Is NS becoming less tolerant of Religion?

[Tuub]

I think people in general are tired of religious people being hypocrites.
The religious can't help it. They have set a code of conduct they can't attain.
NS has never really been friendly to religion. It tolerates it, but certainly doesn't accept it
Also, it doesn't help that many religious posters repeat the same old and tired arguments over and over.
It gets really annoying, really quickly.

And who is NS according to you? Just you i hope.

[Idzequitch]

I think people in general are tired of religious people being hypocrites.
The religious can't help it. They have set a code of conduct they can't attain.
NS has never really been friendly to religion. It tolerates it, but certainly doesn't accept it
Also, it doesn't help that many religious posters repeat the same old and tired arguments over and over.
It gets really annoying, really quickly.

And who is NS according to you? Just you i hope.

NS is all of the posters on NS, as a whole. Especially, but not limited to, NSG.
That would be rather silly if I called myself NS.

[The Archregimancy]

What's the consequence of not believing in a God?

Frees up your Sundays.

You don't need atheism for that; you can just move to the Middle East, and have Sunday become a normal work day.

[Othelos]

Frees up your Sundays.

You don't need atheism for that; you can just move to the Middle East, and have Sunday become a normal work day.

or just get a service job

[Santeriea]

The day you start banning people because you don't like that they are anti-religious you become as bad as them.

[Zeinbrad]

What's the consequence of not believing in a God?

Frees up your Sundays.

In a place of stores (I don't know what their called, sorry) near my home the place is a barren wasteland on Sundays. Any other day it's rather active.

I do come from a religious family, but I'm agnostic and they don't care.

Though my dad does ask me to read the bible because he thinks it an interesting read.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Frees up your Sundays.

In a place of stores (I don't know what their called, sorry) near my home the place is a barren wasteland on Sundays. Any other day it's rather active.

I do come from a religious family, but I'm agnostic and they don't care.

Though my dad does ask me to read the bible because he thinks it an interesting read.

Parts of it are, to be sure.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

The day you start banning people because you don't like that they are anti-religious you become as bad as them.

Who is doing that?

[Reploid Productions]

From a moderation standpoint, I think it's less "NS isn't tolerant of religion" and more "NS has low tolerance for radical anything, period." As mentioned by other folks earlier in the thread, past polls on the forums have typically shown a slim majority claiming to be religious over non-religious, and the mod team's got a pretty diverse spread of religious and political ideologies as well.

Sure, in theory you can argue any position, no matter how abhorrent without breaking the site rules. In practice however, the more radical a position, the less likely proponents will be able to do so. Classic example; how long does the typical serious white supremacist last before running foul of the rules? Generally not very long, because their radical position tends to also teeter right over the edge with tenets about so-called degenerates or undesirables and what to do with them.

In my observations, proponents of especially radical positions, whether they are religious, political, or even fandom-related are more likely to respond to criticism and counterarguments by hurling flames and other abuse. The radical atheist that barges into the Christian discussion thread screaming about how they're horribly wrong/stupid/whatever for believing in that set of religious beliefs is just as likely to get shouted down by NSG and smacked by the mods as the radical Christian that barges into an atheist/Wiccan/Muslim/etc thread screaming how all those heathens will burn in hell for not accepting Jesus.

Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of the site's users aren't radicals of any sort, and manage for the most part to argue with one another with a thankfully minimal amount of mod smiting involved. Seriously, look at NSG's post count- upwards of 6,500,000. If just 1% of that was mod-smiting, that'd be in the ballpark of 65,000 mod action posts smiting people. I don't think we even have 10,000 posts of mods smiting users in NSG! Despite allowing discussion of the entire unholy trifecta of religion, politics, and sexuality, more than 99% of what you guys write is reasonably civil and within the rules and doesn't require moderator intervention. How awesome is that?

[Corrian]

Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of the site's users aren't radicals of any sort, and manage for the most part to argue with one another with a thankfully minimal amount of mod smiting involved. Seriously, look at NSG's post count- upwards of 6,500,000. If just 1% of that was mod-smiting, that'd be in the ballpark of 65,000 mod action posts smiting people. I don't think we even have 10,000 posts of mods smiting users in NSG! Despite allowing discussion of the entire unholy trifecta of religion, politics, and sexuality, more than 99% of what you guys write is reasonably civil and within the rules and doesn't require moderator intervention. How awesome is that?

Doesn't mean the discussions are very often productive in any way, though . Just a back and forth circle of posts going nowhere useful.

[The Five Galaxies]

Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of the site's users aren't radicals of any sort, and manage for the most part to argue with one another with a thankfully minimal amount of mod smiting involved. Seriously, look at NSG's post count- upwards of 6,500,000. If just 1% of that was mod-smiting, that'd be in the ballpark of 65,000 mod action posts smiting people. I don't think we even have 10,000 posts of mods smiting users in NSG! Despite allowing discussion of the entire unholy trifecta of religion, politics, and sexuality, more than 99% of what you guys write is reasonably civil and within the rules and doesn't require moderator intervention. How awesome is that?

