As a collective could we agree on and set specific guidelines for religious questions?

I don’t see why the guidelines for these questions should be any different than those from other questions:

No personal attacks.

Respectful discourse.

I love this idea. I think everyone should point out one good thing that they “think” they understand about another religion before stating their claim.

I agree with @marinelife. People are seldom dispassionate about these ideas; that is going to show in the discourse. And… I think it should show. The Fluther guidelines should keep people civil in discussions about religion – if they’re not, they’ll be obliterated modded.

No religion/atheism questions in the general section, unless it is factual in nature. e.g. “what part of the bible says blah blah blah” or “who published the god delusion”.

Religion questions in the general section always remind me of bad political bills that get paper clipped on to good ones in order to try and steal some credibility.

Maybe religion questions could get a tag similar to the “NSFW” tag… maybe “OSRD” (Over sensetive regarding delusions) or something like that, so we can know in advance that the asker is just fishing for agreement.

- The Hitler pushing Einstein pulling act of 2011.

All “players” shall refrain from pushing Hitler and his acts on to the opposing team, in an attempt to tarnish the other teams argument. All “players” shall also be prohibited from trying to claim Enstein for their own team, in order to try and make them selves look clever.

E.g. Hitler was an atheist, he believed in evolution and eugenics, blah blah blah… oh yea, well the nazi’s belts all said “god with us” on them blah blah blah.

- The cosmic zombie ordinance

It was fun while it lasted, but it’s time to put this one to rest. Jesus was not a zombie, if you get bitten by Jesus nothing happens.

- The sarcasm sustainability bill

Studies have shown that at the rate we are going, sarcasm reserves will run dry by 2030. From now on sarcasm shall be limited to just one remark per post.

Perhaps as a community we should indulge in a little more negative capability and kindness, but also people should grow a thicker skin here. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t mean they don’t like you or you know? I don’t think we should respect each others’ beliefs we but we should respect each other.

Keat’s preference of disquisition rather than dispute is wise, but it takes willingness on every side. We all should be “capable of being in uncertainties.”

Collective? Pah!
As an individual my “guidelines” for religious questions will remain unaltered, I stay well clear!

I agree that we have a “situation” here concerning religious questions. However, I believe that the issue is that we are judging the level of discourse differently in these threads. Like I had mentioned in one of those threads, there is a general understanding in the US that we use one set of standards for determining truth, and discussing opinion, belief, and ethics. Then we have a different standard when something has been labeled “religious”.

My vote is that we…

- Try to keep it from getting personal (address the claims made – not the person making them).
– Do not be offended. That’s right. Just don’t. If we’re all adults, and we agree to discuss things, then there is no place for limiting people’s speech as long as we’re all trying to figure this stuff out. I have seen people making a simple factual statement be accused of offending people. Thick skin, people.
– Try to be a bit more sensitive when discussing religious topics (both sides). Atheists are an oppressed minority in this country, so they’re probably a bit pissy sometimes. Religious people are used to the unspoken rule in which their religious claims go unquestioned. This can be somewhat troubling and people can feel attacked.
– Try to focus the conversations in a way that emphasize where we do agree. Many atheists and theists are political/moral brothers and sisters. Sometimes we merely disagree on this one question. This is important to keep in mind.
– Try as best as you can to not put words in peoples’ mouths. If they have not explained something, it is probably best to ask them to.
– Try to use “some” before terms like atheist, theist, christian, etc. The consensus is that this might keep things more civil.
– If you feel that you are not able to engage in a challenging discussion in which your beliefs or lack of beliefs are directly challenged, it might be wise to stay out of the conversation altogether.

I think at the top, with the original post, it should be clearly stated whether it is a question just to know opinions, and understand how individual jellies think about a religious topic; or a question for debate.

Also, and I am guilty of this. If the question is for a specific group, people outside of that group should not answer, but can ask questions for understanding and clarification. All too often an athiest answers a question that is really being asked of theists.

But, probably there should not be new specific rules different than any other question. I don’t know. It seems we inadvertantly sometimes seem disrespectful when we never intended to be.

As with @ucme, I have decided to stay away from the religious questions as there are some people who cannot, under any circumstances, remain respectful in these questions.
I’m also not following this one after this answer.

