Open discussion of the Christian Why We're Here thread

[I_am_not_mafia]

Eh wot? I wasn't aware I posted somewhere I shouldn't have. Who is Metis? I can't even remember making such a post.

It was just a hypothetical. You wouldn't complain about being excluded from a thread in the debate forum, if it were another topic such as the Five Ways.

I assumed that I had accidentally posted in such a thread after clicking on New Posts.

There is a big difference between the christian-only thread and a boxing ring thread with only two members. There is a proper debate going on with the latter. Despite what you call it, the former is not a debate, it's an echo chamber. This is bad for the forum in the same way that it would be bad if there weren't any theists here. This is why I would have wanted non-christian theists allowed to post there as well.

If it had been a thread such a muslims vs christians say then I would have enjoyed reading it and would have been happy to have been excluded. But it's not. All it is is a way for a subset of theists to strategise on how they are going to further their agenda. Unfortunately it seems to have taken over the entire forum with all the extra threads it has generated and the forum is a much more boring place because of it and I am thinking that I need to start exploring other forums to get my fix. It is poor practice to deliberately limit the potential interest of a thread. This is vastly different to limiting who can post in a thread.

[LastPoet]

My real name is Valério Francisco (weird huh?). Mom and dad had originality.

So tiz, what is your name?

Seems only fair 

 Joseph Charlamagne Amaruq (my western name)

My Inuit name is  Amaruq Tehoronianhen (by naming tradition )

My first name is more rare than my surname. In portugal we call friendly josephs, "Zé"

Nah. tiz will suffice.

[Joods]

JFC, now Dirch has also jumped with post #26. I didn't join AF to listen to a christian discussion with no chance for input.

If only there were some way to not read that thread.  I can't think of how it'd be possible, but if anyone figures it out, you'd be doing a lot of us who didn't join this site to listen to christian discussions a huge favor.

There is. It's called don't click on it if you don't want to read it. 

[Neo-Scholastic]

It was just a hypothetical. You wouldn't complain about being excluded from a thread in the debate forum, if it were another topic such as the Five Ways.

I assumed that I had accidentally posted in such a thread after clicking on New Posts.

There is a big difference between the christian-only thread and a boxing ring thread with only two members. There is a proper debate going on with the latter. Despite what you call it, the former is not a debate, it's an echo chamber. This is bad for the forum in the same way that it would be bad if there weren't any theists here. This is why I would have wanted non-christian theists allowed to post there as well.

If it had been a thread such a muslims vs christians say then I would have enjoyed reading it and would have been happy to have been excluded. But it's not. All it is is a way for a subset of theists to strategise on how they are going to further their agenda. Unfortunately it seems to have taken over the entire forum with all the extra threads it has generated and the forum is a much more boring place because of it and I am thinking that I need to start exploring other forums to get my fix. It is poor practice to deliberately limit the potential interest of a thread. This is vastly different to limiting who can post in a thread.

That is a fair critique. I adopted a contrary position to a couple of the others just to prevent it from being a group hug. And for that Ive been tarred and feathered.

I proposed it as as an experimental alternative to a "civility" thread. I opposed a civility thread in part because despite all the grief I get (and give back) i firmly support the free expression of ideas, including insults. I said there is a perfectly good underutilized debate are for focused moderated discussions.

Im glad for the experiment but agree that it might not be worth repeating. Nevertheless i do believe it has generated at lot of interesting conversations. AF was getting kind of stale. If nothing else this livened it up some.

[A Theist]

If only there were some way to not read that thread.  I can't think of how it'd be possible, but if anyone figures it out, you'd be doing a lot of us who didn't join this site to listen to christian discussions a huge favor.

There is. It's called don't click on it if you don't want to read it. 

Ha! That's what I was going to say!

[Edwardo Piet]

I don't mean any thread specifically. But I've seen some vile, disgusting things said to him plenty of times that weren't warranted. So when he makes a nasty comment and everyone goes crazy, it just reeks of the ol' "can dish it but cant take it."

And the point I at least am trying to make is that he probably provoked it with some earlier thread or comments. I have said myself that it was because of his threads that I started my one about theism being immature, which you then took offense at.

There is a reason he is being dragged through the mud more than anyone else.

QFT

---

random truckers. wonder where he got that

Personal experience presumably.

[Neo-Scholastic]

random truckers. wonder where he got that

Personal experience presumably.

"Not that there is anything wrong with that..."

[Edwardo Piet]

They're using the debate section of the forum. The proposed "safe zone" has not been created. As long as they debate different subjects (and they all have to have differing views and actually debate them, imo), they're using that section correctly. Staff is still discussing the "civil section." That thread is not it.

There are plenty of christian forums they can go to to chat about their religion from which atheists are barred. They don't need a section on AF as well.

---

I genuinely don't know what you are talking about. A Theist's post said nothing about the proposed civility subforum (aka, safe zone as you'd like to call it). I saw no talk of it anywhere on that debate thread.

We're not allowed to post to that thread. Not even non-christian theists who would make the conversation more interesting.

Perhaps you should propose a debate to get non-Christians together called "Non-Christians and their non-Christian role on AF."

MK would be welcome if he wasn't as guaranteed to have gone for good as I am.

---

Personal experience presumably.

"Not that there is anything wrong with that..."

Well I'm glad you recognize now, that there's nothing wrong with it, because you didn't seem to notice that in the past when you found my homosexual jokes about Jesus offensive . . . as if a gay Jesus would be a bad thing.

[Catholic_Lady]

If only there were some way to not read that thread.  I can't think of how it'd be possible, but if anyone figures it out, you'd be doing a lot of us who didn't join this site to listen to christian discussions a huge favor.

There is. It's called don't click on it if you don't want to read it. 

He knows, he's just being sarcastic lol.

[Joods]

There is. It's called don't click on it if you don't want to read it. 

He knows, he's just being sarcastic lol.

Yeah I knew that... but just in case there were some other people who didn't know that... it's good to put the obvious out there