Civility subsection suggestion

[GrandizerII]

1. Seems like baiting to me. Seems a provocative and detrimental distraction from the point at hand. I would just stick to calling the Quran and the Bible, "Quran and Bible."

Of course you would, but is there an expectation on your part that everyone else should show some unwarranted respect to these books? Is your idea of civility that people should show satisfactory (to you) level of reverence to the religious views you hold sacred? I don't see referring to the Bible as a book of myths and legends or "fairy tales" as necessarily uncivil. It depends on the context in which it's being said. If the person is saying it with a "meh" tone, and just to remind people what is being discussed exactly, I could hardly call this uncivil.

2. Disingenuous is ok if it is an honest attempt at trying to understand the person (good example: "it seems disingenuous when you say _____ because _____."). I would steer clear of calling someone ignorant. It's probably better to say "It doesn't seem like you know this subject very well because _____".

This seems so arbitrary. So calling someone "disingenuous" is ok (in some cases), but "ignorant" is not? You see what the trouble here is? People have varying views on what is considered civil or not.

I'm not saying any of those things specifically should be against a particular rule, though they certainly do chip away at the spirit of the rules which is to have civil discussion.

You say this now, but once shit hits the fan, many of you will be hoping for some of these rules to be enacted. Because, like it or not, many theists here don't really like their theistic views being strongly challenged. And any hint of harshness (towards views) will be seen as uncivil by someone.

The thing is, if you are genuinely wanting to have a productive and good discussion with someone, why would you want to push the boundaries and see just how much you can get away with?

That's not my intention (to push boundaries and all). And we have several productive and good discussions in this forum that I have been glad to be a part of. And I got to be a part of them while not worrying much about exactly how to be civil (as long as I was nice enough). If this subforum is made, not only will I have to ponder what exactly constitutes civil or not, most of these good and productive discussions will probably be centered in the subforum (as Steel pointed out earlier), and there probably won't be many of such threads outside of it.

Why not just keep things in a way that will be most conducive to a good discussion? If you're trying to push boundaries you're kind of going into it with the wrong attitude. Better stick to the other subforums on AF and not bother requesting to post in the civility subforum.

In addition to what I said above, I am against this in principle (because it's pretty clear to me that this idea is more for the benefit of theists than it is for members in general, no matter how you slice it), and considering that this is primarily an atheist forum.