COMMUNICATING THREATS OF VIOLENCE ON ATS…

Well perhaps I may present an interesting perspective as I am BOTH a Law Enforcement Officer of over 25 years and a practicing Christian..

I have only ever been "attacked" one time that I recall on ATS due to my faith..

My profession? Well let's just say it is good to have thick skin..

a reply to: semperfortis

Not too surprised at that . . . Perhaps we could tease this out a bit.

1. I wonder if you ever say any of the Pentecostal perspective sorts of things that rile so many up in a flash?

2. I suspect your LEO training bleeds over into your posting by tweaking up an extremely gracious, civil demeanor.

3. I don't recall you noticeably emphasizing your faith or even characterizing your values or casting your values in ways that some automatically find outrageous.

4. The Gut doesn't tend to be offensive to most either. There's a couple of well known overtly Christian mods who tend to be inoffensive--though one is a little bit plain spoken more typically.

5. Nevertheless, Christ said that the world would revile and hate us. If none do . . . what's that about?

6. I came to ATS with a fiercely combative 3,000 hours of intense group process experience plus similar posting experiences on

www.FREEREPUBLIC.COM...

where intense opinions were the common order of the day as long as the insults were not personal. It took me a long time to refine my ATS posting toward a more issues only and greatly more civil style.

7. Nevertheless, my personality and style tend to generate a number of interesting responses--face to face and on the net. Some of those responses are opposite. I can automatically bring out the worst in people--seemingly, sometimes--just by breathing or walking in the room or being in the room with some types, personalities, value orientations walk into the room. Most folks who know me closely face to face characterize me as the opposite--kind, gentle, loving etc. It's a very interesting combination of very different responses.

8. I suspect I'm known hereon for having a list of values and perspectives which some folks are bone marrow hostile to. I seriously believe that there are 10-25 posters on ATS who would do me bodily and/or property damage if they knew my location. Their hostility is typically instant, personally assaultive, fierce, automatic almost regardless of what I say or how I say it. Sticking strictly to the issues is no guarantee of a civil dialogue in terms of the responses to me.

9. I highly value all individuals. I try to post accordingly. Nevertheless, I'm frequently accused of condescension. I don't think that way nor feel it in my heart except very rarely. However, I do tend to call a spade a spade and describe reality as I perceive it and experience it--letting the chips fall where they may. Many of those most fiercely aggressively hostile to me--who I'd feel the most danger from face to face--are FAR WORSE at written condemnation and worse. Somehow, that's much more OK hereon. That's always been mystifying, to me.

10. Seemingly the most infuriating thing to many posters about my posting is that I dare to operate obviouisly from the perspective that

SOME THINGS ARE RIGHT AND SOME THINGS ARE WRONG.

That's absolutely intolerable to a sizable majority on ATS. And some of those seem to be STORM TROOPER FIERCELY DETERMINED to stamp out that perspective in every way possible at every opportunity.

Of course, they fiercely operate out of the perspective that THEY ARE RIGHT about there being NO RIGHT OR WRONG. LOL.

11. There is a topic that was demonstrated in Biblical times to include fiercely assaultive behaviors on the part of adherents. That spirit is still alive in the world and operative in a percentage of such folks by their own admission. Any hint of anyone even postulating the possibility that such folks might be less than equally saintly can bring out the fiercest of hostilities. I'd not want to be caught alone on a dark road by such posters on ATS. Given that they seem to be strongly of the perspective that there is no right or wrong, they'd likely feel quite comfortable doing me as much bodily harm as possible.

12. I prefer, as much as possible, to live at peace with all mankind. I recognize that's not possible totally. And, I believe that on ATS, so far, my perspective has as much right to be OVERTLY expressed as anyone else's. And I'm not willing to hide it under a bushel nor to insure that every word and phrase is wrapped in 12 layers of rabbit fur. The double standard folks on the other side insist on their right to fiercely and even repeatedly personally assaultively attack not only my perspective but my person. I still avoid the overt personal assaults regardless. And, I persistently try and refine my wording to be as hearable as I can, in good conscience do.

a reply to: yeahright

Decorum is a fancy word censorship.

originally posted by: th3dudeabides
a reply to: yeahright

Decorum is a fancy word censorship.

ABSOLUTELY INDEED.

