CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online
log in · register
Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions › Appeal regarding Shadyev's JL Karton

Appeal regarding Shadyev's JL Karton

Started by Gary Patel · · 👁 11 views · 40 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Gary PatelKenneth Peterson5rowdyhawk10steelskipper5Dennis Lewis6rowdytinkerhollowtrucker77crimsonhound80rapidrider3neonviper59Steven Clark2Roger Barrett2Kevin MitchellMorgan Rodriguez57quietbison2mellowraven22
hollowtrucker77 hollowtrucker77 Regular
681 messages
joined Nov 2007
#21 ·
steelskipper5, walk me through your little plan for sanctions here. How would you actually pull that off?
It’s pretty obvious, isn't it, that believers carry this inherent sense of subjective exclusivity right in their DNA? It's just how they're wired.
Look, enforcing rules isn't the hard part; anyone can play cop. The real headache is finding a perfectly balanced scale so those rules actually mean something and work the way they're supposed to.
That’s exactly why we see these endless complaints about bias cropping up everywhere, whether you're looking at the political landscape or the whole religious scene.
Trying to draw a line in the sand and decide what’s acceptable versus what isn't... honestly, it's an incredibly difficult call to make.
steelskipper5 steelskipper5 Active Member
176 messages
joined Feb 2010
#22 ·
hollowtrucker77 said:steelskipper5, how exactly would you go about sanctioning that??
It’s pretty obvious that believers—just by the very nature of what they believe—carry this inherent sense of subjective exclusivity, right?
The issue isn't really about enforcing the rules; the real struggle is finding the right weight for the scale so those rules actually work fairly.
That’s why we see constant complaints about bias, whether it's coming from politics or religion.
It is incredibly tough to decide here what counts as acceptable and what doesn't.

Look, I think I made my point clear enough this time: it's hate speech.

If the struggle is figuring out how to apply the rules equally to everyone, then yeah, the problem is someone's bias.

The Religion forum isn't a religion being a religious forum. In fact, the whole site isn't some religious forum. It needs to stay religiously neutral.
If we let believers get away with intolerance or hate speech just because it aligns with their religious stances—basically pretending "freedom of expression" covers stuff that violates both basic civilized norms and American law—then we don't have equality. Not in society, and not under the law.

The rules are simple and straightforward. The real issue is just that people don't follow them, and the moderators here seem to enforce them pretty selectively.
I can't really speak on Politics because I stopped jumping into that pit of filth a long time ago; back then, way too much hate speech was tolerated there, and as an American, I wasn't about to waste my nerves or my time on it. But I can talk about Religion.

If I were to say a certain group of believers is evil, immoral, or depraved, I’d probably lose 500 points for hate speech. I’d practically hand them to myself if I could (and the Religion mods can vouch for me—I've reported my own posts a few times, along with others, when I couldn't wait for the mods to clean up the trolling and insults before I lost my mind and snapped). But when some believer claims atheists are evil, immoral, or depraved? Nothing happens. And that’s what has to stop.
I actually reported one specific post making that exact claim; now I’m just wondering if I’ll see the author get banned anytime soon. Knowing how things usually go around here, I’m almost certain I won't.

Anyway, I don't see what's so complicated about this. But hey, if you can explain it to me, I'm all ears.
hollowtrucker77 hollowtrucker77 Regular
681 messages
joined Nov 2007
#23 ·
that link would definitely help
I mean, sure, everything seems crystal clear when you're dealing with a perfectly straightforward scenario
But my whole point was actually about those messy situations where things aren't so black and white, and everyone involved just goes looking for any little excuse to take offense
😉
Since I don't really hang around much in the religion threads myself, I can't claim to have some grand theological perspective, so I'm mostly just speaking from what I observe happening here in these discussions
neonviper59 neonviper59 Newcomer
4 messages
joined Feb 2009
#24 ·
Quote:

hollowtrucker77 says:
the link would help
Sure, everything is easy to understand when the situation is straightforward.
But what I was actually getting at is how things go when they aren't clear-cut, and everyone involved just looks for any excuse to take offense.
😉
*cut*COLOR]

on the topic of the religion PDF:
I'm a believer.

