Suggestion: Ban Religious Debates

[Jaime C]

I don't care about religious debates if they're clearly marked as such. What I do hate, is when a fairly standard thread that is not religious in nature is turned into one.

[Happyman]

I don't care about religious debates if they're clearly marked as such. What I do hate, is when a fairly standard thread that is not religious in nature is turned into one.

I've participated in a few of those. Just read a 110 post "legal" thread where I'd guess about 75% of the posts were on a side-line, mostly religious.

Thing is, I actually wanted to see the answer to the OP's question for once, and because it's such a long thread, I thought there might be something good in it, hiding there in the middle of all the religious stuff. Nope, waste of time.

[john madden]

I don't care about religious debates if they're clearly marked as such. What I do hate, is when a fairly standard thread that is not religious in nature is turned into one.

I've participated in a few of those. Just read a 110 post "legal" thread where I'd guess about 75% of the posts were on a side-line, mostly religious.

Thing is, I actually wanted to see the answer to the OP's question for once, and because it's such a long thread, I thought there might be something good in it, hiding there in the middle of all the religious stuff. Nope, waste of time.

You should report it; the mods will clean up if appropriate.

[atlantis]

You should report it; the mods will clean up if appropriate.

- ditto -
and again it shows that it is a question of attitude of some posters. I understand that religion doesn't have the same importance for all of us, and that for some it is apparently a big part in their life but avoiding to shove it to other's throats may be in order.
I (too) often receive complaints from poster which are in a similar line than those expressed by Jaime C and Happyman and I have to admit that sometimes when I click on a thread because I had an interest in it, I have been pretty surprised to find out that the content was not approaching what the title was promising.

[Mister Bule]

I understand that religion doesn't have the same importance for all of us, and that for some it is apparently a big part in their life but avoiding to shove it to other's throats may be in order.

Shoving religion down other people's throats? Seriously? I am sincerely unaware of anyone having done that here.

Perhaps we have been reading different forums. If it is the same one, we certainly seem to view it in drastically different ways.

Cheers,

MB

[lantern]

- ditto -
and again it shows that it is a question of attitude of some posters. I understand that religion doesn't have the same importance for all of us, and that for some it is apparently a big part in their life but avoiding to shove it to other's throats may be in order.
I (too) often receive complaints from poster which are in a similar line than those expressed by Jaime C and Happyman and I have to admit that sometimes when I click on a thread because I had an interest in it, I have been pretty surprised to find out that the content was not approaching what the title was promising.

Time to roll this one out

[atlantis]

Perhaps we have been reading different forums.

I am not sure we've been reading different forums but we sure read different posts and you perhaps have never received complaints and comments from users of this forum. This is telling that you don't realize that a large number of users are unhappy of threads being derailed.

Personally, I have stopped reading "religiously tinted" 23 paragraphs posts, especially when I find them in response to a question like "where can I find a screwdriver in JKT".

[johntap]

Does that apply to debates about atheism, Atlantis.

Here is something of interest from USA (Dec 6th NYT):

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office.
But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses.

[atlantis]

Does that apply to debates about atheism, Atlantis.

Not sure about what is the nature of your question, John but here is what I can tell you: Derailing a thread with a post concerning atheism or any religion is... well... still derailing a thread from it's initial topic. Same goes with derailing a thread about "where I can find a screwdriver" with a post advising about where to go on your next holiday. Light off topic can be acceptable but anyone posting should wonder if their post really makes sense in the thread. See what I mean?

Was it a genuine on topic question or an inquiry for some kind of survey or research, John?

Just teasing you.

[johntap]

Was it a genuine on topic question or an inquiry for some kind of survey or research, John?

Just teasing you.

Hey, I'm over that aren't I? (I've seen a lot of members here going the academic survey route to enlist support for their ideas- never gets anywhere)

My point, not bad for a slow Sunday morning I thought, was, pithily, to state that it is surprising that atheists don't seem to want take up the cudgel/go off topic, rant and shove down the gullet their creed, as readily as believers. (It would seem there are as many atheists here as believers.)

I feel sorry for Mr B, because I don't consider him a gullet-shoving parent White-tailed Tropic Bird at all. I see him more as a pecked upon Frigate bird: where the young and uninitiated plunge their head down the parent's throat looking for the right stuff.

I'm out of here. The metaphors are getting stretched.

[Happyman]

You should report it; the mods will clean up if appropriate.

I'm afraid it has already received moderator attention... and is an old thread as well (2012, before I posted). I sorted the legal threads by length and started reading from the longest I had not previously read, hoping to learn more about legal issues here. The religious debate there might have started naturally enough, but it quickly became thread worthy in it's own right. Maybe that is the practical approach: if you find yourself making the fifth off-topic post, copy the 4 posts above you to a new thread and post a link to it.