Please disallow polical and religious discussion.

[BaNa]

Yeah Ive been a member of a foram where politics was banned from OT (sometime around bush/kerry :) ) and it was all the worse for it. Imo if U MAD, dont open those topics. I avoid most religion ones cause I cba.

[smoth]

it isn't about me being all mad, I AIN'T EVEN MAD YA'LL but watching people I thought I had some respect for say things which immediately destroy what respect I had for them.

[1v0ry_k1ng]

alternatively, how about we continue to have political and religious discussions and you just stay away from the threads?

[smoth]

How about you tone the animosity down enough to read the thread.

If you don't want to discuss such topics here, then don't. Personally I don't even read 99% of Offtopic.

I can but I wanted to ask/put the notion forward and see how people felt.

have a problem with me? take it up in pm and drop the catty bullshit.

[BaNa]

smoth my comment wasnt directed at you it was a general thing.

[smoth]

sorry for misunderstanding. Christfuck I need to go to bed. Just wide awake. it is 6am here.

[TradeMark]

There are more appropriate sites for this sort of banter and raging, does it really belong here?

yes you can go to those sites, imo youre the only one raging here

[1v0ry_k1ng]

I learn all my politics from the springforums.. you cant take that away from me

[CarRepairer]

Set up a forum poll asking people if they think these topics should be banned from the offtopic.

Offer another option where a second offtopic forum could be created for controversial threads and the first one would remain a place for threads about Steam games and cool computer desks.

[Pxtl]

Or just remove "offtopic" from the "view active topics" search.

[AF]

IIRC politics and religion WERE banned, but after numerous forum wipes and the departure of SJ it was long forgotten and new rules were put in place

[SinbadEV]

I would like to point out the irony of a situation where the empiricists are calling to end religious discussion because it is making them uncomfortable.

I find it hard to find a place on the Internet where this type of discussion can be held... either the site is populated entirely by people on the same side of the arguments or so inundated with trolls as to prevent any meaningful discussion from occurring. Bringing this kind of subject to light on a non-anonymous platform (facebook) is nigh impossible, due to to having to ensure I don't offend my Mom or alienate half of my friends.

I agree that this kind of discussion is best held in person but I don't really have any people "in person" to discuss this kind of thing with anymore... and the few I do have all agree with me to a certain extent (aka, I've at least convinced my Buddhist, Agnostic and Atheistic friends that I'm not an idiot.. which in most cases seems to be what our discussions boil down to here) so we tend to talk about things like board games, recently read books and doctor who

[TradeMark]

You can! http://atheism.stackexchange.com/

[smoth]

What part of anything i haves said is empiricist? I double checked the term and it is one of those polarized viewpoints which is based on tangible and according to wiki tactile information.

[Neddie]

I'm opposed to censoring discussion which is not inherently harmful or derogatory, in keeping with the generally hands-off approach to content policing of my predecessor.

I seldom contribute to religious or political discussions seriously because I find doing so is often unproductive. A serious contribution is usually neither desired nor accepted. I can generally come in, check for particularly egregious transgressions, read the arguments in play, and leave.

[SinbadEV]

You can! http://atheism.stackexchange.com/

I don't understand why you linked me to that site and I doubt they would appreciate a theistic perspective given that they are primarily focused on defending atheism... but nice site.

I think the main reason for "Atheist Rage" comes down to the "burden on proof" problem. Quite simply, all a Theist cares about is that there is some way of fitting facts to their belief system or discounting information presented as fact. All we really care about is ensuring that there is a shred of doubt available... because, ignoring the idiots on both sides, a rational person would be convinced that god didn't exist if presented with irrefutable evidence of this... so we don't need to prove God exists, we just need to prove your evidence isn't irrefutable.

It is a tenet of faith in most flavours of Christianity that no one can come to God without Him revealing Himself. Our jobs as Christians is to remove obstacles that come between a person and their accepting of this personal experience. There is an awful lot of infrastructure involved with this process, which is what people typically refer to as "religion"... but it all boils down to making sure you don't think you are crazy for believing in God... the rest of the stuff, like telling people how that should behave mostly comes down to keeping people from getting to the point where admitting their actions are wrong would be a crippling blow to their psyche.

[SinbadEV]

What part of anything i haves said is empiricist? I double checked the term and it is one of those polarized viewpoints which is based on tangible and according to wiki tactile information.

Sorry. I was wrong in my assessment of your position... though I would not feel amiss to attach that label to some of the viewpoints I've see expressed in the recent rash of discussion... you are not one of the people I should have lumped into that group.

[AF]

Religious discussion is a distraction that gives us no benefit of any kind here other than to waste time.

For further reference please refrain from the following horribly insulting Athiest stereotypes, oxymorons, logically contradictory labels, and misunderstandings:

• Fundamental Athiests
• Athiest Extremism
• Athiest rage
• Devout Atheism
• Athiests holding Faith or holding faith in Athiesm
• Believing in athiesm ( I believe in I dont believe )
• Stating athiesm as a fact or opinion ( its a contradiction that belies a fundamental misunderstanding of the words, its like saying a lack of evidence is evidence )
• Saying Atheism is a religion ( oxymoron )
• Science is lies ( if its a lie it isn't science )
• Worship of science

I find these terms and ideas utterly ignorant and self serving, I feel saddened as they are not necessary, there are plenty of religious and nonreligious people who are above and beyond those predjudices and misunderstandings that have crept into so many peoples minds. They may not even realise what they say.

But those are rife on this forum, and they are a prime cause of so much wasted time, and the perpetrators ( such as you sinbad ) are utterly oblivious to the horrendous logic flaws that even stating those words in no context inccurs.

[knorke]

lol religion discussion camouflaged as religion discussion discussion

[SinbadEV]

Religious discussion is a distraction that gives us no benefit of any kind here other than to waste time.

For further reference please refrain from the following horribly insulting Athiest stereotypes, oxymorons, logically contradictory labels, and misunderstandings:

• Fundamental Athiests
• Athiest Extremism
• Athiest rage
• Devout Atheism
• Athiests holding Faith or holding faith in Athiesm
• Believing in athiesm ( I believe in I dont believe )
• Stating athiesm as a fact or opinion ( its a contradiction that belies a fundamental misunderstanding of the words, its like saying a lack of evidence is evidence )
• Saying Atheism is a religion ( oxymoron )
• Science is lies ( if its a lie it isn't science )
• Worship of science

I find these terms and ideas utterly ignorant and self serving, I feel saddened as they are not necessary, there are plenty of religious and nonreligious people who are above and beyond those predjudices and misunderstandings that have crept into so many peoples minds. They may not even realise what they say.

But those are rife on this forum, and they are a prime cause of so much wasted time, and the perpetrators ( such as you sinbad ) are utterly oblivious to the horrendous logic flaws that even stating those words in no context inccurs.

I'm sorry but I think you are wrong. Perhaps it's just a vocabulary issue.

Please provide me the word for someone who believes, based on the lack of scientific evidence proving the existence of God, that there is no God so I can start use it in place of "Faith in Atheism".

Please provide me with a word for the need of some people who believe that God does not exist to aggressively attack the intelligence and morality of those who do, to use in place of "Atheist Rage".

Now, I agree with a number of the other things you said but what we are getting at here is that you don't believe the straw men I'm setting up are actually real people that exist... which I am 90% is not the case. There are idiots on both side of the discussion and it is, apparently, my goal in life to prove to strangers on the Internet that I am not one of them.