During these debates, I've been called a fanatic and a chicken—and honestly, I wasn't offended. To me, it felt more like my opponent was basically admitting defeat, you know? Just heat-of-the-moment stuff.
I've even been called a child killer—and the post somehow racked up 35 points. 😢 Some guy even wished me a good morning.
Look, I enjoy debating atheists even if they call me an idiot. But if someone pops up with a post saying, "Good day, moron," I’d suggest a 7-day ban. Just a thought. Doesn't matter if they're an atheist or a theist—it's all the same to me.
steelskipper5 steelskipper5 Active Member
176 messages
joined Feb 2010
#25 ·
hollowtrucker77 said:a link would help

No link.
In the meantime, he just got slapped with a warning card for insulting other users. I mean—insulting atheists as a group—is actually illegal under hate speech laws (just ask a lawyer), carrying anything from three months to three years in prison, yet somehow it still goes unpunished here.

Look, don't get me wrong—I wouldn't be pushing this rhetoric if believers from all sorts of denominations hadn't spent the last while successfully baiting their way into getting tons of warnings and bans by claiming their "sacred" beliefs were being insulted. Which, let's be honest, any criticism—especially an actual argument—is going to do. ☕
So, at this point, all I'm looking for is—equality. If you aren't allowed to insult Christians, Muslims, or Hindus, then damn it, you shouldn't be allowed to insult atheists either—not even Satanists. But to prove that to an outsider... well, I’d probably need more time. I’d have to spend another year posting on this religion being a religious forum. And that’s a hell of a lot of work.
Steven Clark2 Steven Clark2 Active Member
85 messages
joined Sep 2020
#26 ·
hollowtrucker77 said:a link would have helped
Of course everything is perfectly clear when the situation is straightforward.
However, my point was based on those instances where things aren't so clear, and every single participant finds some arbitrary reason to take offense.
😉
Since I am not particularly active in the religion being a religious forum, I cannot offer much of a personal perspective; rather, I am simply speaking from what I observe here regarding this topic.

Well, you really ought to visit the Religion forum more often; you would certainly get a much broader view of how things work here. 🙂 Please don't take this as a slight. It is just that, occasionally, I read through these complaints and honestly find myself torn between laughing and crying.

First off, the Religion sub-forum is called "Religion," not "Mocking Religion" or "Atheism" or anything of that sort. The fundamental issue within the Religion section stems from the arrogance of certain atheists—their unwillingness to engage in tolerance or dialogue, and their tendency toward disparagement, condescension, and even outright contempt for Christians and their beliefs (which are primarily Christian). I have participated in many religious forums, but as I have stated before here in the Religion section, I have never encountered such levels of arrogance, mockery, condescension, and insults as I have witnessed on this specific forum.

Given that there are many atheists who frequent this section, it is entirely understandable and logical that a dedicated space for atheists should exist. This isn't about discrimination at all; quite the opposite. Anyone interested in topics concerning theism versus atheism will naturally gravitate toward such a section. Conversely, anyone interested in specific Christian, Islamic, or other values is more than welcome to join the Religion section.

As it stands, we have a situation where many debaters are slowly giving up on discussions because it seems impossible to have a civil conversation on any subject without being subjected to spamming and trolling by certain atheists. What is the purpose of a Religion section if one can barely discuss religion there? 🤷

Naturally, believers aren't saints either, and I have reported posts myself when people went too far in their descriptions of atheists; I don't agree with that behavior one bit. But still, this is the Religion section, so why hasn't anyone considered that a section as vast as Religion might simply require a different structural concept? For instance, the Spirituality section used to be under Religion, and now it is its own separate entity. Why couldn't there be a similar arrangement for Atheism?
Gary Patel Gary Patel Active MemberOP
74 messages
joined Jul 2022
#27 ·
Look, Bu Bu, that was exactly my point with this little experiment—I wanted to see what things would look like on this forum if we just paused all the atheist posts for a while. I figured since theists are constantly complaining about the atheists here, I might as well test out what the vibe would be if it were strictly a space for believers.
If it turns out the board actually runs smoother without any atheists around, then maybe it’s worth considering making it official. It would certainly settle the debate once and for all on whether atheists are truly such massive provocateurs.
Or, we could just go ahead and rename the subforum entirely.
Steven Clark2 Steven Clark2 Active Member
85 messages
joined Sep 2020
#28 ·
Gary Patel said:Look, the reason I wanted to run this little experiment was to see what the dynamic would be like on the Religion subforum if atheists stopped posting for a while. My intention was to test this because believers are constantly complaining about atheists, so I wanted to observe the atmosphere if the subforum were populated solely by theists.
Perhaps if it became evident that the forum functions more smoothly without atheists, then such a change should be implemented. This way, we could determine if atheists truly are as provocative as they are perceived to be.
Or, alternatively, we could simply rename the subforum.

