A DU Group for the discussion of Religion/Theology?

[okasha]

I wonder if there's enough interest to submit a proposal to the admins for a DU group on this topic. As others have noted, it's almost impossible to have a rational discussion on religion/theology in this forum. Most of the threads on the first page are not discussions of the topics at all. If there is interest, is there a way to phrase the mission statement to permit informed, rational input from all perspectives but to filter out the bigoted, self-congratulatory religion-is-a-fairy-tale-believed-only-by-delusional-idiots circle-jerks that comprise many of the threads on the opening page of this forum?

What do other members think?

[CBGLuthier]

1. I am with you

I may be an atheist but BS bashing of other people's beliefs are wrong and bigoted.

[okasha]

3. Thanks, notmypresident!

[htuttle]

2. Please describe what a 'rational' discussion of religion would sound like

[papau]

12. Perhaps it would not have put downs about how much more rational one

would be if you were not religious. Currently I expect the religious, if they object to atheist put downs of the religious in the Science forum, to be baned from the Science forum.

Perhaps in this new Religion forum the Atheist Evangelical core would avoid implying - just in this forum - that only they have the key to rational thought and discussion of the human experience.

Perhaps, in this forum, when mis-statements are made by the Atheist Evangelical core and pointed out by others with links and data as to who was or was not an atheist and as to what is in the religious history, we would not have the mis-stated assertion repeated over and over again as if mere assertion would convince anyone. Indeed perhaps in this forum it could be a given that the posters are religious so that no one was wasting time trying to convince anyone about how much smarter, more rational they are because the are not believers. Perhaps in this forum the discussion would be about shared religious concepts, not on the quality of a trace back of a given thought to any earlier source.

But such a forum does not need to exist on DU for DU to be a great site and extremely useful to our common goal of bringing back progressive values in government.

But it would be nice.

[beam me up scottie]

22. Do you ever read what you type?

Your posts are so full of hate they make no sense at all.

Is this particular tirade because you were banned from posting in the Science forum for attacking other posters?

I would think you would talk to SKinner about that, not blame atheists.

[papau]

58. no hate is in my posts - but then I do not accept harassment from anyone

including "good atheists"

I liked the thought behind your "When Good Atheists Go Bad" - and I appreciate your attempt to raise the level of discussion - but even that thread quickly deteriorated into the usual pissing contest between atheists and everyone else.

As "okasha" said in post 14 "Atheists who can be respectful of other peoples' beliefs, such as the first person who posted to support the group, would be more than welcome....But I'm not interested in defending mine or other people's beliefs to fundamentalist bigots of any sort--be they theists or atheists. Neither am I willing to put up with harassment from either group."

[beam me up scottie]

62. You pissed in my thread, papau,

you just tried to disguise it with your usual passive/aggressive shit.

You forgot to add the little toast smilie you always use to show how sweet you are.

[papau]

65. :-) and that is a "passive/aggressive " smile! I posted to Zebedeo

and said that progressive religious discussions do not seem productive, and indeed do not seem possible, on DU.

Do you disagree?

[beam me up scottie]

66. No, I believe in being honest.

If someone doesn't like what I have to say, I prefer they respond in kind.

I hate phonies.

[FloridaPat]

4. OK by me. I take it you're refering to the first page of

Ethnicity, Religion & Atheism forum?

[okasha]

6. I'm referring to the first page

of the Religion/Theology forum, in which we are currently posting.

[rockymountaindem]

5. I think that's a fine idea.

For the reasons you stated.

[pretzel4gore]

7. good idea....

the problem with such a topic is that the terms must be defined, and agreed on.......anyone who has read theology knows that the technical setting up of the arguments is what takes so much time. and saying we're just amateurs who use general rules to handle the disagreements; well .....good luck! 'God' is one of the most complex 3 letter word in the human psyche/language, often requiring pages of clarification (for ex. do you mean the creator as found in xianity, or what? how much of religious symbolism is acceptable, or did jesus literally walk on water, did god literally create the world in 6 days, with sunday for rest? etc)

[BloodedOberon]

8. Not a problem, but why bother?

I wouldn't sabotage a religious discussion or turn it into an argument, but then I wouldn't have to either. Nobody enters a religious discussion looking to change faiths, and few enter one looking for new facts or viewpoints. Short of detailing your beliefs (which only takes one post) the only way of keeping a religious conversation going is by arguing.