@tom_g ‘s answer made me think about something…

Regarding atheists being opressed, are we really? atheists will go on (quite rightly) about how they can’t do this and can’t do that, but then you have the Jews and their oppressed history, then you have Christians being oppressed online by atheists and bashed in the media, you have Muslims complaining about the terrorist reputation, Buddhists going on about Tibet, Wiccans going on about how people treat them like emo kids and so on and so on and so on.

Starting to wonder if any of us are oppressed or if we all are.

poison – dear lord, sir. focus! (and aren’t you across the pond?)

@poisonedantidote Athiests cannot reveal themselves for fear of judgement all too often. At least here in America it is true. I don’t tell many people I am an athiest here in Memphis, TN. It would be no problem in other parts of the US. You have probably seen answers showing how so many people will not vote for an athiest in America. Christians were horrified Obama mentioned athiests in his innaugural speech.

I would not have guessed that specifying that only people with specific viewpoints may answer a particular question was in keeping with the spirit of Fluther. Maybe I just misjudged Fluther.

Religion is in no way deserving of any consideration not given to the colour of the sky or the price of tea in China.

If the question is regarding a fact, post it in General and your answer will, by Fluther guidelines, reference only the specific fact in question.

If you want carte blanche to say whatever you want without anyone disagreeing with you, there are plenty of religion-specific message boards on the internet that would be more than happy to slake your thirst for attention.

Good luck. There will always be that person. Always.

Religious discussions deserve no special rules. The same rules apply across the board. I agree with @marinelife in that there should be no personal attacks and respectful discourse should be maintained, but that goes for any Fluther question.

@tinyfaery word!!

I do not want specific rules for specific types of questions. But there are people who will mock questions just because they do not understand that topic or just because they have no real opinions about it.
Oh and religious questions are the ” ... ” that attracts all the flies who just want to buzz around. I’m sorry but it’s true. One just has to observe how many speculations/non founded arguments/flames/attacks/lack of respect for another/etc can be found in religious questions.

@dappled_leaves Many times I write my questions as “Christians: ....” Because I want Christians to tell me how they see things. I don’t want athiests interpreting how they think Christians look at the particular topic, and I don’t want sarcastic athiests to scare of the Christians with sarcasm or challenging questions.

@JLeslie I agree. I don’t see that as being any different than questions addressed to women, men, LGBT people, etc. It reminds me of those questions that say “what PC laptop should I get?” and all the answers are “get a Mac”. If that’s a problem, I don’t see why atheists saying “God doesn’t exist” to a question addressed to Christians about the Bible isn’t treated the same way.

However, it can be problematic when things like “I feel sad for atheists and their poor misguided beliefs” are posted in such questions (I have seen similar things to that before); it makes it hard for the non-target audience for the question to ignore the question.

Most of the time, though, it is more similar to the Mac/PC thing in that the answers are just plain unhelpful. I see that as more for the General section, though.

Agreed, @DominicX

How about we only allow parenting questions to be answered by people with children five years of age or older? Wait, that’s not enough experience. Ten? Twenty? Fifty?

How about making all government questions only answerable by people with a degree in political science?

How quickly this entire enterprise would fall apart.

@Seek_Kolinahr

But it’s not “all religious questions”, it’s the ones specifically addressed to certain people. However, when women respond to questions addressed to men (or vice versa), the responses don’t get modded. In that way, it’s more of a suggested audience than it is an exclusive audience.

I don’t know if people are suggesting that we make an official site rule that if a question is addressed to Christians, only Christians may answer or else their response will be modded, but just that if you are not a Christian and you are planning a response like “But God doesn’t exist!” to “What does God say about X in the book of X?” maybe you should refrain from doing it.

I wholeheartedly agree with you on the last point. I have a vast knowledge of the Scripture, and have no problem helping someone with a reference question. The Bible as literature is quite gripping in places. and frankly, I love nothing more than to see a Christian reading the Bible (nothing will deconvert the honest person faster.)

Since there is no other category of question on this site that demands we pass a qualification exam to answer, I see no reason that Social questions should merit such special treatment. If one wants to converse with Christians and only Christians (or Atheists and only Atheists) I can recommend several different message boards that will fulfill their needs.

