Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (7273)	4/5/2002 7:52:16 PM
From: Poet	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

It's one thing to be overly PC, quite another to aggressively and condescendingly attack specific religious beliefs. I've argued long and hard with karen on this (as I have with Evile and CL), but have never said she didn't have the right to discuss her opinion here. There's a difference.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (7273)	4/5/2002 8:16:13 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

This is different. This is a boxing ring. If you bring an idea here it is subject to abuse, and those who can't bear to see their ideas abused shouldn't bring them here. Steven, Neo and I spent a long time working this through and came to an agreement that it was reasonable to treat people's religious beliefs with "seriousness." Not deference or respect but seriousness. Not ridicule or contempt but seriousness. I think that's a fair compromise. We can discuss any aspect of religion we want, however cherished it is to someone, we just shouldn't make cracks about it, and, by the inference of some, about them. I don't presume to understand the way some people are invested in these things. I recall at one point in an earlier conversation that JLA argued that religion wasn't even about ideas but about the essence of the person. I don't pretend to understand that, but I sure see people react as though it's the case. This was just something that Neo and I came up with. There hasn't been much buy in. There also have been some differences of opinion about what constitutes seriousness versus contempt. So there we are. You, of course, will do what you want. I will avoid making light of people's religious beliefs. It's really not useful to the discussion when people get upset. (And it dramatically adds to the number of posts.) I think I can express what I need to say without gratuitous contempt. Although I can't guarantee how anyone will take it.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (7273)	4/5/2002 8:49:45 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

Now can we flush this PC crap down the toilet of irrelevance and get back to attacking each other's ideas, cherished or not? It's all right with me! Very good post. I posted it to Neocon.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (7273)	4/5/2002 9:09:40 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 21057

I thought I'd address this to the thread, since it concerns a notion that appears to be getting a generally positive reception, one for which I happen to have little affection. Actually, I'd say it didn't get that good a reception. Neo only had at best three others on his side. He was definitely getting shelled. This is bullshit Amen. That's what happens here. That's what this place is for. Amen. People who believe quietly and keep their beliefs to themselves should certainly be left alone. Get up on the rostrum, though, and it's open season. Those who can't take the heat in the kitchen should stay out in the parlor and wave their lacy little fans. And amen again. Don't want your religious values blown to hell? Don't bring them up. And don't read posts on the subject when someone else does. Because I, for one, ain't gonna hold my tongue.