“ Religion ” A Very Sensitive Subject

[mab]

Hi,

I want to discuss the part of forum that is about Religion. People talk over there in humiliating way about one another’s religion.

Everyone considers himself to be right. In fact the religion is something very personal to everyone. So everyone should respect it.

Over here such a topic just raise “HATRED”. If someone really wants to discuss this he/she should go to the sites where there are scholars, who know every bit about every topic. Over sfn people are saying things about religion without solid proofs, which is painful very painful.

We all should respect one another’s religion, no matter which religion we are having.

Please CLOSE this part of sfn forum.

I Request people from every religion to vote in this regard.

Thank you.

[YT2095]

that`s all well and good, but what about freedom of speach?

 

and I`m not aware of ANYONE saying things of "HATRED" as you put it???

if you see such things PLEASE let myself or anyone of the other moderators or Admin know about it n a PM (that`s another reason we have that facility).

we cannot stop peoples thoughts or feelings though, and if some do demmand Evidence of certain claims then they are well within their rights to do so (I would and have done).

 

what exactly is it you want doing here?

[Lance]

You dont have to read it. Dont open that section if it bothers you,

[Sayonara]

I Request people from every religion to vote in this regard.

Just out of curiosity, does that include atheists and agnostics?

[5614]

"People talk over there in humiliating way about one another’s religion."

i dont think people interntionally speak badly of one another

 

"Everyone considers himself to be right. In fact the religion is something very personal to everyone. So everyone should respect it."

100% agreed, that doesnt mean if cant be discussed and doesnt mean it cant be argued over, although in the end it comes down to belief, so people shouldnt be offended by other people's view, as everyone is entitled to their own view... however obviously you shouldnt be rude about others.

 

"Over here such a topic just raise “HATRED”."

i dont think so, that is rarely the intention anyway + you shouldnt listen to others if there is such a sensitive thing which is based on personal beliefs and opinions anyway (opposed to facts). not only this but it is good to learn about other religions and other points of view.

 

"If someone really wants to discuss this he/she should go to the sites where there are scholars, who know every bit about every topic."

us normal people have every right to discus our religious views as well.

 

"Over sfn people are saying things about religion without solid proofs, which is painful very painful."

there is little proof when it comes to religion. please can you point out an example to support what you are saying (in this case).

 

"We all should respect one another’s religion, no matter which religion we are having."

totaly 100% agreed

 

"Please CLOSE this part of sfn forum. I Request people from every religion to vote in this regard."

i see no reason to stop people talking about religion so long as it is understood that you must not offend people deliberately; you must not be anti-certain-religion & must respect everyone elses view.

if this section upsets you feel free not to participate in it, however so long as it applies with SFN rules (about respect to others etc.) then there is no reason to stop it.

 

all quotes from original post by mab

[YT2095]

what is "SFN People" for a start?

[5614]

im not sure, at first i though he was referring to us, but then i thought hey, he must mean the:

Single Frequency Network

or

Someone for Nothing! (its a group)

 

just before people get offended, this is a bit of a joke post!

[Perennial]

Religious forums are always potential torches, but as long as some level of personal discretion remains it should be tolerated in my view. Religious debate & discussion is hard for many people, but limiting it is just a convenience ... taking the easy way out.

[AL]

You're more than welcome to not visit that part of the forum if it bothers you that much. I actually enjoy that forum, being an ex-Christian who spent a good number of my teenage years reading religious apologetics, philosophy and science before finally giving up on religion altogether. The debates still interest me however, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who enjoys them.

In fact the religion is something very personal to everyone. So everyone should respect it.

...

We all should respect one another’s religion, no matter which religion we are having.

I can respect religion to the extent that it does not defy reason or do harm to others. If you choose to have faith in something which cannot be proven or disproven, that's fine with me (though I prefer to call it hope rather than faith). If you choose to have faith that 2 + 2 = 5, I cannot respect that, no matter how dearly you hold that belief. Likewise, if your faith makes you a better person, I'm all for it. If your faith causes you to blow things up and chop people's heads off or pick on harmless minorities, I cannot respect that, again, no matter how dear this belief is to you*.

 

*I'm using "you" in a general sense. I'm not referring to any of you in particular.

[mab]

My only aim in saying all this is that, it’s a forum about science that is based on FACTS, and religion is something different based on FAITH.

