It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Issue Of Religiously Inspired Topics on ATS and BTS

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:03 PM
The Issue Of Religiously Inspired Topics

Over the past few months, our staff has witnessed an extreme rise in the intensity of some contributions within threads that have topics directly about religion, or that are inspired by religious issues. Most notably, just as we experience occasional problems form groups of pro-Freemasonry users in the "Secret Societies" forum, we've recently experience some problems with those who appear to be groups of Christians collaborating on religious topics.

With this in mind, we're going to make a long-needed change in one forum, and reaffirm the intent of two other forums.

The Conspiracies In Religion Forum (ATS)
This forum on has always been set aside as the dedicated forum to discuss potential conspiracies, scandals, and problems with organized religions and religious personalities. It should not be a place to discuss religion. From this point forward, we will be limiting all threads in this forum to the specific mandate.

The Origins & Creationism Conspiracy Forum (ATS)
This forum on was established to discuss a spin-off hot topic from the Conspiracies In Religion forum, the effort by several groups (mainly evangelical christians) to mandate the teaching a religious belief as science. It is not a place to debate creationism -v- evolution. Threads discussing science (evolution) should be limited to the Science and Technology forum, and threads discussing religious beliefs (creation) should be limited to the BTS forum discussed below.

The Religion, Faith, And Theology Forum (BTS)
This forum, formerly known as "Faith and Spirituality" on will be the dedicated destination for all religiously-inspired discussions, including those that may be critical of religion, or no religion. Discussion of creation, creationism, and the potential merits of teaching the notion of creation in schools will be limited to this forum.

NEW FORUM: Psychology, Philosophy & Metaphysics
This new forum is for the discussion of a wide range of non-religous topics: Consciousness, Mind, Epistemology, Psychology, Philosophy, Metaphysics, Self-Empowerment, Knowledge and also fringe subjects such as Mind-Control and Psychotronic Manipulation. All in all this will be an "intellectual & philosophical cafe" with a focus on everything from mental relaxing and non-religious personal balance, to conspiracies and speculation related to influencing the mind.
(Coming Soon)

Civility And Decorum Are Expected
We anticipate that our members will contribute to these and all topics with the civilized social graces that we've all come to expect while participating in ATS. We do not want to see non-believers derailing the topics of believers, and likewise, believers should not be disrupting the topics of non-believers. Above all else, respect the beliefs or non-beliefs of thread participants and focus on the subject matter, not each other.



Important clarification...

The initial message unintentionally appeared to focus too much on the "Christians' side" of the eternal debate, this was not, and is not the intent. We've had similar "decorum" problems with atheists, Muslims, and Wiccans (among others), some of which have unfortunately resulted in account terminations. This step to clarify the forums that typically contain debates inspired by religion(s) is our effort to better segment the various topics, and remind everyone that civility is expected, and most importantly prevent any future need to ban a member's account over these issues.


[edit on 11-6-2008 by SkepticOverlord]

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:14 PM
reply to post by SkepticOverlord

This is a great change. In particular, I really like the new forum on "Psychology, Philosophy & Metaphysics" -- I've seen a lot of people asking for this, and now we have it.

One of the things I've been superbly impressed by during my ATS experience is the depth of some of the discussions in cognitive sciences and consciousness -- I will be a major participant in this new forum, for sure. I think ATS, strangely so, is one of the heavy hitters in this area that I have found on the web. (Why would that be? But it is true!)


posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:16 PM
Thank God, finally putting some of this stuff in it's place, good job SO.
So are we going to keep the "pro-Athiest" topics in faith and religion as well? you do know Atheism is considered a religion now right? To be more specific a religion is a system of beliefs concerning all thing physical and unexplainable. At least that is what I have seen Atheism to be.
First post, w00t!


posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:17 PM
This is a very good idea and I applaud your efforts to try to stop the maddness involved with religions. I have seen one too many heated arguments that keep on going for no apparent reason.

Or, the only reason is the very stupid one i.e. "I think I am right and everybody else is wrong."