Hey there, how have you been? 🙂

Listen, as far as I am concerned—you are always welcome at my door. 👍 I don't know you personally; I only know you through a few posts, but from what I have gathered, you seem like a decent guy. My apologies if I misjudged you earlier. 😁

What I meant to convey is that atheists of your caliber always have a place here in the Religion section. In truth, I am not the one who decides who belongs; I am merely expressing my opinion. To be more precise, I didn't articulate myself very clearly. Everyone has the right to participate wherever they wish, but, my friend, not everyone’s presence is particularly pleasant. Are atheists provocateurs? Some certainly are—I won't name names because I don't care to dwell on identities; I prefer to speak my mind directly. If someone has hundreds of posts but none of them are constructive, then those posts are utterly useless. I am not referring to you, of course. I just don't see the point or the purpose in certain discussions. Is there no God? Well, fine—that doesn't matter. If proving such a claim results in nothing but beating a dead horse, then it is better to step aside and enjoy the benefits of this forum and the hundreds of others across the globe. 🙂 Otherwise, you are just stifling yourself and everyone else.

Granted, atheists would still exist within the Religion subforum, though perhaps the nature of the debates would shift. I have participated in many forums where the percentage of atheists is much lower, yet I still encountered more insults, mockery, and similar behavior. Religious people can be quite fierce among themselves (a harsh term, perhaps, but an honest one) due to minor theological differences that carry massive implications. If you ask me personally, this specific Religion subforum doesn't feel much like a religious space. Not really. I have nothing against that, but when I write here, I sometimes forget—and if it weren't for other forums, I might have forgotten certain topics long ago. 🙂

Furthermore, I refuse to ignore the fact that some atheists are constantly picking fights with theists, which is complete nonsense. No atheist, lacking both an interest in religion and actual knowledge of it, should be judging theists. 😲 I am not talking about rude behavior; I certainly do not condone those kinds of posts.

The subforum wouldn't necessarily become "better" if atheists were absent; it is purely a matter of transparency, organization, and practicality. Perhaps I am wrong, but what is the harm in having a few dedicated subforums within Religion? Including atheism among them? That way, a true atheist wouldn't feel the need to wander through religious threads looking for something to engage with—that is my line of thinking, anyway. Unless, of course, they are invited to something genuinely interesting, which is a different matter entirely. I still suspect some atheists fear this, but I honestly see no reason for such apprehension. This isn't about discrimination—I could argue quite convincingly that believers are no less discriminated against in those spaces (though I won't get into that)—it is simply about the practical utility of the forum. And as for how much religious people might clash with one another once that happens—well, that is a whole other story.🙂

Actually, I think the real solution might be to simply temper our own personal perceptions—to find some calm, inject a bit of positivity into the conversation, and move forward. There is absolutely no reason for us to harbor animosity toward one another over anything; far from it. You know me well enough to know that I respect and recognize those who maintain a positive outlook, even if they happen to wear a different jersey than I do. 😁

I hope you’re doing well, and please give my regards to Shady. Especially when he hands out those penalties. 😍

Ah, apologies, I just couldn't help myself... please don't hold it against me... 😂
Steven Clark2 Steven Clark2 Active Member
85 messages
joined Sep 2020
#29 ·
Shady, could you please explain why this post was flagged:

🤷>
Roger Barrett2 Roger Barrett2 Member
33 messages
joined May 2010
#30 ·
rowdyhawk10 said:Look, I honestly think the idea that only believers should be allowed to post here is completely baseless and, frankly, unacceptable. Agnosticism and atheism are legitimate stances on religion, God, and morality just as much as any faith. People who believe in God don't have some kind of exclusive ownership over this subforum; it doesn't belong solely to them. If we actually restricted the religion forum to only believers, it would turn into nothing more than a tedious church service where one specific group just sits around endlessly lamenting about their predictable fantasies.

We’re never going to let that happen—not because we won't fight it, but because it's simply not an option. Honestly, I think outbursts like that... "What are you even doing hanging out in a religion forum? You're an atheist."Just a heads-up: we’re going to have to start handing out warnings and bans more strictly moving forward. If you spot any posts that cross the line, please report them immediately so we can deal with it. Thanks for keeping things civil. 🙂

steelskipper5 said:Look, I feel like I made my position pretty clear on this one: I'm calling it exactly what it is—hate speech.