If you really want to discuss this then in this case, as in other parts of science forum there are experts, in the same way there should be experts from every religion. They should be moderators of that forum so that they could keep the balance.

Religion is something about “PEACE” and “BALANCE”. It defines rights and duties. It’s not about inhuman activities, if you hear or see such things done by various individuals then it’s part of their own self not the religion, they are in fact misusing the name of particular religion.

[Sayonara]

Firstly, we don't need you to tell us what this forum is for. While this may be a science web site, the Religion and Philosophy forum is - perhaps surprisingly - for discussions of and pertaining to religion and philosophy.

 

By dictating your own opinions and labelling them as the definition of religion you are undermining your own case. Anyone who is given arbitrary control over the religion forum will try to stifle free discussion to their own ends - exactly as you are doing, in fact.

 

If you think that the religion forum would be best moderated by experts in a religion, then by all means show us one expert of any religion on these boards, who has no agenda, evangelic bias, or insane streak.

[Glider]

Over sfn people are saying things about religion without solid proofs, which is painful very painful.

"If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself, but to your estimate of it; and this you have the power to revoke at any moment." (Marcus Aurelius Antoninus).

 

In other words, any pain you suffer as a result of our discussion is down to you, not us, and it is quite within your power to stop suffering.

 

.

[Ophiolite]

MAB, I understand, though I do not share, your concerns. Several of the posters have asked that you give specific examples of where posts in this forum have been disrepectful or displayed hatred. It could be helpful if you could offer some examples, so that the discussion was then about specifics, rather than generalities.

 

I also thought 5614's post addressed each of your concerns rather well. What was your reaction?

[mab]

Mainly answering Sayonara³'s post

,“By dictating your own opinions and labelling them as the definition of religion you are undermining your own case”.

I am not dictating my definition of religion,

“Religion is something about “PEACE” and “BALANCE”. It defines rights and duties. It’s not about inhuman activities”

I wrote about main principles of all religions, even if a person has no religion, even then he/she believes in peace, its healthy human nature.

I am not imposing my opinion.

Because first I wrote about closing that part of forum, but after I read others point of views, I agreed that there is no harm in keeping forum about religion. But

“There should be experts from every religion. They should be moderators of that forum so that they could keep the balance”.

I wrote “expert of every religion”, in order to make environment unbiased. Another suggestion if you don’t mind is that, by having some unbiased moderator, who has knowledge about all religions and check the comments “that are not based on solid facts and are distorting the actual face of a religion”.

When there is any scientific discussion, the discussion is interesting and healthy because people, who have knowledge, mostly correct the direction of discussion.

If religion is being misinterpreted and giving rise to misconception, it makes readers feelings hostile towards that particular religion.

Be impartial then research for truth.

[Sayonara]

Please CLOSE this part of sfn forum

^ That looks like imposing your views to me.

 

I agree with you that people could be more respectful of others beliefs, but we can't force people to only say or think certain things, and we don't have a magic bucket in which we grow moderators who know everything about every religion.

[Skye]

Considering that high ranking and experienced members, as well as well educated scholars, of religions often disagree on the interpretation of religions, I don't see how it would necessarily resolve any disagreements by having experienced moderators.

[Aardvark]

Mainly answering Sayonara³'s post

I am not dictating my definition of religion' date='

“Religion is something about “PEACE” and “BALANCE”. It defines rights and duties. It’s not about inhuman activities”

I wrote about main principles of all religions, even if a person has no religion, even then he/she believes in peace, its healthy human nature.

[/quote']

 

 

Your religion and many others may be about "PEACE" and "BALANCE" but not all are. A religious follower of the Norse Gods believes that you can only get to Valhalla ( a variety of paradise ) if you die in battle. The ancient Carthagians believed in throwing babies into furnaces to bring divine intervention. The Aztecs believed in ritual wars to capture men and cut out their hearts to please the Gods.

 

The main principles of a Methodist or Buddhist are not shared with these religions. To ask for equal respect of all religions and to insist they all have the same underlying principles flies in the face of these facts.

 

We should certainly behave respectfully but not to the extent of self delusion.

[mab]

To Ophiolite,

Thanks for your concern, I appreciate your manner of asking.

I hope you will understand my point of view, I don’t want to point out any particular statement, because I think it will again grow into argumentation.

Religion, is sensitive issue, I don’t want to get involved in argument.