Also, I am excited to start posting in the brand new forum and am excited to have a forum dedicated to some of the more fringe conspiracies in psychology and metaphysics.

Again, thank you.


posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:17 PM
Oh this is good.
I am really excited for the Psychology, Philosophy & Metaphysical Forum, I think that is going to have some great topics to talk about and some excellent discussions! I can't wait for that to come!



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:17 PM

NEW FORUM: Psychology, Philosophy & Metaphysics

way to Skyfloating !

i think this is a much needed forum. i for one will be lurking about in that one for sure. Thanks ATS Staff.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:18 PM
Can't wait for philosophy forum

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:18 PM
Thank you.

My concerns are answered.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:20 PM
I know I'll bere a lot "Psychology, Philosophy & Metaphysics".

Fantastic new addition and much needed reaffirmation and reinstitution of rules applied to specific forums.
Really neat-o indeed-o.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:22 PM

Every week I swear ATS makes me spit coffee on my screen and think to my self.. WHAT the HECK are you guys thinking?

Manners and decorum, they are nessecary for a smooth running atmosphere to create intelligent debate.

This is true.

However I must say that I find it so incredibly short sighted at the people ATS chooses to "point out".

Now now SO before you think I am just defending Masonry I am not.

Freemasons on the Secret Society forum grow increasingly, most of the new Masons in there are past conspiracy theorist FROM ATS >> including my self.

How is it you find it so odd that - and I quote - "groups of people" who are having their institution, philosophy and way of life attacked respond, in kind, with the SAME VIGOR?

Christians who have their faith attacked on specific forums are catagorized into "groups of people" because they share a like minded belief in their religion and defend it, because it is who they are. How dare ATS group them like that..

They are not a group. They are individuals. Just as in Freemasonry every Freemason in the Forum is an INDIVIDUAL and DO NOT ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ONE ANTOHER TO FORM A "GROUP".

Why are people against Christianity not grouped into "groups of people" .. why, I do believe ATS would have a "gang stalking" group of anti Christians! ..

I am against Christianity in general, I do not consider my self a Christian, but when I say something against Christianity and several people respond in kind against what I say I do not think "omg, they are ganging up on me!" NO .. They act as individuals.

My last point is you will see tempers flare (as mine are now as I am tired of Masons being unjustly targeted by ATS) when you deal with sensitive issues on ATS where a debate forumlates it's self around SOME ONE ELSES beliefs!

Race, Religion, Philosophy, Politics, Nationality.

These are things that will be highly high strung debates, warns will fly, threads will get off topic.

Not justifying bad behavior, just saying IT SHOULD BE EXPECTED.

And ATS should not decide which side to side with! .. It is quite obvious when you say "Freemasons grouping together" and "Christians grouping together" and no doubt in race threads and political threads you choose one side to say "ah, they are causing ALL the problems!"

If your going to create a forum where people's ways of life are disected, INSULTED, scrutinized and balatently attacked you should expect people to respond with the same vigor.

I suppose the Christian population should just roll over and not partake in debate huh?

Let me make it clear to you SO .. Freemasons, and Christians for that matter do not collaborate in some grand scheme to "attack" people who oppose them.

I believe the problem ATS is having is over generalization and stereotyping.

Civility And Decorum Are Expected

To this I agree. I think ATS is just going about it all the wrong way.

In the end I think we must decide.. is this an intelligent forum for intelligent debate or is this just another conspiracy forum, and opposers to conspiracies are not welcomed?

Just my opinion, don't hate me for it.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:23 PM
I applaud the creation of a Psychology, Philosophy & Metaphysics forum, but am curious how it will fit in with ATS rather than BTS. Seems, at least from the initial description, to be a catch-all in which personal development (seemingly a BTS topic) and conspiracy issues (ATS) are both welcomed and encouraged.

I suppose short of creating two groups, it will depend on the posting trends to ultimately dictate which direction it will lean towards.

I'll be curious to keep an eye on it, myself.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:25 PM

Originally posted by jimmyjackblack
you do know Atheism is considered a religion now right?

