ATS is not a congregation... or a shooting range

Now, before I start, let me just say that that 'one' thread is one of my biggest peeves: Intolerance. It made me mad, something that has only happened one other time anytime I was browsing ATS. That being said, I am mournfully disheartened by the fact that someone on this site would have that breed of opinion.

Discussion:
1 : consideration of a question in open and usually informal debate
2 : a formal treatment of a topic in speech or writing

Source

Congregation
1 : a : an assembly of persons : gathering; especially : an assembly of persons met for worship and religious instruction
b : a religious community: as
(1) : an organized body of believers in a particular locality

ATS is NOT a congregation for your religion OR lack thereof. It is a discussion-based forum and the success of the fame and quality of this forum has depended on the discussions that we've had. This means that when you make a thread, propagating your views or stance on your subject, you must expect to receive opposing views and be prepared to discuss the topic with your fellow members. If you write a thread propagating the belief in a God, then you must be prepared to discuss the topic with people who don't believe in God, and vice-versa. This is general knowledge, and is the most important part of a discussion regarding religion. If you knowingly refuse to discuss a topic with someone who does not share your views, then it isn't a discussion, it's a congregation. You're making your thread a church. It's not supposed to be a church.

I'm not saying if you are religious then to refrain from posting anything religious. What I'm saying is that when you post something religious, then expect to encounter people who do not believe in your religion, and be ready to discuss with them just as you have discussed with people who do share beliefs. Likewise, if you don't have a religion, then be prepared to discuss with people who do just as openly as you have discussed with the people who share your non-beliefs.

An example would be:

- Going into a thread where the opening post is full of unconnected Bible verses and, instead of asking the OP what the point of the thread is, blaring out your hate of their religion.

- Being said OP, and instead of stating what the point of your thread is, posting more Bible verses and having a piss-measuring contest among those who share your beliefs.

Recently it seems like people have stopped 'denying ignorance' and instead 'embrace innocence'. It is your duty when you make a thread to be prepared for an open-discussion, and your duty when you reply to a thread to have an open mind. Does this mean you have to agree with the other person? NO. Just read the top of the forum you are in:

Religion forum: Discuss all things spiritual and share your own faith-based experiences.

Philosophy and Metaphysics: This new AboveTopSecret.com 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.

Conspiracies in Religions: This forum is dedicated to the speculation and examination into conspiracies and scandals perpetrated or inspired by organized religions. This forum is not for the general discussion of religious topics.

In conclusion, all I'm trying to say is that there is a difference in a discussion, and a share-fest. If you explicitly state at the foot of your OP that: "What do you guys think" or "Discuss", then it is a discussion and you should be expecting people with differing views and be prepared to challenge them, not shoot them down at whatever the cost, and the same goes for whatever religion you belong to (or don't).

Also, I'm sure most of you have seen this at the top of your thread box:

You are an experienced contributor to ATS. Please be an example for our newer members and make every post matter.

What do you guys think about the state of the forums currently. It feels like Summer break is longer than it should be.

I feel your pain.. it's frustrating dealing with closed minded people. That being said people are like this in real life so I do not expect an internet forum to be any different!

reply to post by mr10k


So are we congregating , discussing or shooting? JK Feel better now? I like the ones who show up and say they hate the topic...or tell you your format was wrong...or tell you something completely different from what the thread was about...or don't bother to read it and give an opinion based on the title.


BAW33

reply to post by mr10k

(1) : an organized body of believers in a particular locality

Doesn't this apply to ATS though?

reply to post by mr10k


There is a religious and creationism sub forum here for them to discuss anything they want about religion and you have no say so about it.

ATS is NOT a congregation for your religion OR lack thereof. It is a discussion-based forum

Originally posted by Juggernog
reply to post by mr10k

 

There is a religious and creationism sub forum here for them to discuss anything they want about religion and you have no say so about it.

ATS is NOT a congregation for your religion OR lack thereof. It is a discussion-based forum

Ok. Now read what is a discussion is. And also, you forgot where I said:

In conclusion, all I'm trying to say is that there is a difference in a discussion, and a share-fest. If you explicitly state at the foot of your OP that: "What do you guys think" or "Discuss", then it is a discussion and you should be expecting people with differing views and be prepared to challenge them, not shoot them down at whatever the cost, and the same goes for whatever religion you belong to (or don't).

reply to post by mr10k

What do you guys think about the state of the forums currently. It feels like Summer break is longer than it should be.

