Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forums?

[Oftencold]

Myself, I think not.

Politics derives from experience, thoughts about practicality, nationality, culture, ethnic identity, the division and distribution of finite resources, the perpetuation and redress of wrongs through completely human action, human nature and how malleable that nature is. It produces lots of acrimony, discord, outrage and intransigence. And few would suggest that our politics greatly concern the dead.

Because finite resources of many kinds are involved, politics discord compels even more aggression and assertiveness than religious discord. (Many people, and many doctrines of religion can reach a point where not intrinsically hostile sects can say something to the effect that "you worship in your way, and I shall worship in mine." But politically, it's very rare to say you take that territory that we both claim, and I shall take this territory that we both claim," without plans to take all of what one claims eventually.)

Certainly religious debates can have many of these traits too.

But for the Religious, religious discussions have far deeper and more lasting implications, infinitely greater importance and involve Agencies beyond human capacity, perception, and scope.

For me, the mindset that I employ for politics is largely unsuitable for a religious debate or even deep discussion. I am quite comfortable telling someone that they are thinking like a foolish, ignorant child when they are doing just that if the topic is a Senate confirmation, or pending bill. I would almost never do that to someone expressing a closely held religious belief, other than perhaps passionate Athiests who generally refuse to acknowledge their quaint religion.

At any rate, I personally feel, (and because it's me, this is naturally a superior opinion,) that religious discussions are not well suited to the modes of thought, passions, moods and charming snarkiness of political fora. I prefer that the topics be widely separated thematically. That is, I dislike religious questions coming up, as in the topic listing while I'm girt for conceptual war.

What do you think?

 

[CanadaJohn]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

I'm not big on dictating what others should do or not do or what they should or shouldn't have access to. I've very seldom entered a thread in the religion forum since I'm not a religious person but I am very interested in politics. That doesn't mean I have any negative opinions about those who enjoy discussions in the religion forum.

Just from being on DP for a year and a bit I can see why many Americans like to self-identify as libertarian - they want to get away from other people forming their personal lives.

Simply put, I'd much rather move past a thread I'm not interested in than expect the site to eliminate any threads I'm not interested in.

 

[Oftencold]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

I'm not big on dictating what others should do or not do or what they should or shouldn't have access to. I've very seldom entered a thread in the religion forum since I'm not a religious person but I am very interested in politics. That doesn't mean I have any negative opinions about those who enjoy discussions in the religion forum.

Just from being on DP for a year and a bit I can see why many Americans like to self-identify as libertarian - they want to get away from other people forming their personal lives.

Simply put, I'd much rather move past a thread I'm not interested in than expect the site to eliminate any threads I'm not interested in.

In truth, I call not for anything to be done, I'm just curious about what people think, or what they might do if they were founding a forum.

I don't have difficulty passing by topics I'm not interested in, but stopping at ones I'm interested in, but really am in the wrong frame of mind to be commenting on. I'm one of those people who have trouble looking up a word in a dictionary, because there are so many other interesting words on the way.

 

[Moot]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

I think it's a good idea to have a separate sub forum for religion debate for the very reasons you cited, religious debate should be separate from political debate.

 

[WCH]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

Closely held religious beliefs are the basis for many of my political opinions. How would I separate the two?

 

[Oftencold]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

Closely held religious beliefs are the basis for many of my political opinions. How would I separate the two?

I agree and have said as much on many occasions.

But many things ought not be together, even where there is a causal relationship.

My very personal opinion, and it's no more than that, is that in general I don't think that purely religious topics go well with political topics, in that the proper attitudes and humility for the one are discouraged by the other. If nothing else I find them to be very discordant when considered side by side, like people at adjoining tables, one group discussing the virtues of silk fabrics in the design of gowns, and the other discussing the virtues of various species of manure in the practice of horticulture.

I'm only curious to see if it affects other people in this way.

 

[Quag]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

I see no reason to not have religious sub forums.
Dont like them, dont go there

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

Myself, I think not.

Politics derives from experience, thoughts about practicality, nationality, culture, ethnic identity, the division and distribution of finite resources, the perpetuation and redress of wrongs through completely human action, human nature and how malleable that nature is. It produces lots of acrimony, discord, outrage and intransigence. And few would suggest that our politics greatly concern the dead.

Because finite resources of many kinds are involved, politics discord compels even more aggression and assertiveness than religious discord. (Many people, and many doctrines of religion can reach a point where not intrinsically hostile sects can say something to the effect that "you worship in your way, and I shall worship in mine." But politically, it's very rare to say you take that territory that we both claim, and I shall take this territory that we both claim," without plans to take all of what one claims eventually.)