If you post, though, I'll make an effort to read.

[okasha]

9. Even if the "only way to keep a religious discussion going

is by arguing"--and I disagree with that, from personal experience--there is a difference between argument and harrassment. That's why I'd like to see "all perspectives" included but harrassment put out of bounds.

[beam me up scottie]

20. So you post a broadbrush attack on a group of DUers ?

Yeah, you've got credibility.

[papau]

10. I'd like such a forum

:-)

[More Than A Feeling]

11. I'm in.

[trotsky]

13. There are already a few.

Catholic and Orthodox Christian Group
Christian Liberals/Progressive People of Faith Group
Seekers on Unique Paths

So will the bigoted, self-congratulatory atheism-is-an-empty-and-deadend-philosophy-(or alternately, intense-belief-system-and-religion) believed-only-by-arrogant-morons posts still be allowed? Or do you just want to eliminate the atheists?

[okasha]

14. I wouldn't fit into a Christians-only group, not being one. And neither I

nor Christians/Jews/Sufis/etc. are on "unique paths."

Atheists who can be respectful of other peoples' beliefs, such as the first person who posted to support the group, would be more than welcome. That's why I want to include "all perspectives."

But I'm not interested in defending mine or other people's beliefs to fundamentalist bigots of any sort--be they theists or atheists. Neither am I willing to put up with harrassment from either group.

[papau]

16. I agree :-)

:-)

[WritingIsMyReligion]

34. trotsky, I think I love you.

:loveya:

:rofl:

:D :P

:hi:

[beam me up scottie]

41. Uh uh, no you don't!

I saw him first! :mad:

[WritingIsMyReligion]

49. Back off!

:P :P

Nice journal, BTW. It's full of BMUS snark. ;)

[beam me up scottie]

52. Okay,

but you can't have Sal, me and him go way back.

I would have posted some nice things I've said for my journal but there aren't any!

Evil atheists have an image to keep up, you know.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

54. Yup.

;)

[beam me up scottie]

15. Another ditto head echo chamber?

You guys already have half a dozen.

How many more do you need?

[okasha]

17. Just one where we don't have to put up with insults like your topic line

would be fine.

[beam me up scottie]

18. Like I said, you've got plenty, why post in here just to whine?

Aren't you supposed to take your complaints to the mods?

[beam me up scottie]

19. Example of one of those insults :

If there is interest, is there a way to phrase the mission statement to permit informed, rational input from all perspectives but to filter out the bigoted, self-congratulatory religion-is-a-fairy-tale-believed-only-by-delusional-idiots circle-jerks that comprise many of the threads on the opening page of this forum?

[arwalden]

I Noticed That Too... Astounding, Isn't It?

:eyes:

[beam me up scottie]

69. What happens to the broad brush attacks by atheists?

Oh, that's right.

You wouldn't know because their posts never last more than a minute or so before a few dozen sweaty index claws pound their alert keys until their computers crash.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

31. Yup, because we nonreligious ones are out to get you.

And you guys NEVER do anything to us...

Yeah.

:eyes:

[beam me up scottie]

43. Why, it's just like the real world!

We know how persecuted those believers are.

I'll bet a US President even thinks they're not citizens!

[WritingIsMyReligion]

45. Hmmm, yeah!

:eyes:

It's so hard to belong to the vast majority of the country--after all, only 80% of America is Christian. Hard times, hard times.