If you’re struggling to figure out how to make the rules apply equally to everyone, then you aren't dealing with a technicality—you're dealing with someone's bias.

Look, let's get one thing straight: the Religion section isn't some kind of dedicated religious forum. In fact, the whole of Forum.us isn't a religious platform either. Because of that, we need to make sure everything stays strictly religiously neutral.
If we decide that believers get a free pass to be intolerant or use hate speech just because they’re "standing by their faith," then we aren't actually talking about freedom of expression—we're creating a loophole. If you allow people to bypass basic civil norms and US laws simply by wrapping those views in religious doctrine, then true equality is dead. We wouldn't have it in our social fabric, and we certainly wouldn't have it under the law.

The rules themselves are straightforward enough. They’re clear, they make sense, and there shouldn't be any confusion about what's allowed. The real headache is that people just don't bother following them, and to make matters worse, it feels like the moderators pick and choose when to actually step in. It’s pretty selective enforcement, if you ask me.
I can't really bring myself to talk about Politics. I stopped wading into that particular cesspool a long time ago; back then, there was just way too much hate speech being tolerated for me to bother wasting my breath or my sanity on it, especially as someone who isn't part of that specific crowd. But if you want to talk about Religion, I'm all ears.

If I were to step up and claim that one specific group of believers is evil, immoral, or depraved, I’d probably deserve a 500-point deduction for hate speech. Honestly, I’d hand those points over to myself if I could—the moderators here on this forum can vouch for me; there have been plenty of times when I’ve actually flagged my own posts, along with everyone else, because I just couldn't sit by and watch the trolling and insults spiral out of control before they stepped in to clean things up. But when some believer turns around and says that atheists are evil, immoral, or depraved? Nobody says a word. It’s like it's perfectly acceptable. That double standard needs to end.
I actually flagged one of those posts where they were making that kind of claim. Now, I’m just sitting here wondering if I'll actually see them get banned anytime soon. Based on how things have been handled around here lately, I’m betting I won't see much change.

Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is here. But if you wouldn't mind walking me through your reasoning, I’d definitely appreciate the breakdown.

I’m still relatively new to this scene, so I haven't quite caught up on the long history of bickering between atheists and believers here. That said, just for the record, I really don't care for it when religious folks start labeling atheists as evil, corrupt, or immoral. Just wanted to get that out there.

To be honest, I recently voiced the same sentiment—that atheists should probably stay out of religious discussions—and Shady ended up deleting my posts because of it. Look, I’m not complaining; I get why it happened, and I actually laid out my reasoning in the thread.

During a recent debate about atheism, someone sent me a link attempting to define what atheism *isn't*—listing all these things it supposedly doesn't represent. But honestly, at its core, atheism is simply the individual's rejection of the belief in God's existence. That’s it. It’s just a stance that can form part of someone's broader worldview or their general outlook on life.

So, why am I advocating for atheists to step away from religious discussions?
First off, this forum functions as a space for institutional beliefs. A huge chunk of our posts and topics could easily be categorized under "alternatives"—things like discussing Christ or Buddha as states of consciousness, for instance. Secondly, since atheism is defined by the negation of God's existence, it doesn't actually make any positive assertions. If you aren't asserting anything true, what kind of meaningful debate can we even have?

Since atheism isn't a faith, it lacks creeds, confessions, institutions, canons, or formal organizations. It has nothing official. Compare that to Christianity, which possesses all of those things. Consequently, these debates almost always devolve into atheists attacking Christianity and Christians playing defense. It becomes a loop of: "The Bible is just a collection of myths and political maneuvers," "God is a fabrication, a criminal, or a tyrant," "Jesus never existed," "Christianity was born from a clash between Jewish and pagan influences," or "The early Church misrepresented Jesus's actual intentions." It’s always the same cycle.

What is the actual point of these arguments? If this forum is meant for discussing institutional religion, then the dialogue should focus on those institutional beliefs—which is fine, whether coming from believers or non-believers. What's missing is a discussion about the differences between us; instead, we get people who are part of an institutional belief system debating the very nature of institutional belief itself.