Certainly religious debates can have many of these traits too.

But for the Religious, religious discussions have far deeper and more lasting implications, infinitely greater importance and involve Agencies beyond human capacity, perception, and scope.

For me, the mindset that I employ for politics is largely unsuitable for a religious debate or even deep discussion. I am quite comfortable telling someone that they are thinking like a foolish, ignorant child when they are doing just that if the topic is a Senate confirmation, or pending bill. I would almost never do that to someone expressing a closely held religious belief, other than perhaps passionate Athiests who generally refuse to acknowledge their quaint religion.

At any rate, I personally feel, (and because it's me, this is naturally a superior opinion,) that religious discussions are not well suited to the modes of thought, passions, moods and charming snarkiness of political fora. I prefer that the topics be widely separated thematically. That is, I dislike religious questions coming up, as in the topic listing while I'm girt for conceptual war.

What do you think?

I think that you are highly offensive and ignorant of what not believing God exists is.

I think that the questions of how the impact of stupidity inflict bad decisions on the world are very suitable for a forum such as this.

There are dedicatedly religious forums out there. If you want an echo chamber go there. Here the debate is political. Your philosophy of fact denial does have impact on the political world. The real world. Why should it be protected from the sort of examination that all other view points are subject to?

 

[Shadow Serious]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

Myself, I think not.

So far the poll is trending otherwise. You should vote in your own poll too.

Politics derives from experience,

True.

thoughts about practicality,

Some people have unpractical ideas about what society should be and thus their politics are impracticable.

nationality,

Yes and some have international political objectives.

culture, ethnic identity,

Both due so whenever government gets involved or they get it involved.

the division and distribution of finite resources,

Not to mention the securing of the finite resources.

the perpetuation and redress of wrongs through completely human action,

Which is one of the primary roles of government so yes.

human nature and how malleable that nature is.

Human nature is not very malleable and the best that can be hopped for is the tempering of the worst of human tendencies. Though religion has a big role in doing the same at least in its doctrine.

It produces lots of acrimony, discord, outrage and intransigence.

So does religion, sports teams, and basic personalities of people that rub each other badly.

And few would suggest that our politics greatly concern the dead.

I think that Carl Marx is a dead man who his writings have inspired considerable political tensions not to mention bloodshed. And he is not the only political philosopher that has contributed to the world distentions either.

Because finite resources of many kinds are involved, politics discord compels even more aggression and assertiveness than religious discord.

Politics have used religions as cover for their purposes doesn't mean that religions cannot do the same especially if one gains the favor of government or the issue of adherence of doctrine is given utmost importance by those in charge in the respective sects. Religion comes into politics when government treads on religion's turf and the same when religion treads on government's.

(Many people, and many doctrines of religion can reach a point where not intrinsically hostile sects can say something to the effect that "you worship in your way, and I shall worship in mine."

Very modern but this doesn't always happen some people are unhapply that others practice and belive differently than they do and are not happy when some people act "unnaturally" and want them to be punished.

But politically, it's very rare to say you take that territory that we both claim, and I shall take this territory that we both claim," without plans to take all of what one claims eventually.)

Are you saying this is not political?

Certainly religious debates can have many of these traits too.

But for the Religious, religious discussions have far deeper and more lasting implications, infinitely greater importance and involve Agencies beyond human capacity, perception, and scope.

And yet results of such are not beyond the human condition and are temporal and thus political.

For me, the mindset that I employ for politics is largely unsuitable for a religious debate or even deep discussion.

As long as religious debate involves government power it is political.

I am quite comfortable telling someone that they are thinking like a foolish, ignorant child when they are doing just that if the topic is a Senate confirmation, or pending bill.

As long as the bill or the appointment can impact peoples life style or livelihood I would not consider any discussion to be childish.

I would almost never do that to someone expressing a closely held religious belief, other than perhaps passionate Athiests who generally refuse to acknowledge their quaint religion.

Maybe the fundamentalist atheists take to a level too far but in general I consider it a null Religion than a quaint one.

At any rate, I personally feel, (and because it's me, this is naturally a superior opinion,) that religious discussions are not well suited to the modes of thought, passions, moods and charming snarkiness of political fora.

In organized religion in its institutions are political. Other than that snarkiness is not unknown in religious discussion its just that most people who publicly do so have a diminished sense of humor which should be obvious.

I prefer that the topics be widely separated thematically. That is, I dislike religious questions coming up, as in the topic listing while I'm girt for conceptual war.

While there will be questions that come up that would not involve politics there are enough that do come up that do so to have such a section.