Any person with sensitive heart can feel what points can hurt the feeling of any religion. Basically misinterpretation of religion hurts, and writing comments without any solid proofs and disfiguring the shape of a religion (any religion).

I hope you understand what I want to say.

[5614]

yes. i as many others understand what you are saying... but think its wrong, there is freedom of speech here and where has anyone deliberatly insulted someone else's religion?

[mab]

I have no proof to say that somebody wrote intentionally against any religion ,it can be due to unintentional carelessness ,but still hurting someone's feelings.

[mab]

In the start, I have made request rather than forcing or imposing anything as word

“Please”

clearly shows that it was request. My second post shows this more clearly, that I wanted friendly and caring environment and am not against discussion which is in limits, without hurting feelings.

I wrote,

it’s a forum about science that is based on FACTS

,in this Suggestions and comments forum.

In reply by Sayonara, I am told harshly,

Firstly, we don't need you to tell us what this forum is for.

What is “Freedom of speech” by the way. He even as a Moderator couldn’t take such a common sentence, but able to bear whatever is happening in those religious threads. Should I call it Justice.

Sayonara wrote

we can't force people to only say or think certain things

Again misinterpretation of my writing, I didn’t say any such thing. I just wanted somebody to keep an eye on everything and delete those parts that cause pain.

Sayonara wrote,

we don't have a magic bucket in which we grow moderators who know everything about every religion.

If you don’t know how to drive then you don’t need to drive, if you are still willing to drive, in that case there should be driver sitting beside you, otherwise it will just cause accidents.

If my message is still not conveyed to you, then it’s useless to say anything anymore.

If my posts hurt someone then it was not my intention. I don’t want to further argue over this topic.

[Sorcerer]

Oh harden up..... you don't see people who agree with evolution being hurt by creationist arguing against it do you? I doubt a single creationist is an expert on evolution, but we don't try to stop them discussing evolution. The same applies to anybody with any opposing view, just because they want to argue something they beleive and you disagree shouldn't make you want to go running to your room for a cry like a little girl.

[YT2095]

the current system of moderation for the religion forum is already as good as it could be.

consider this: If one person were to be sole moderator of it, How would that present ballance?

whereas with no ONE particular person moderating it, it`s cutting down the error margin and providing a greater overall ballance average.

 

it`s pure Logic

[Sorcerer]

not to mention since there is not one religion there should not be one moderator........ not the mention the fact is philosophy AND religion.......... philosophy is always going to contain relgious debate, the good thing about it is that it is not dogmatic debate, it is debate based on premises and conclusions, proper arguements, not the its in the book so its gotta be right stuff.

 

And Mab if you disagree argue your posistion, someone might just change their mind and agree with you, if not, then what do you care??

[Sayonara]

In the start' date=' I have made request rather than forcing or imposing anything as word clearly shows that it was request.

"Please"

That makes no difference. Your request was to close the religion forum because YOU didn't want to see part of the discussions. You showed no interest in the fact that it is (a) also a philosophy forum, (b) already moderated quite well enough, and © enjoyed by dozens, if not hundreds, of members and guests.

 

 

My second post shows this more clearly, that I wanted friendly and caring environment and am not against discussion which is in limits, without hurting feelings.

If you think there are unfriendly and uncaring posts on the boards, engage your imagination and have a think about what the posts we do remove must be like.

Believe me, there's a hidden forum that is packed with them.

 

 

In reply by Sayonara, I am told harshly,

See it as harsh if you will. I see it as being a statement of fact, and I can't be held accountable for how you interpret it.

You seem to be suggesting that because a science forum expects to deal in facts, that is all people can and/or will post here. That's a ludicrous position.

 

 

What is “Freedom of speech” by the way. He even as a Moderator couldn’t take such a common sentence, but able to bear whatever is happening in those religious threads. Should I call it Justice.

I do not know what this means.

 

 

Again misinterpretation of my writing, I didn’t say any such thing. I just wanted somebody to keep an eye on everything and delete those parts that cause pain.

We already do moderate the forum, perhaps more stringently than any other. If you are asking for tighter checks, which you are, that can only be achieved by policing what people can and can't say.

 

 

If you don’t know how to drive then you don’t need to drive, if you are still willing to drive, in that case there should be driver sitting beside you, otherwise it will just cause accidents.

Meaningless analogy, badly constructed. Please try to argue your point based on its own merits, rather than random issues of law or safety in unrelated areas of reality.