"Religion" catagory needs to be split - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

The Borg · 02-14-2007, 02:07 PM

Reading some of the "religion" posts the past few weeks, I think there needs to be a split in the religion catagory.

Catagory #1) "Religion"
- dealing with normal topics of gospel related questions, discussions;

Catagory #2) "Philosophies of Men, Mingled with Scripture"
- dealing with contrived reasoning, in depth analysis over the multiple meaning of some word, current philosphies of learned human behavior.

UtahDan · 02-14-2007, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Borg

Reading some of the "religion" posts the past few weeks, I think there needs to be a split in the religion catagory.

Catagory #1) "Religion"
- dealing with normal topics of gospel related questions, discussions;

Catagory #2) "Philosophies of Men, Mingled with Scripture"
- dealing with contrived reasoning, in depth analysis over the multiple meaning of some word, current philosphies of learned human behavior.

That is SO clever! Hopefully you will be available to help us sort out which is which.

The Borg · 02-14-2007, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UtahDan

That is SO clever! Hopefully you will be available to help us sort out which is which.

No way...I'm not smart enough!

Jeff Lebowski · 02-14-2007, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Borg

No way...I'm not smart enough!

Apparently you are.

creekster · 02-14-2007, 04:02 PM

Why the sarcastic responses? Borg is either sincere, in which case they are not justified, or he is trying to make a point, in which case they are non-responsive (although he may take it as proof that the point neededd to be made).

Moreover as a point, it is not entirely off-base to remind those of that are believers to tread carefully. What about that is deserving of these type of responses?

MikeWaters · 02-14-2007, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by creekster

Moreover as a point, it is not entirely off-base to remind those of that are believers to tread carefully. What about that is deserving of these type of responses?

Guilty consciences.

UtahDan · 02-14-2007, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by creekster

Moreover as a point, it is not entirely off-base to remind those of that are believers to tread carefully. What about that is deserving of these type of responses?

I think its pretty condescending in that (1) it is a rebuke (2) it presumes that the author's idea of where that line is is the correct one. I'll keep my own counsel on that, thanks.

I don't have the least patience for him or you suggesting to me what it is appropriate for me to discuss on an internet message board. Opt out of and don't participate in whatever you deem inappropriate, but if you look down your nose at me and suggest that I should too then anticipate a tart reply.

The Borg · 02-14-2007, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UtahDan

I think its pretty condescending in that (1) it is a rebuke (2) it presumes that the author's idea of where that line is is the correct one.

Not trying to be condescending at all. Just common sense. How could I presume to say what anyone can say or not say on a message board???

If you, or anyone else on this board has ever served a mission (I'm assuming most on here purport to be LDS)...then you know how people are all over the spectrum regarding their spirituality.

It is easy to throw things about, on a message board,... but you never know how it will affect people. If one finds themselves calling LDS authors or GA's derogatory names, saying they are full of crap, etc... is that constructive? Not saying you have to even be constructive...don't know what I"m trying to say at the moment...but, I would think that one would be more sensitive to the various levels of spirituality of people who are "out there".

I am half serious about a "philosophy" catagory.

UtahDan · 02-14-2007, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Borg

Not trying to be condescending at all. Just common sense. How could I presume to say what anyone can say or not say on a message board???

If you, or anyone else on this board has ever served a mission (I'm assuming most on here purport to be LDS)...then you know how people are all over the spectrum regarding their spirituality.

It is easy to throw things about, on a message board,... but you never know how it will affect people. If one finds themselves calling LDS authors or GA's derogatory names, saying they are full of crap, etc... is that constructive? Not saying you have to even be constructive...don't know what I"m trying to say at the moment...but, I would think that one would be more sensitive to the various levels of spirituality of people who are "out there".

I am half serious about a "philosophy" catagory.

Your warning is duly noted.

non sequitur · 02-14-2007, 04:39 PM

The category is "Religion", not "Mormonism". Mormonism is a subset of Religion, not the other way around.

02-14-2007, 04:02 PM	#5
creekster Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: the far corner of my mind Posts: 8,711	Why the sarcastic responses? Borg is either sincere, in which case they are not justified, or he is trying to make a point, in which case they are non-responsive (although he may take it as proof that the point neededd to be made). Moreover as a point, it is not entirely off-base to remind those of that are believers to tread carefully. What about that is deserving of these type of responses? __________________ Sorry for th e tpyos.

02-14-2007, 04:39 PM	#10
non sequitur Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 1,964	The category is "Religion", not "Mormonism". Mormonism is a subset of Religion, not the other way around. __________________ ...You've been under attack for days, there's a soldier down, he's wounded, gangrene's setting in, 'Who's used all the penicillin?' 'Oh, Mark Paxson sir, he's got knob rot off of some tart.'" - Gareth Keenan

02-14-2007, 02:07 PM	#1
The Borg Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 533	"Religion" catagory needs to be split Reading some of the "religion" posts the past few weeks, I think there needs to be a split in the religion catagory. Catagory #1) "Religion" - dealing with normal topics of gospel related questions, discussions; Catagory #2) "Philosophies of Men, Mingled with Scripture" - dealing with contrived reasoning, in depth analysis over the multiple meaning of some word, current philosphies of learned human behavior. __________________ Hello......helloo.......HELLLOOO!