The religion forum for me is like the 911 forum,avoid the crap out of them because nothing good can come from it other then getting banned while screaming and swearing.

I am not discouraged by the forums,its the members that make me facepalm while swearing at my monitor.
I feel like people have made this another facebook or youtube while just looking for attention and there is ALOT of attention seekers.

The great threads that happen every so often is what keeps me around.
Also,the off topic forum and chat....I love my chatters and have made some cool friends there.

ETA I am not good at threads so i try to set an example by not making them.
A fool reveals himself when he opens his mouth.

reply to post by mr10k


Heh - I actually thought about making a similar thread earlier today when reading the latest religion threads.

Mine was going to be something like this...

Ya know, Christianity has been around for about 2000 years now. During that time it has been examined, discussed and dissected by some of the greatest minds of the ages.

So given that fact, it is highly unlikely that anyone here is going to come up with some shocking new argument that will convince every believer they are believing a lie. Likewise, it is equally unlikely that anyone here will receive a divine revelation that will convert the masses of unbelievers.

Post what you will. But know that it has been around for 2000 years so your arguments either pro or con will likely not make any more dent than spitting in the ocean would.

Some people will continue to believe and some will not to believe regardless of your efforts - deal with it, learn to live with it and try not to poke the other side with a pointy stick too often and the world will be a better place.

reply to post by Frogs

Post what you will. But know that it has been around for 2000 years so your arguments either pro or con will likely not make anymore dent that spitting in the ocean.

Amen to that Frogs.
(no pun intended)

This is what I posted today in a religion thread.

I tend to ignore all threads from the people who believe to the people that don't,I see no point in arguing about something that is nobody elses business but my own.

I enjoy debates.. when they are debates


but we need to keep in mind that faith is different to each one of us to someone its totally strictly biblical verses where they borrow lines to show their "interpretation" about the matters and then there is no midways as they see bible say so word by word, and yes there is not much to debate about when debate is totally unrelevant.. its a more of proclamation and maybe should be left like that.

To many others faith is more flexible and is like a dough you can bake of your liking, its not wrong either. you can include your own interpretations of the issues and even have some imagination with it. Giants, UFO´s, Aliens, star wars, tornados, tsunamis etc.. and even then bible doesn´t exclude them either. When its about christianity even Jesus talked with metaphors because he wanted people to stop and think by themselves.

So there is an orthodox view and liberal and everything between these two, we just have to cope and go on.. even we disagree on some manners how things should be presented to us.

Originally posted by mr10k
Now, before I start, let me just say that that 'one' thread is one of my biggest peeves: Intolerance. It made me mad, something that has only happened one other time anytime I was browsing ATS. That being said, I am mournfully disheartened by the fact that someone on this site would have that breed of opinion.

You can't tolerate intolerant posts? Not very tolerant of you..

As much as someone can respond in a negative manner (meaning against op) the op can choose how he/she responds to that.. No one can be forced to respond to naysayers if that's not what they want to do..

When you are speaking to people with strong beliefs maybe you should back off already knowing they will not take kindly to a negative view on their beliefs.. People are Sick of people who come into topics that are obviously not to their liking just so they can say, nope that's not right, you are wrong op.. This is pointless, and the frustration that comes from that breeds the response you get... These responses are better suited to topics that are not belief based. You cannot prove positive or negative what you do not know, and if most posters understood this KEY issue then they wouldn't feel the need to click on obviously religious topics..

Just because you don't understand something... ONLY means you don't understand it, nothing more..

You are not the teacher, you are not the moderator, you are not the cop... It's not your job to decide what is right and wrong, this is up to public perception.. Obviously narrow minded posts that KNOW things on either side look dumb to me.

Many times the OP points out that they are not looking to debate an issue only explore their thoughts.. People need to not post in these threads with the fair disclaimer.. Imagine how these negative posts would be perceived in person around the thanksgiving dinner table.. Rudeness is a major problem, and it mostly comes from the posts/posters you are defending.

Disclaimer: I am a hippy democrat who would prefer guns didn't exist, but reality and my desires are WAY far apart haha. I'll be running to my republican friends religious houses with all the guns and food if things get messed up. I appreciate our differences, but I am not threatened by them.

Originally posted by Dustytoad

Originally posted by mr10k
Now, before I start, let me just say that that 'one' thread is one of my biggest peeves: Intolerance. It made me mad, something that has only happened one other time anytime I was browsing ATS. That being said, I am mournfully disheartened by the fact that someone on this site would have that breed of opinion.