I think graciousness and civility are great values and behaviors.

I think truth is more important than both.

I don't think there's any place on ATS for threats of violence nor for verbal personal assaultiveness.

a reply to: th3dudeabides

Refer to it however you'd like. No one has to agree with the rules. But if you post here, expect your posts to be taken down if you violate them.

They're called Terms and Conditions, not Idle Suggestions You Might Want to Consider Following. No apology proffered for that.

a reply to: th3dudeabides

Just my two cents..but you know? You're right. Decorum is a fancy word for censorship.

It describes self censorship to maintain a standard of decency and tact so as not to overly offend others where it can ever be avoided. Where it can't be? Well.. I avoid starting my own threads on entire topics I see around the net because I know, realistically, it won't be a discussion but a combat thread. I certainly pass on replies I'd like to post to share my more colorful opinions at times.

Censorship? I suppose I am censoring my own desires to share a thing in the interest of the community and/or other member's feelings. (sentences self to hard labor...suspended indefinitely)

It's one bunny's take on things.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

INDEED.

Wisdom often self-censors.

However, when it tends to be automatic and for shallow to freedom-destroying reasons to avoid upsetting the globalist PTB . . . we will have crossed a horrific line.

I think a lot of Christians on ATS self-censor--not to avoid violating the T&C but to avoid triggering the hostilities of the threatening folks who are absolutely intolerant of a supernatural believing Christianity that would dare to suggest that their hedonism or rebellion or whatever is not god and not worth worshiping.

I know a number of Christians self-censor on ATS, by not even going to threads so chronically populated by the dogpilling threatening hostiles. I, myself, often avoid threads entirely or at some point because of the threatening, assaultive posts in my direction and/or in the direction of anyone who'd dare to hold my perspective.

It is not too far fetched to imagine that the day could easily arise where our perspective was virtually wiped out, non-existent, on ATS by such an intensely threatening and hostile posting climate.

There are some topics even now, where long time Christians hereon very rarely bother to show up and post on at all. Almost the only representation of our perspective is from new folks who have little experience with the level of knee-jerk dogpiling by the threatening hostiles.

The same folks who OVERTLY CHAMPION us and our perspective BEING REMOVED FROM THE PLANET must feel quite smugly comforted and victorious when their dogpiling successfully muffles to squashes our perspective on a thread near totally or totally.

There are many topics where such calls and championing for our extermination are chronic, repeated, plentiful, seemingly automatic, brazen and extremely bullyingly 'in your face.'

Yet it's the Christians who are loudly screamed at for being "the bad guys."

What a raging double standard.

BTW, I'm often in situations hereon where I have not said anything particularly "Christian" or whatever because there was nothing about the topic at hand which involved any such issues or implications.

Yet, evidently because of my signature, other posters seem to feel compelled to--off topic--be outrageously hostile--calling for, in screaming word choices--the removal, dying out, extermination of anyone who'd dare to believe as I do--off the planet, out of society, etc.

How civil.

Usually, such language is added to, dogpiled onto . . . vs removed. Sweet.

a reply to: BO XIAN

Links?

Proof?

Did you alert Staff?

a reply to: bunnytoes1973

Here here. A question well worth asking.

Kind Regards
Myselfaswell

originally posted by: baneofevil
POST REMOVED BY STAFF

I don't have a dog in this specific fight but I get those types of U2Us more than most.

Meh...

I just delete them and move on.

originally posted by: semperfortis
a reply to: BO XIAN

Links?

Proof?

Did you alert Staff?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I have nothing but the utmost respect for you, sempre, always have.

I spend more time reading post than posting, throughout the years, surely you have seen the post?

Actually it isn't just post, topics with titles that are aimed at insulting Christians,

I may spend a few days documenting all of it.

Now in regards to me being passive and just shutting up about the subject and turning the other cheek as I have been told to do a few times and seems to be the new meme, that's just a ploy to shut me up.

On one topic about Christian persecution a poster said Christian love being martyrs.

I'm not mainstream in my faith and very alternative in my interpretation of the Bible, probably wouldn't fit in anywhere, but lately I have felt moved to inform people about the Christian persecution world wide.

Which of course they deserve because of the crusades, jk

However I don't want to persecute anyone else because of their faith or lack there of either.

oh, le sigh

wiping dust