"Religion" catagory needs to be split

[creekster]

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. 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.

First, the only thing I suggested was inappropriate was your "tart" response to the original post (and even then I merely inquired as to the reason for it) .

Second, if it was a rebuke, and I am not sure that is accurate, it was gentle and certainly did not intend to limit the content of what you or anyone else discusses.

Third, neither I nor anyone else here has told you what the line should be; that remains up to you. I just don't see why this has you and others so worked up, that's all. Let's say Borg is being a 'mullah', if you will (arguendo), isn't this pretty much the prescription everyone gives to Rocky? So he puts this sort of idea out there gently and gets a bucketful back. I guess I just don't see it.

As for me, I thoroughly enjoy the religious, philosophical and theological discussions on this board (even if I don't always understand them), but I, too, fear the effect they might have on some. I would certainly never try to control them, but I don't see the fact that Borg chooses to present his feeling that we should keep perspective in these discussions, especially when presented so softly, as an offensive act.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by hyrum

The topic sub-title says "All things LDS and not."

Of course, the Current Events sub-title refers to Terry Shiavo (sic), so I would not put much weight in them.

[All-American]

Propose the aparatus by which you plan to separate the two and I will gladly support it, should it be effective.

Irrespective of what you think of another man's ideas on religion, it is beyond our capacity and beyond our right to decide whether his ideas are truly the yearnings of the spirit or not.

[non sequitur]

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.

I think we need a separate category for people that don't know how to spell "category".

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by non sequitur

I think we need a separate category for people that don't know how to spell "category".

Duly noted smart guy lol

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by All-American

Propose the aparatus by which you plan to separate the two and I will gladly support it, should it be effective.

Irrespective of what you think of another man's ideas on religion, it is beyond our capacity and beyond our right to decide whether his ideas are truly the yearnings of the spirit or not.

Great. Let's create two categories then we can sit and argue about whether each post should be moved to the other category. Sheesh.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Great. Let's create two categories then we can sit and argue about whether each post should be moved to the other category. Sheesh.

That was AA's point precisely, I think.

[BarbaraGordon]

I'd like to propose a new forum in which we can propose new forums.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

I'd like to propose a new forum in which we can propose new forums.

You better take that to another forum.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by creekster

That was AA's point precisely, I think.

Yeah, think of me as a less polite, less articulate version of AA.