@Seek_Kolinahr

In that case, it’s less about addressing Christians as much as it is about addressing people who will provide a helpful answer. In the General section, at least, answers are supposed to be helpful, which is why people shouldn’t post something like “God doesn’t exist” as a response to a question about what the Bible says about something. But if an atheist can answer this question while being helpful (due to their knowledge of the Bible, for example) then I don’t see the problem. Again, the addressing the question to Christians is a suggestion, not an enforced rule (at least, it should be that way).

I think we’re seeing eye to eye.

@Seek_Kolinahr @DominicX I agree with you both. I was too strict in my answer. It is not that I mind an athiest answering, especially if they have insight or knowledge about a question. I just prefer they don’t alienate any Christians in their responses. Typically the Q’s go pretty well if they are worded well.

No.

We have a set of guidelines. People just need to follow them.

I never seem to understand what the big fuss is about. Maybe I’m missing something. I’ve been here for years and treat people pretty much the way I do in real life – and expect the same.

Let’s see: you might call me secular. But that would imply that I am not religious. To do so would imply that I believe in religion – which I am not sure I do. I believe in customs and tradition – but only the ones that contribute something of value to society – something of beauty – in a word (mine only) ART.

Is there a God? Well, I just capitalized the word. Why do I do that? Because that’s how I was brought up and I find it hard to shake. There are gods – I’ve read (and enjoy) Greek and Roman Mythology – but there is also a God. How do I know? I don’t.

I have no problem not knowing why. I can’t even wrap my head around how Fluther works. Literally. You coud explain it to me slowly a hundred times – as Ryan et al have done – but I still won’t get it. I am just not smart enough.

So maybe belief in God is for dumb people.

By the way – which God? Which one popped into your mind while reading this?

That’s partly my point. I don’t know. I also don’t care – but in the least apathetic way you can imagine. I don’t care what you call God – or if you call God – because that is between you and Him. I also don’t mind saying Her/It or Allah. I don’t think God minds – and I’m not sure He’s an interventionist God anymore – I know I wouldn’t want to bother with such petty, stupid – warmongering little beings when there are billions of stars out there.

Oh yes, and dinosaurs roamed the earth and the planet is, what, 3 billion years old give or take? I don’t mind how you count. Literally, figuratively, 5500 actual years or figurative years.

I just don’t know.

I do know that when I see dew on the grass in the morning, or a baby’s sigh – I hope there is much more than just us. Just this.

I know when I see a flower, or a lion take down an antelope – I feel that we are honoured to be a part of something greater – something that began with, and for some reason – despite our stupidity and destruction – continues to be greater than a sum of all our parts.

I believe.

In what exactly – is my business – not yours.

Does this offend someone?

If yes, then please explain why. I shall do my best to apologize for my beliefs – so that you can go on with your life.

I haven’t noticed a problem, really. Aside from the abuse, but that’s the Internet for you.

It shouldn’t get any more special treatment than anything else. What is it about religious questions that get to certain impasses that other questions don’t? Let’s add restrictions to politics and vegetarianism then, why don’t we. And just about everything else.

Maybe next time someone says they don’t like zombies, I should ask the collective if it’s okay to make it a rule that people can’t say they don’t like zombies anymore.

A lot of very controversial subjects get discussed here, and religion is not alone in prompting strong, heated, debate. Check out some political threads, and you’ll see more of the same. I just don’t see any reason why religious questions should be treated differently than any other, especially in an ‘official’ way. The same goes for questions of any type asked by younger members (referencing the question I suspect prompted this discussion), though keeping the asker’s age in mind is helpful. The guidelines apply evenly, all across the board.

We don’t disallow anyone from answering any question, even if it’s directed to a specific group. As long as the responses meet the guidelines, they stay. If they cross the line into personal attacks or flame bait, they go. If the question is in the General section, the responses must also be on topic and helpful.

All of that said, I’d love to see all of us being respectful of the very real people behind these questions and answers. Try not to hurt people, ok?

I would LOVE to see a greater effort towards tolerance of opposing views in both Religious and Political threads here. I know for a fact this voracious appetite to draw blood at the slightest hint of taking a firm position that also seems to deter many thinner skinned Jellies from participating in threads for fear of the mob action I do see far too often occur. IMO we need to foster healthy debate and not swift-boat-style-attacks on opposing views.

Yeah, there’s always that person…..sigh.

I think a very effective way of being disrespectful to the person is to feign respect for their beliefs.

@AdamF :: You are correct like jello is food.

@johnpowell Care to elaborate?

@AdamF :: It was a joke.