[varkam]

21. I think it's a bad idea.

I will admit that there are a few of us atheists who use cheap shots way too often - I've been guilty of it myself. But the past few discussions I've had here on R/T have been pretty good, no one calling each other names. In fact, I've found that most of the non-theological people here are reasonable folks who are interested in facilitating a discussion on the matter - not putting theists down for the sake of it. If by insults you mean challenges to your belief system, then I submit you have way too wide a definition of insult.

Why I post to the R/T forums when I'm, in fact, an atheist is because I'd like some perspective. If the only place I could post religious stuff to were the A&A group, then I'd be screwed - most everyone would agree with each other and we'd be done with it.

In fact my last OP in the R/T forums was not a put-down or even a direct challenge, it was to get a theist to explain an argument to me because I didn't understand. Perspective comes from discussion involving members of all different walks of life and faiths, which is why I so value the R/T forums. I try not to use it as a platform to subject theists to my non-existent intellectual superiority - but I can get caught up in the heat of the moment, just like everyone else (including theists!).

I think it's a bad idea because perspective benefits everyone. It's what takes the *fun* out of fundamental.

[okasha]

23. By insults I mean such things as "ditto-head echo chamber."

The other religious-themed forums are specialized, varkam. I'm a traditional Native American with a literary and historical interest in the Bible and Christian theology, as well comparative religion in general. (Now, I'm relatively safe from the kind of bs that goes down here, because you can't insult my religion without also insulting my race. Others aren't so shielded.) It should be possible to have a discussion about such matters that is a discussion--not a running battle attempting to fend off baiting and harrassment. It is, after all, quite possible to challenge someone's beliefs respectfully. Your posts are good examples of what such a mutually respectful, rational exchange shoud look like. Should a new group form, you'd be most welcome there.

[beam me up scottie]

25. What a hypocrite.

You started a thread for the sole purpose of attacking a group of DUers and now you whine about being insulted by them?

:rofl:

[CBGLuthier]

27. Hmm, where have I heard that before?

How dare someone condemn me for condemning them for condemning me?

[beam me up scottie]

28. Show me where I condemned anyone.

I'll wait.

[Goblinmonger]

24. You know what, go ahead

If you are just going to whine about someone challenging your beliefs, than find somewhere where you can just pat each other on the back. Oh, wait, you condemned self-congratulatory circle-jerks, so I guess that won't work.

I have a forum name for you, "No Uppity Atheists Allowed." If I knew how to post that name in the stererotypical "kid" writing with a "p" and the "y" backwards, like in cartoons, I would have.

[CBGLuthier]

26. Why do my fellow atheists care so much

what others believe?

Oh, I know the arguments. Fundies are killing us. Fundies are opressing us.

Well dammnit fundies don't post on DU.

The religious people of DU don't insist I believe. Why should I insist they are silly for their beliefs?

As far as I am concerned I hate smugness and arrogance from anyone. None of us have all the fucking answers. While I may not be able to believe in a god that doesn't mean those who do are stupid. In fact, I really wish I could believe.

God (no real pun intended) knows it would give me some comfort in this cold shitty world. But that's just me and they are just them and that's Ok. Life is too short to spend it beliitling those who agree with me on most things except this one issue.

And yes, I used to be pissy about it too. But I managed to grow up.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

29. What about the bigoted, self-congratulatory athiests-are-crazed jerks

who comprise as many first-page threads as your "religion-is-a-fairy-tale-believed-only-by-delusional-idiots circle-jerks"?

:eyes:

How many freaking echo chambers does this forum NEED, fer chrissakes? Do you really think a religion group would be one whit more sensible than this place? For frig's sake, the LOUNGE makes more sense than any religion forum on here.

:eyes:

[beam me up scottie]

30. I like you.

You can join our group for people who are too special for the other groups.

[varkam]

32. Yes.

Yes you can.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

37. I saw that post.

I'm just SO damned special....

:D

:hi:

[beam me up scottie]

40. Damned smart-alecky uppity atheists!

Who died and made them Not God?

[WritingIsMyReligion]

42. LOL! I'm not even an athiest--

I just despise organized religion. I don't know what the hell I am--some weird pantheistic/naturalistic/spiritualistic lady-ette. Or something like that.