What do you think?

Avoid threads that really do not involve politics if you dislike them.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

Myself, I think not.

Politics derives from experience, thoughts about practicality, nationality, culture, ethnic identity, the division and distribution of finite resources, the perpetuation and redress of wrongs through completely human action, human nature and how malleable that nature is. It produces lots of acrimony, discord, outrage and intransigence. And few would suggest that our politics greatly concern the dead.

Because finite resources of many kinds are involved, politics discord compels even more aggression and assertiveness than religious discord. (Many people, and many doctrines of religion can reach a point where not intrinsically hostile sects can say something to the effect that "you worship in your way, and I shall worship in mine." But politically, it's very rare to say you take that territory that we both claim, and I shall take this territory that we both claim," without plans to take all of what one claims eventually.)

Certainly religious debates can have many of these traits too.

But for the Religious, religious discussions have far deeper and more lasting implications, infinitely greater importance and involve Agencies beyond human capacity, perception, and scope.

For me, the mindset that I employ for politics is largely unsuitable for a religious debate or even deep discussion. I am quite comfortable telling someone that they are thinking like a foolish, ignorant child when they are doing just that if the topic is a Senate confirmation, or pending bill. I would almost never do that to someone expressing a closely held religious belief, other than perhaps passionate Athiests who generally refuse to acknowledge their quaint religion.

At any rate, I personally feel, (and because it's me, this is naturally a superior opinion,) that religious discussions are not well suited to the modes of thought, passions, moods and charming snarkiness of political fora. I prefer that the topics be widely separated thematically. That is, I dislike religious questions coming up, as in the topic listing while I'm girt for conceptual war.

What do you think?

What do I think? You're bothered by something that doesn't matter.

The religious forum is for discussion and debate for religious concepts.

And then there are all the other forums - several of which are suitable for discussion and debate about religious concepts (ie: the stuff I yammer on about since I'm an atheist)

And this forum (DP) doesn't just cater to politics - we have forums for all manner of topics beyond politics. Don't confine yourself too much, you'll get a headache.

 

[Oftencold]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

What do I think? You're bothered by something that doesn't matter.

The religious forum is for discussion and debate for religious concepts.

And then there are all the other forums - several of which are suitable for discussion and debate about religious concepts (ie: the stuff I yammer on about since I'm an atheist)

And this forum (DP) doesn't just cater to politics - we have forums for all manner of topics beyond politics. Don't confine yourself too much, you'll get a headache.

How Humans choose to confine themselves is what elevates us from savagery, you know. Just saying.

 

[Oftencold]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

. . .I think that Carl Marx is a dead man who his writings have inspired considerable political tensions not to mention bloodshed. And he is not the only political philosopher that has contributed to the world distentions either.
. . .

You misinterpreted my point. Carl Marx is indeed a man dead with whom many politically minded people are concerned.

He is not, however, so far as we may know, a dead man concerned with politics.

As for voting in my own poll, I usually don't at first, since that tends to suggest how I'd like others to vote.

 

[Oftencold]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

I think . . .

Evidence suggests otherwise.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

Originally Posted by Tim the plumber View Post
I think . . .

Evidence suggests otherwise.

Do you enjoy posting clearly false statements which would in any court cause you to be called a liar?

 

[Dragonfly]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

I think the religious sub-forum is a great thing to have.

It helps define who the talibornagains are.

 

[Shadow Serious]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

You misinterpreted my point. Carl Marx is indeed a man dead with whom many politically minded people are concerned.

He is not, however, so far as we may know, a dead man concerned with politics.

As for voting in my own poll, I usually don't at first, since that tends to suggest how I'd like others to vote.

I understand about not voting in your poll to avoid that. I did not think that you meant that dead people are politically minded so I am sorry for misinterpreting your intent.

 

[chromium]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

but then you can ask same of "leisure" forum and so on. All forums have these extra features. I'm not fan of religion in the least but i don't see the harm. In fact i kinda like it cause i can just peruse to find out who the loons to ignore/mock are when they venture into more legit topics.

 

[Oftencold]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

. . . I am sorry for misinterpreting your intent.

It's nothing, and very easy to do with text messages.

It also seems to be my lot in Life lately that almost everything I say to anyone gets misinterpreted.

 

[Quag]

Re: Is it a good idea for political debate forums host explicitly religious sub-forum

It's nothing, and very easy to do with text messages.

It also seems to be my lot in Life lately that almost everything I say to anyone gets misinterpreted.

Dont know about your everyday life but here on DP many people misinterpret others on purpose.