Posted on 06/22/2012 8:48:35 AM PDT by Religion Moderator
It is within the bounds of “open” Religion Forum town square style debate for a Freeper to express his hatred of a belief. But such posts are never allowed on RF threads labeled “prayer” “devotional” “caucus” or “ecumenical.”
It is never within the bounds on the Religion Forum for a Freeper to express his hatred of people who hold a particular belief when any Freeper is part of the belief group.
For example:
It is ok to express hatred towards CatholicISM on “open” Religion Forum threads. It is never ok to express hatred towards Catholics because some Freepers are Catholic.
It is ok to express hatred towards ProtestantISM on “open” Religion Forum threads. It is never ok to express hatred towards Protestants because some Freepers are Protestant.
It is ok to express hatred towards SatanISM and Satanists both because no Freeper is Satanist.
Some political posters are now venturing onto the Religion Forum probably because Romney’s beliefs are at issue in this election.
If you do not wish to see RF posts, do NOT use the "everything" option on the Free Republic browse option list. Instead, browse by "News/Activism." When you log back in, the browse will reset to "everything" - so be sure to set it back to "News/Activism."
Finally, whereas posters may argue vigorously for and against beliefs on “open” Religion Forum threads it is never tolerable to use ad hominems in religious debate because they invariably lead to flame wars when the subject is one’s deeply held religious beliefs.
For something to be "making it personal" it must be speaking to another Freeper, personally.
"Protestants are heretics" is not making it personal. "You are a heretic" is making it personal. "Catholics worship Mary" is not making it personal. "You worship Mary" is making it personal. "Mormons worship many gods" is not making it personal. "You worship many gods" is making it personal.
However, when a poster paints with a brush that accuses an entire religion of criminal behavior - his post will be pulled as flame bait. For example, posts that say "Protestants kill babies" or "Catholics molest children" or "Mormons kill non-Mormons" will be pulled. However, if the post is specific about a non-Freeper, I will not pull it. For example "Rev. Doe says abortion and infanticide are not sin" or "Father Doe was convicted for molesting those kids" or "Mormons killed non-Mormons at Mountain Meadows" would not be pulled.
Statements formed as questions are rarely "making it personal."
"Are you a heretic" is not making it personal. "You are a heretic" is making it personal.
Forms of "making it personal" include mind reading, attributing motive, accusing another Freeper of telling a lie (because it attributes motive, the intent to deceive) - making the thread "about" individual Freeper(s), following a Freeper from thread to thread and badgering a Freeper over-and-again with the same question.
When in doubt, avoid the use of the pronoun "you" and Freeper's names - or put yourself in the other guy's shoes.
Despite all these efforts to eliminate ad hominems, there is nothing I can do to keep you from "taking it personally."
If you keep getting your feelings hurt because other posters ridicule or disapprove or hate what you hold dear, then you are too thin-skinned to be involved in “open” RF debate. You should IGNORE “open” RF threads altogether and instead post to RF threads labeled “prayer” “devotional” “caucus” or “ecumenical.”
“Catholics worship Mary” is not making it personal.
It’s also a lie. Lying about religions you hate is permitted on the religion forum?
The statement should be prefaced as:
“I believe that Catholics worship Mary”.
Totally right. But many people do not choose to make “I” statements, even though they are preferrable.
Pretty sure he's still a Trinitarian though.
Some people love to discuss sects with perverts ad nauseum.
Could you add a rule against rehashing the same arguments over and over for years on end? Reading most open discussions on the Religion forum makes me feel like Bill Murray in Groundhog Day.
I think that it is anti Christian to express hatred at all. You can dislike, or disapprove, someone’s actions, but hatred is a very strong word.
Rather it's the deacons and elderswho "teach that".
Even Catholics have a hard time believing in the Trinity. The best we can do is to treat it as a MYSTERY and just accept it. They cannot explain it, or so I was told by the priest who gave me my convert classes.
Cuz, that's really what I want to do!!!
Heck, I currently have a Mormon business associate and work under a Jack Mormon broker. To say we Inmans are anti-Mormon vs anti-Mormonism is quite the stretch.
The RM does an awesome and often thankless job.
I can just see him coming home and logging onto FR and sighing, wondering what he’s going to encounter THIS time.
One point I’d like to make is that disagreeing with another belief system is not necessarily *hate*. What I’ve seen too often is that pejorative is too freely thrown about and at someone who is pointing out what they see as errors in another belief system.
It most often occurs when a member of said belief system has nothing left in his arsenal to contest what is being pointed out, and so resorts to accusations of *hate* to deflect the discussion or discredit the source.
IMO, at that point, one can invoke Godwin’s Law and declare a win.
I just wanted to say thanks, and that your words are well-expressed.
There are thousands of views of FR over a period of time. Often we see someone new responding to our posts that hadn't seen them before.
In closing, see my tagline. The mormon missionaries have a set program of the message they give out.
Thanks for the ping, Salvation.
My immediate family is Catholic, and my extended family is Mormon on both sides. This is one of my few ventures into the Religion Forum. I take myself at face value to be Christian. I can appreciate the RM’s monumental task of herding the fervent cat herd on this forum.
What strikes me as odd is that hatred is being codified as a somehow acceptable value.
2nd Corinthians tells me otherwise. Hope, faith, and charity.
I don’t care to join in the rampage against any brother or sister. I personally wish God’s blessings on all. (Phil 4:19,20)
OTOH, I came up around horses and dogs and open ranges and mountains. I might have translated The Word into my experience, dyslexic and all, and missed a bit of the preaching. Pray for me. I’m praying for all y’all.
WHO codified it? How? When? Source, please.
This is just another example of the loose use of "hatred/hate" on FR.
I was referring to the RM’s post: “It is ok to express hatred towards” ...
Gosh, I guess I’d better ping you to post 96. Didn’t know that I’d violated greyfoxx’s space enough to call in the boss. Sorry to waste your time actually.
The best way to avoid the phenomenon is to read the article and the first page or so of comments. The longer a Religion Forum stays active, the more in reduces to the usual arguments among the usual posters.
According to what Jesus says in Matthew 5, it is not.
There is a BIG difference.
IMO, this is something that happends almost daily on FR by selective editing...insinuations that someone said something they did not say.
As to my pinging JR, he has the final say on what in the way of "hatred" is allowed on FR.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.