Not by atheists.

However, since atheism is a "lack of a spiritual belief system," discussion of such topics would be most appropriate for the revised BTS forum.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:27 PM
Perfect. I think this is exactly what has been needed for a long time. You've identified criteria and other variables to determine where various posts/replies should be posted. Well done. Goodonya too for reiterating the basic requirement of manners and decorum.


posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:30 PM
This is great news; Psychology, Philosophy & Metaphysical Forum are indeed a greatly appreciated addition to the site.

Glad to see ATS always looking to improve and experiment in ways such as this.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:40 PM
I'm not sure this is a good move at all, I will wait and see what the BTS regulars have to say about it, because given the kind of "debate" that goes on in ATS in regards to creationism vs evolution it might spill to other areas of BTS and make the place a nightmare for those who go to BTS to chill or are just BTS regulars that really can care less about what goes on in the ATS side.

Hopefully it works out because it has gotten out of hand of late.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:44 PM
I know this is directed at SO, but as a member reading this in a public forum I also have very strong feelings about this post and the demeanor of the posters reactions.

You do act in accordance with another as a group by default of the ideaology that you subscribe to.

The problem here rockpuck is indeed opinion. Although we are all entitled to ours, I find them urtterly meaningless in a heated debate that can be consummated through facts.

The reason groups such as Christians and Masons, and YES they ARE groups (they even have a lable and system of belief that they all follow) are usually singled out is because they share a common ignorance (and I don't mean that as an insult). Many discussions, and I've taken part in this and experienced it first hand as well, in threads dealing with theology of any sort frequently deteriorate into character attacks and person degradations when actual logic and facts are introduced into the topic. Why is this? It's simple. These theologies are not based on true facts, but mere opinion and knowledge that has been molded over time to fit the agendas of the ever changing religious genus, and you'll find that copious Christians share a multitude of varying ideas about their OWN religion.

People conjoining into a general ideology creates a group.

Yes, you are individuals, a group of individuals all sharing the same ideology, and frankly sometimes it becomes rather fanatical. That is not my opinion, it is a fact. So fanatical that logic, intellectual and factual substance are discarded and replaced with myopic fanaticism and projected self anger to protect something that simply can not be proven.

I've received a u2u recently from a fanatical member telling me to f off and die! That's pretty radical! Shwew! Thank Athiesm (
) that I don't let people shake me, and I think it'd be a well embraced philosoph yof others too. To not let another ruffle your feathers and to just skip over anything that is a personal pop-shot, or at least ask for evidence of why someone says you are such and such. When they can't prove it, it just further reveals what they are doing.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:48 PM
One would almost think that there isn't an "ignore" function on this board.

Nice touch with the metaphysics forum, though.


posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:48 PM
i like the religious debates/ origins of creation debates , i hope we will not loose too much by limiting them

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:49 PM

Originally posted by Rockpuck

I am against Christianity in general, I do not consider my self a Christian, but when I say something against Christianity and several people respond in kind against what I say I do not think "omg, they are ganging up on me!" NO .. They act as individuals.

The point is that some members DID feel ganged up on, you don't but they presumably did. Not saying either side is right BUT I can understand why they may have felt that way. Not only that, there was a lot of posts that consisted of one person just agreeing with another (BORING!!).

What I do think though is that there were two sides to this and that the Freemasons were singled out for responsibility when the 'anti's' were equally responsible. Perhaps it was only the latter that complained.

Either way, it has got somewhat better in past weeks and with it the level of conversation, hopefully 'Religion' will similarly benefit from a bit of adult supervision

Congrats to Skyfloating for a campaign successfully fought

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:51 PM

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
just as we experience occasional problems form groups of pro-Freemasonry users

I musta' missed something. People CAN be pro-freemasonry, right? (for the record - I'm not pro or anti ) Or is there something more to this?

It should not be a place to discuss religion.


NEW FORUM: Psychology, Philosophy & Metaphysics

Now I'm drooooooling!

[edit on 6/11/2008 by FlyersFan]

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in