It’s like I mentioned in a post I deleted earlier: how can someone who doesn't believe in any of this (an atheist), or someone who isn't sure (an agnostic), or someone who finds the whole thing nonsensical because it defies common sense (a rationalist), have a meaningful conversation with me? I believe in God and the supernatural. To the "okay" atheist or agnostic out there: just say what you think. Say it's nonsense, say it doesn't exist, say you don't believe it, and then move on from the thread. If I were an atheist, that’s exactly what I would do.
Steven Clark2 Steven Clark2 Active Member
85 messages
joined Sep 2020
#31 ·
I noticed that quite some time ago myself. When I brought up the idea of launching an atheism sub-forum to certain people, they seemed to take it far more seriously than if I had suggested starting a new forum dedicated to Christianity.
Kevin Mitchell Kevin Mitchell Member
14 messages
joined Aug 2011
#32 ·
The main reason atheists jump into these debates is because religion exerts such a massive influence—often a negative one—on their lives. If faith were truly just a private matter, you wouldn't see atheists cluttering up online forums, except perhaps for some masochist who thrives on conflict or a student researching the subject.
I won't get into how religion impacts people on this thread (or any other, really; it's been covered enough)
Morgan Rodriguez57 Morgan Rodriguez57 Active Member
216 messages
joined Oct 2011
#33 ·
Kevin Mitchell said:The big reason why atheists bother showing up to these debates is simply because religion has such a massive impact—and let's be honest, often a negative one—on their lives. If faith were truly just a private matter, you wouldn't see atheists hanging out on forums like this, except maybe for some sadist who just loves a good argument, or perhaps a student looking to wrap their head around theology...
I'm not going to get into how religion actually affects people here (or anywhere else, really, since we've all beat that drum enough times)

you can say what you want... at most, all you deal with is that mandatory school and church religious ed classes, but after that, nobody really bothers you...
Steven Clark2 Steven Clark2 Active Member
85 messages
joined Sep 2020
#34 ·
Kevin Mitchell said:The primary reason atheists engage in these debates is because religion exerts such a massive influence—often a negative one—on their lives. If faith were truly just a private matter, you wouldn't see atheists on forums like this, except perhaps for some masochist who enjoys arguing or a student interested in studying theology.
I won't get into how religion affects people on this thread (or any other, really; we've covered it enough)

🙂 I can offer a different perspective on that. Atheism itself is a social phenomenon that impacts people's lives, so just as you, as an atheist, might not want believers meddling in your private affairs, I, as a believer (even though I don't live in the US), don't want atheists dictating my way of life. Let's keep things peaceful. You cannot claim to be defending democracy or threatened rights by attempting to suppress religious consciousness or the human need for it. For instance, if you don't want your child to take a religious studies class—and personally, I believe everyone should have the choice whether or not to include it in school—then it is quite pretentious to impose that view on others. Whether someone else tries to impose something similar on you is a completely separate issue, and you won't improve anything by using the very same tactics you criticize in your opponents. Do you see the distinction? Not a single atheist has managed to convince me that I am wrong, and since I live in a country that isn't particularly fond of Protestantism (given my own background), I am acutely aware that personal choices—even those made against faith or religious education—must never be forced upon anyone, nor should anyone face consequences for them. Do you follow my logic?
quietbison2 quietbison2 Newcomer
1 message
joined May 2009
#35 ·
Steven Clark2 said:🙂 Look, I can see things from the other side too. Atheism is part of a society that actually impacts people's lives—so just like you, as an atheist (for example), don't want believers sticking their noses in your private business, I—as a believer (even though I'm not in America)—don't want atheists trying to dictate how I live my life. Peace out. You can't hide behind democracy or "threatened rights" to basically crush people's religious consciousness or their need for faith. If you don't want your kid (say) to take religion class—which, personally, I think should be a choice for every parent—then it’s totally pretentious to try and force that view on everyone else. If someone tries to push something similar on you, that's a whole different story, but you aren't gonna be any better off using the exact same tactics as the people you're complaining about. Get what I'm saying? Not one single atheist has ever managed to convince me that I'm wrong, and since I live in a state that isn't exactly thrilled with Protestantism (given that I am one myself), I'm well aware that personal choices—even if they go against faith or religious studies or whatever—can't and shouldn't be forced on anyone, nor should anyone face consequences for them. You feel me?