You can't tolerate intolerant posts? Not very tolerant of you..

I can tolerate intolerant posts, by not posting on said threads. You should read up on the definition of tolerance.

As much as someone can respond in a negative manner (meaning against op) the op can choose how he/she responds to that.. No one can be forced to respond to naysayers if that's not what they want to do..

Except for when the OP asks for a discussion. If you ask for a discussion then there is no excuse for you not to take in to consideration all of the replies, unless you are promoting ignorance willfully.

When you are speaking to people with strong beliefs maybe you should back off already knowing they will not take kindly to a negative view on their beliefs.. People are Sick of people who come into topics that are obviously not to their liking just so they can say, nope that's not right, you are wrong op.. This is pointless, and the frustration that comes from that breeds the response you get... These responses are better suited to topics that are not belief based. You cannot prove positive or negative what you do not know, and if most posters understood this KEY issue then they wouldn't feel the need to click on obviously religious topics..

Again, not when the OP asks for a discussion, and, like before, look up the definition of what a discussion is. What you are describing is what I called a piss-measuring contest, not a discussion.

Just because you don't understand something... ONLY means you don't understand it, nothing more..

Your post reminded me of this:

Originally posted by GARN40ish
A great amount of people are skeptical on the subject, for good reason. You cant blame these people! Its simply something they are not used to, familiar with, or practiced or studied in their past.

This poster believed that people were skeptical on ascension not because of the lack of proof, but because they don't understand how it works. Again, this is a piss-poor examination of what it means to be skeptical on a subject. It is what I described as 'embracing innocence'.

You are not the teacher, you are not the moderator, you are not the cop... It's not your job to decide what is right and wrong, this is up to public perception.. Obviously narrow minded posts that KNOW things on either side look dumb to me.

No, I am none of those things. But I what I AM is a member of ATS, a discussion-based forum, and this thread is detailing what a discussion-based forum is, what it is intended for, and why it is not a congregation. It isn't a matter of opinion or 'public perception', it is fact that ATS is a discussion-based forum and you can easily ask one of the mods if it is such. And I am glad that narrow minded posts look dumb to you, but I don't care because I very rarely narrow-minded posts that KNOW things. I see open-minded posts that know things, and closed minded posts that CLAIM to know things, but not what you describe.

Grow up.

How mature of you, kind sir.

reply to post by Dustytoad

Originally posted by mr10k
And I am glad that narrow minded posts look dumb to you, but I don't care because I very rarely narrow-minded posts that KNOW things. I see open-minded posts that know things, and closed minded posts that CLAIM to know things, but not what you describe.

Grow up.

How mature of you, kind sir.

Everything above that is either stuff we aill only disagree on, or you seem to be misunderstanding. Now, to your last point there, yes I had wrote that, but didn't take me long to edit it out into a longer response.

to the middle part.

Open minded posts don't know anything. You are the one misunderstanding terms based on your point of view. true open mindedness changes perspective often and never sits for too long.. This would limit the view, thus narrowing it, thus narrowing the mind, thus narrow minded posts.. This was NOT directed at you, but at posters that you are defending.. Skepticism is not narrow mindedness, I was calling both sides that know narrow, because they have only one path one view, it's narrow...

Edit.

Originally posted by Dustytoad

Open minded posts don't know anything. You are the one misunderstanding terms based on your point of view. true open mindedness changes perspective often and never sits for too long.. This would limit the view, thus narrowing it, thus narrowing the mind, thus narrow minded posts.. This was NOT directed at you, but at posters that you are defending.. Skepticism is not narrow mindedness, I was calling both sides that know narrow, because they have only one path one view, it's narrow...

I never said open minded posts don't know anything, I said I have seen open minded posts that know what they are talking about, among other types of posts. I am not misunderstanding you at all, you seem to be misunderstanding the terms I'm using, and I have to make an extra effort to make my posts easily understandable. Yes true open mindedness changes the mind, but by assuming that all skeptics are narrow minded you are giving the impression you have a closed mind. Skepticism brings about open mindedness in other people. Skepticism is in the same branch as peer-review and open-source projects. The Skepticism you are describing is the first example I gave in the OP. It is not skepticism, it is hate.

You are also implying, from your post, that no one can truly know anything about something, as you said:

Skepticism is not narrow mindedness, I was calling both sides that know narrow, because they have only one path one view, it's narrow...

