhaps rewords it, should you hold a grudge? You should not, because the way you describe feeling in your second paragraph results from it. We should be more forgiving of each other and learn to move on, and then this wouldn't be a problem.

Originally Posted by Theorist

I also don't see a problem with a religious and a secular sub-forum. Why not put them in the same sub-forum? I just would like a place where I have to be so cautious in editing my posts to be 'relgiously free.' I would be all for a place with lower restrictions on what we can and can't say.

My friend!

In all seriousness, that is what I have been proposing all along with the Ideology board (the topic everyone seems extra elusive about responding to). A board like the one you suggest would be fine in my book-- more than fine. I in fact think it might make ToS a better place.

[Theorist]

Originally Posted by Moco Loco

They aren't aggressive, and if they are, a new board won't change that. I believe at many times, some of us perceive a potential threat and call it aggression. Also, no one shouts in a forum; there's caps, but I've never seen anyone use caps on anyone else for more than a single word or phrase, and it's generally always obviously for emphasis when it's done.




Who has ever said that (If it was HNM, I totally believe you )? What matters most, I believe, is whether or not that is in the past. If someone says something offensive but later apologizes for it and perhaps rewords it, should you hold a grudge? You should not, because the way you describe feeling in your second paragraph results from it. We should be more forgiving of each other and learn to move on, and then this wouldn't be a problem.

Ok, they might not be an all out attack, but there have been plenty that have been less than just a simple statement. It's kinda like if someone says "Well that's gay." When someone says that, they are probably saying something is stupid and they don't like it. Most the time people say "well that's gay" I don't think they mean "well that is like gays, dumb and I don't like them. I don't like gays, so I'm gonna associate them with things I don't like." I think they are simply using a word that has evolved multiple meanings over time.
1. Happy, joyful
2. Homosexual orientation
3. to show dislike towards something.

But, a lot of people ,not just gays still take offense to someone saying "That's gay."

And second part, yeah I don't like to call names, but it was HNM, and I've seen that statement at least 4 times

[Moco Loco]

Originally Posted by Theorist

Ok, they might not be an all out attack, but there have been plenty that have been less than just a simple statement. It's kinda like if someone says "Well that's gay." When someone says that, they are probably saying something is stupid and they don't like it. Most the time people say "well that's gay" I don't think they mean "well that is like gays, dumb and I don't like them. I don't like gays, so I'm gonna associate them with things I don't like." I think they are simply using a word that has evolved multiple meanings over time.
1. Happy, joyful
2. Homosexual orientation
3. to show dislike towards something.

But, a lot of people ,not just gays still take offense to someone saying "That's gay."

And second part, yeah I don't like to call names, but it was HNM, and I've seen that statement at least 4 times

You've seen someone say "that's gay"? I've been known to say that, but I don't think I've ever said it here as I am very careful what I say here.

Either way, no one should take so much offense at a statement like those you are referring to that they feel discriminated against or that it can't even be talked about in the first place. I think a huge indicator of this is the fact that everyone is presently accepting of any member's right to be spiritual, regardless of what happened in the past.

[Ashen Key]

Originally Posted by Theorist

Ok, they might not be an all out attack, but there have been plenty that have been less than just a simple statement. It's kinda like if someone says "Well that's gay." When someone says that, they are probably saying something is stupid and they don't like it. Most the time people say "well that's gay" I don't think they mean "well that is like gays, dumb and I don't like them. I don't like gays, so I'm gonna associate them with things I don't like." I think they are simply using a word that has evolved multiple meanings over time.
1. Happy, joyful
2. Homosexual orientation
3. to show dislike towards something.

But, a lot of people ,not just gays still take offense to someone saying "That's gay."

The use of 'gay' in that sense means that is a negative, a bad thing, an insult.

So yes, it is offensive. And no, the meaning has not changed - it is a very traditional thing, to imply that someone is attracted to their own gender. Because of course, homosexuality is bad, isn't it, it's disgraceful, disgusting, not what good people to do, etc. Which is offensive

That's where the usage comes from, and it's not a benign 'meaning change'

(and ugh, the use of 'retarded' as insult here on this forum really, really makes me twitch)

[Moco Loco]

Originally Posted by Theorist

Ok, they might not be an all out attack, but there have been plenty that have been less than just a simple statement. It's kinda like if someone says "Well that's gay." When someone says that, they are probably saying something is stupid and they don't like it. Most the time people say "well that's gay" I don't think they mean "well that is like gays, dumb and I don't like them. I don't like gays, so I'm gonna associate them with things I don't like." I think they are simply using a word that has evolved multiple meanings over time.
1. Happy, joyful
2. Homosexual orientation
3. to show dislike towards something.

But, a lot of people ,not just gays still take offense to someone saying "That's gay."

And second part, yeah I don't like to call names, but it was HNM, and I've seen that statement at least 4 times

Originally Posted by Ashen Key

The use of 'gay' in that sense means that is a negative, a bad thing, an insult.

So yes, it is offensive. And no, the meaning has not changed - it is a very traditional thing, to imply that someone is attracted to their own gender. Because of course, homosexuality is bad, isn't it, it's disgraceful, disgusting, not what good people to do, etc. Which is offensive

That's where the usage comes from, and it's not a benign 'meaning change'

(and ugh, the use of 'retarded' as insult here on this forum really, really makes me twitch)

This is a strange example to me as I have never seen "gay" used in such a way on this forum. I am probably guilty of "retarded" though, but when I say it, I use it as it is listed in the dictionary: to make slow; delay the development or progress of (an action, process, etc.); hinder or impede. Sorry if I'm too politically incorrect for you

[Moco Loco]

lololol Theorist, that's what I thought at first, but the example was so long that I was like... huh... maybe someone says this around here?
Anyway, I feel confident that no one is ever trying to hurt anyone else, so though we have our differences, we should feel confident no one intentionally means to insult our views or values. That is the first step.

[Human No More]

I originally said that a single subforum would work - and while that was not a tenable position in order to ever resolve this, we have made sure that the result is unbiased.

As for often-controversial issues, everyone needs to avoid them if they can not be done respectfully.

I don't think anyone can truly be called 'aggressive' here.