I'm with you on this. Honestly, it's pretty ridiculous that after everything you just wrote, you're still pushing for some atheist moderator to open up a Christian sub-forum here?!
Roger Barrett2 Roger Barrett2 Member
33 messages
joined May 2010
#36 ·
Kevin Mitchell said:The main reason atheists jump into these debates is because religion exerts such a massive influence—often a negative one—on their lives. If faith were truly just a private, personal matter, you wouldn't see so many atheists posting on forums like this, unless they were just some masochist who enjoys arguing or maybe a student researching the subject.
I’m not going to get into the specifics of how religion affects people on this thread (or any other, really; we've covered it enough)

That feels like a bit of a cliché, honestly.
While I try to avoid sweeping generalizations—and I'm sure not every single atheist is here for the exact same reason—my impression is that most of them view religion as an inherent evil or something that needs to be dismantled. That’s why they approach these discussions with such intensity, constantly hunting for flaws and trying to outmaneuver believers in every argument.
Steven Clark2 Steven Clark2 Active Member
85 messages
joined Sep 2020
#37 ·
quietbison2 said:I am in complete agreement with your points. I would simply add how truly absurd it seems that, despite everything you have laid out here, you are actually advocating for an atheist moderator on a sub-forum dedicated to Christianity!

It appears I may have misspoken, or perhaps my point was not entirely clear. I am certainly not suggesting that Ego should continue his moderation exactly as he has been doing if there are valid complaints against him. However, I also do not believe he should be removed based on other factors; he possesses a deep understanding of this forum, our rules, and the technical side of things. Perhaps I am mistaken in my reasoning—and I am happy to be corrected—but if someone more discerning than myself decides not to appoint him to a potential sub-forum, I certainly won't complain. Look at it from this perspective: if a sub-forum becomes part of a larger parent forum (for instance, Christianity within the broader Religion category), it stands to reason that the existing moderators would remain in place for that sub-section, or at least some of them. Among our active moderators in the Religion section—Mostly, Ego, and Shady—it is clear that Shady is significantly more active than Mostly and Ego. Therefore, I believe Mostly and Ego could reasonably serve on the new sub-forum alongside a few other Christians. Of course, I am in no position to make these decisions; I am merely offering a suggestion that one may choose to accept or reject. 🤷
steelskipper5 steelskipper5 Active Member
176 messages
joined Feb 2010
#38 ·
Morgan Rodriguez57 said:Yeah, right... the only way you guys get exposed to anything is through mandatory school classes and Sunday school, but after that, nobody even touches you...

First off, even that would be overkill. But when the Church starts meddling in legislation and elections—like those blue laws or that comment from maybe two days ago—then your whole argument is basically standing on thin ice.
Morgan Rodriguez57 Morgan Rodriguez57 Active Member
216 messages
joined Oct 2011
#39 ·
steelskipper5 said:First off, even that would be going way too far. But when the Church starts meddling in legislation and elections—like those blue laws regarding Sunday work or that whole comment from a couple of days ago—then your argument really starts to fall apart on shaky ground...

And as for all that business about interfering with laws and the whole "no working on Sundays" thing, we're all feeling the impact of that anyway, so I guess it doesn't count... 😁
Steven Clark2 Steven Clark2 Active Member
85 messages
joined Sep 2020
#40 ·
Morgan Rodriguez57 said:and regarding legislative interference and the ban on Sunday business, we are all suffering equally, so I suppose that doesn't count... 😁

I wouldn't say I'm suffering quite as much :😍 though I know I shouldn't be counting myself, right? Even so, I occasionally see a desire from the mainstream church to dominate through its stances and such here. For that reason, personally, I am against any form of religious education being imposed on anyone, or anything tied to any church—specifically because I want to be understanding toward those who aren't members of a faith, whether they are atheists, Muslims, or otherwise. Basically, anything involving any church within any social stratum should, in my view, remain a matter of personal choice. Since I don't care for having things forced upon me either, especially by church authorities (regardless of which denomination), I have come to realize that freedom is perhaps the only thing we have left. If someone makes a choice that others deem "wrong," it is at least fair to allow them to exercise their right to that freedom.

Actually, perhaps it would be better if we started a dedicated thread to discuss these matters in more depth. It would be far more productive here to focus on grievances regarding Shadyjev's "red cards"—or rather, those cards he so generously hands out to everyone over in the Religion section. 🙂 Looking at you two, I initially thought we were talking about actual cardboard, but honestly, I am relieved that isn't the case. 🙂

Enjoy yourselves. 👍

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads