Ignore/Invisible Option

[Dr. Lecter]

The usual counter-question is about how people would feel if instead it was an Islamic Divers Association, with posts proclaiming Allahu akbar.

The standard counter-response of those who just couldn't care less whether someone's ranting about their theism (a category into which the religious and the atheists both fall), their agnosticism, or their aversion to others' rantings about theism/agnoisticism: Who gives a flying at a rolling, flaming donut?

 

[dfx]

The standard counter-response of those who just couldn't care less whether someone's ranting about their theism (a category into which the religious and the atheists both fall), their agnosticism, or their aversion to others' rantings about theism/agnoisticism: Who gives a flying at a rolling, flaming donut?

Actually that's another question, not a response :tongue:
And the response to that would be: some people do.
(And no, atheism is not a type of theism. It's the opposite.)

 

[Dr. Lecter]

Actually that's another question, not a response :tongue:
And the response to that would be: some people do.
(And no, atheism is not a type of theism. It's the opposite.)

Questions are responses, too And while I'm sure we'd have a fine philosophical debate about whether atheism is inherently faith based and therefore agnosticism is the purely rational approach, this is probably not the thread for it.

Some people probably prefer not to see threads with an excessive number of exclamation points in the title, but that hardly means there's a need for additional site functionality. But if there's a simple way to add the feature, what the Hell.

 

[dfx]

Questions are responses, too And while I'm sure we'd have a fine philosophical debate about whether atheism is inherently faith based and therefore agnosticism is the purely rational approach, this is probably not the thread for it.

There's several schools of thought on that matter, but disagreements usually stem from a misunderstanding of what atheism and agnosticism actually mean, or I should say what the definitions of those terms are. Some people prefer to see it as a 2-dimensional scale, with atheism and agnosticism not being mutually exclusive (not me though). But yeah, not the place.

Some people probably prefer not to see threads with an excessive number of exclamation points in the title, but that hardly means there's a need for additional site functionality. But if there's a simple way to add the feature, what the Hell.

Funny that you should mention that. I've seen site mods edit the titles of threads like that to make them more, um, digestible. So yeah, resources are being spent on that.

 

[hroark2112]

Have you asked your home town to require all churches be segregated to a specific part of town?

i mean...they do it with industrial and commercial buildings...why not a religious section of town? How do you bear to drive to work knowing you're driving past a building with bibles in it?

 

[dfx]

Have you asked your home town to require all churches be segregated to a specific part of town?

i mean...they do it with industrial and commercial buildings...why not a religious section of town? How do you bear to drive to work knowing you're driving past a building with bibles in it?

You mean like these people did?

 

[flots am]

Some of you guys are apparently unaware of the Worldwide Christian Scuba Diver Association subforum, though that's the only God specific forum I noticed. I only happened to hear about it when I noticed some post, but I don't use the New Posts button.

I've been here since the board first came up, and never even heard of it.

If someone is actually pissed off at the "Worldwide Christian Scuba Diver Association subforum" they must have started out looking to be offended, since I haven't seen it, ever.

 

[NAM001]

I dont agree. The root of the discusion is that one persons religious views do not allign with anothers. And one wants protection from the threat of the other. Specifics are moot in that regard.

If by what you are suggesting were to be the case in fact. Then your position is other than that which has been brought into question. The idea that the presence of another opinion poses a threat to ones belief is remedied by a rather easy solution. leave, go somewhere else where you are not threatened. If you stay you agree to co-exist with the values of those who share the bandwidth on SB whether you agree with them or not. You come to SB to get the cotent you want from it. Just like the grocery store. If you dont like soda's. Then you simply dont shop that isle. But dont have a hissy because some one in the checkout like has a 6 pack.

And in regards to the islamic divers association. They are no different than the rest of us. Comply with the SB policies or go away. If the fictatious association wants to have their own area and cater to underwater demolitions and name them selves Diving For Virgins. SB has the right to ban them for their behavior or violence promoting content. JUST LIKE ANYONE ELSE.

The usual counter-question is about how people would feel if instead it was an Islamic Divers Association, with posts proclaiming Allahu akbar.

 

[divad]

Who gives a flying at a rolling, flaming donut?

Did you mean donut-hole?

---------- Post added April 22nd, 2014 at 05:14 AM ----------

huh? that is too deep for me at this time,

Wait 'til you get to college....

 

[dfx]

If by what you are suggesting were to be the case in fact. Then your position is other than that which has been brought into question. The idea that the presence of another opinion poses a threat to ones belief is remedied by a rather easy solution. leave, go somewhere else where you are not threatened. If you stay you agree to co-exist with the values of those who share the bandwidth on SB whether you agree with them or not.

Are you saying that SB is an inherently Christian community, and that SB's stance on tolerating other beliefs and non-beliefs is to simply ask them to leave? I hope that's not the case.

And in regards to the islamic divers association. They are no different than the rest of us. Comply with the SB policies or go away. If the fictatious association wants to have their own area and cater to underwater demolitions and name them selves Diving For Virgins. SB has the right to ban them for their behavior or violence promoting content. JUST LIKE ANYONE ELSE.

Ah, but this isn't about banning people. It's about SB specifically endorsing and supporting one particular religious community by giving them their own (public!) area, while not doing the same for others. But it's very interesting that your first thoughts on a hypothetical Islamic Divers Association seem to be underwater demolition and banning them for their behaviour. Tells me a lot about you.