If I know that a glass is full, or that Barack Obama won the election or that, let's assume God exists, that God exists, then that is not narrow-mindedness. If that is all the info that is available at the time, and I know it all, then I'm not narrow-minded, and I can be either open minded (choosing to accept new information as it is released) or closed minded (thinking that everything I know now is all there is to know, and any knew info is most assuredly false).

In short, what I mean is that I have seen open minded posts that know, and open minded posts that don't know, but I have never seen an open minded post that claims to know. For example, a Christian who is willing to accept new information stating that God does not exist but still believes in God.

reply to post by mr10k


You misunderstand again... I am not saying what you said..

I am saying true open minded posts Know that they don't Know... I am not equating open mindedness to beliefs.. This is what you think of it.. I am not equating skeptics to people who don't believe magical things without proof I call skeptics people who don't believe ANYTHING without proof..

Open mindedness changes views often and is open to ANY ideas mainstream or not.

I am an open minded skeptic for instance.. I have no home base to guard.

You are taking narrow minded to be automatically bad. I am not saying this. I am just saying literally narrow minded. Knowing anything narrows the mind from all possibilities into one possibility. Open mindedness entertains many possibilities at once, and doesn't sit on one.

A person is neither narrow minded or open minded in totality, every thought they have either gives them a broader or more narrow view. Narrow minded is like a telescope, and then someone walks up next to you and pushes you over.. You can know many things and this is narrow.

Science is the practice of open mindedness.

Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by mr10k

 

You misunderstand again... I am not saying what you said..

I am saying true open minded posts Know that they don't Know... I am not equating open mindedness to beliefs.. This is what you think of it.. I am not equating skeptics to people who don't believe magical things without proof I call skeptics people who don't believe ANYTHING without proof..

Open mindedness changes views often and is open to ANY ideas mainstream or not.

...Like I said before, you must have missed it.

Yes true open mindedness changes the mind...
Skepticism brings about open mindedness in other people...
You are also implying, from your post, that no one can truly know anything about something...

And you did imply that by saying:

Open mindedness changes views often and is open to ANY ideas mainstream or not.

What I am saying is that just because I am open-minded, does not mean I should accept someone else knowledge as fact, because their knowledge may be wrong. And rereading your post you do equate it as a belief (not a religious belief obviously, a belief in general, an assumption).

open-mindedness norms relate to the way in which people approach the views and knowledge of others, and "incorporate the beliefs that others should be free to express their views and that the value of others’ knowledge should be recognised."

You're post basically states that open-minded people will never know everything while I am saying that open-minded people just know what they are talking about is fact in general on a given topic, so we are talking about two different things.

Originally posted by Frogs
reply to post by mr10k

 

Heh - I actually thought about making a similar thread earlier today when reading the latest religion threads.

Mine was going to be something like this...

Ya know, Christianity has been around for about 2000 years now. During that time it has been examined, discussed and dissected by some of the greatest minds of the ages.

So given that fact, it is highly unlikely that anyone here is going to come up with some shocking new argument that will convince every believer they are believing a lie. Likewise, it is equally unlikely that anyone here will receive a divine revelation that will convert the masses of unbelievers.

Post what you will. But know that it has been around for 2000 years so your arguments either pro or con will likely not make any more dent than spitting in the ocean would.

Some people will continue to believe and some will not to believe regardless of your efforts - deal with it, learn to live with it and try not to poke the other side with a pointy stick too often and the world will be a better place.

Everything you wrote here can be (and usually is) applied to ANY topic. For some reason heated debates just seem to stand out more in religious topics. I truly enjoy heated debates as long as the heat is on the subject and doesn't degrade into insulting the individual.

reply to post by mr10k


There are no open minded people or closed minded people.. I don't use sweeping words of dynamic thought processes..

We are using words differently.. Can't get around that. I mean words only directly as their english pieces that make them up. Open Mind.. Literally.

I don't think it's openminded to believe in aliens.

I don't think beliefs are open minded.. I don't think knowledge is open minded.. I also don't put open mindedness as the be all end all, because if you keep your whole mind open you won't know how to walk to the store, or what money is...

close mindedness is not negative or positive.. You need both parts. You will find I don't like limiting things to good or bad.

Anyone who thinks im going in circles just read this post and then read my first post in this thread. I think it will make more sense that way.


So My point. Some people want to explore ideas, and not get any answers.. Just talk like friends, like "ever wonder if maybe stars are actually star gates?" That kind of post may just be a thought process someone wants to go through, they don't want people telling them stars are balls or burning gas.. Thus ending the discussion..