;)

[beam me up scottie]

44. Really?

Some of my best friends are some weird pantheistic/naturalistic/spiritualistic lady-ettes!

[WritingIsMyReligion]

47. Well, lookee there!

We have a winner!

:P

:rofl:

[salvorhardin]

46. Oh! We like people like you.

They tend to bring the best drugs.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

48. !

:rofl::rofl:

Like I, a dutiful daughter and respectful (:rofl:) minor, would know anything about drugs!

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

:P

[salvorhardin]

50. Oh crap!

I just saw your sig line. You're a minor so I'd better issue the usual legal disclaimer...

Disclaimer: salvorhardin in no way advocates the use of mind altering substances, unless they're legally prescribed by your physician (in which case, who's your doctor?) because drugs are bad, m'kay?

[WritingIsMyReligion]

51. I love making people think I'm older than I am.

It's fun.....I had half the Lounge going for a long time...before I decided to spill...

:D :D :D

;)

[beam me up scottie]

53. I never would have known.

Seriously, you're head and shoulders above most adults.

And you have the sense of humor of a woman going through menopause.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

55. LOL!

"....sense of humor of a woman going through menopause."

What is THAT supposed to mean?

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Thank ya, though....I think. ;)

[beam me up scottie]

56. Oh, you'll find out.

In a few decades!

[salvorhardin]

33. The "You don't use your mind to think about your religion" group? n/t

[WritingIsMyReligion]

39. Well, that statement is too often a given.

:D

[thinkingwoman]

35. the lounge is my religion

You're not knocking it are you? Huh? Well ARE you? :sarcasm:

[WritingIsMyReligion]

36. Yeah, what if I am?

HUNH?

:P :P

:hi:

[thinkingwoman]

61. You're one those, uh, one of those, uh...

you're one of those writingists are you?!? I've got your number. You don't fool me. You think Writing is a better religion than DULounge but you're wrong, wrong, wrong! Know how I know? Cause the Lounge told me so!!

Hmf.

:hi: back at ya. We seriously need a snooty, upturned nose smiley to go with my "hmf" dontcha think?

[beam me up scottie]

38. Oooooooooooo, you're mean!

We definitely want you in our club!

[okasha]

57. I'd like to thank the Academy

and beam me up scotty, WritingIsMyReligion,Goblinmonger and others for making my argument for another group more vividly than I have been able to do myself.

I appreciate it, guys. :D

[papau]

60. LOL :-)

:-)

[beam me up scottie]

63. Well, you're more than welcome.

Whenever we're insulted, we try to return the favor. :hi:

Except I forgot to insult anyone in my thread, darn it!

[thinkingwoman]

59. Really?

I'm stunned. Truly.

Hey, questions...Do I have to act superior? Er, I mean, CAN I act superior? What if I want to be the Mother Superior? Is that ok?

Oh, and the most important question of all...are their dues?

[beam me up scottie]

64. Nah, you'll have to persecute your fair share

of innocents and eat some babies, but we're pretty lax.

And your first rubber chicken is free!

[thinkingwoman]

70. I'd like my first rubber chicken to be purple

Cause that's the color or superiority, or royalty, or somesuch.

Persecuting innocents and eating babies will be a piece of cake. I'm pagan. We do that naked. With dancing. :evilgrin:

[arwalden]

67. Who Gets To Have The Final Say On What "Rational" Means?

[beam me up scottie]

68. Whoever kills the most heathens.

Or believers.

They have a head start on us though.

[Ediacara]

71. Locking

Friends, at this time, this is the DU group for discussion of religion and theology. If you would like to discuss religious and theological questions in an atmosphere free of dissent, please visit our many DU groups that have been set up to address various religious and theological areas. Also, please take note of the proceedure for proposing new groups.

That being said, I'm afraid that this thread is a rather extreme group attack and broad brush smear of other progressives, and must be locked.