Doesn't mean the discussions are very often productive in any way, though . Just a back and forth circle of posts going nowhere useful.

Ain't it so much fun though?

[Idzequitch]

Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of the site's users aren't radicals of any sort, and manage for the most part to argue with one another with a thankfully minimal amount of mod smiting involved. Seriously, look at NSG's post count- upwards of 6,500,000. If just 1% of that was mod-smiting, that'd be in the ballpark of 65,000 mod action posts smiting people. I don't think we even have 10,000 posts of mods smiting users in NSG! Despite allowing discussion of the entire unholy trifecta of religion, politics, and sexuality, more than 99% of what you guys write is reasonably civil and within the rules and doesn't require moderator intervention. How awesome is that?

Doesn't mean the discussions are very often productive in any way, though . Just a back and forth circle of posts going nowhere useful.

That's still useful in it's own way. I said earlier in this thread, the thoughts and ideas of a stranger on the internet are not very likely to change anyone's views. What they can and should do is mentally stimulate us. "Why do I believe this and not that? What makes my position stronger than his? Are there unaddressed weaknesses in my arguments?" The person who constantly has to ask him/herself these questions will likely be more sure of his beliefs, and better able to defend them. So although the debates do tend to go in circles (Many, many, many, many times) they do serve a purpose, just not the one a lot of people would like to see (Namely, convincing others that you're right and they're wrong.)

[Corrian]

That's still useful in it's own way. I said earlier in this thread, the thoughts and ideas of a stranger on the internet are not very likely to change anyone's views. What they can and should do is mentally stimulate us. "Why do I believe this and not that? What makes my position stronger than his? Are there unaddressed weaknesses in my arguments?" The person who constantly has to ask him/herself these questions will likely be more sure of his beliefs, and better able to defend them. So although the debates do tend to go in circles (Many, many, many, many times) they do serve a purpose, just not the one a lot of people would like to see (Namely, convincing others that you're right and they're wrong.)

True. And I think it is always a good thing to have an open mind period.

[Idzequitch]

That's still useful in it's own way. I said earlier in this thread, the thoughts and ideas of a stranger on the internet are not very likely to change anyone's views. What they can and should do is mentally stimulate us. "Why do I believe this and not that? What makes my position stronger than his? Are there unaddressed weaknesses in my arguments?" The person who constantly has to ask him/herself these questions will likely be more sure of his beliefs, and better able to defend them. So although the debates do tend to go in circles (Many, many, many, many times) they do serve a purpose, just not the one a lot of people would like to see (Namely, convincing others that you're right and they're wrong.)

True. And I think it is always a good thing to have an open mind period.

Agreed. The forums would be a much more interesting place if everyone wasn't so damn sure that they are right all the time.

[Steta Isles]

Freedom of speech, you could make an anti-Atheist thread right now. You can't just shut something down because you disagree with the statements used, that's called suppressing free speech.

[Idzequitch]

Freedom of speech, you could make an anti-Atheist thread right now. You can't just shut something down because you disagree with the statements used, that's called suppressing free speech.

This website is owned by Max Barry. He gets to decide what is and is not allowed here. There is no free speech here, though the mods keep it as close as they can allow under the site rules.

[Risottia]

From a moderation standpoint, I think it's less "NS isn't tolerant of religion" and more "NS has low tolerance for radical anything, period."

Basically, you're telling us we're a bunch of centrists.
As a commie, I feel that I've been discriminated against by your mod self. Cue text-walls in General and Moderation featuring my whining against the evident modly bias against non-centrists.

[Reploid Productions]

From a moderation standpoint, I think it's less "NS isn't tolerant of religion" and more "NS has low tolerance for radical anything, period."

Basically, you're telling us we're a bunch of centrists.
As a commie, I feel that I've been discriminated against by your mod self. Cue text-walls in General and Moderation featuring my whining against the evident modly bias against non-centrists.

Hey now, there's still a difference between radical communists and the non-radical variety.

[Shaggai]

Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of the site's users aren't radicals of any sort, and manage for the most part to argue with one another with a thankfully minimal amount of mod smiting involved. Seriously, look at NSG's post count- upwards of 6,500,000. If just 1% of that was mod-smiting, that'd be in the ballpark of 65,000 mod action posts smiting people. I don't think we even have 10,000 posts of mods smiting users in NSG! Despite allowing discussion of the entire unholy trifecta of religion, politics, and sexuality, more than 99% of what you guys write is reasonably civil and within the rules and doesn't require moderator intervention. How awesome is that?

Doesn't mean the discussions are very often productive in any way, though . Just a back and forth circle of posts going nowhere useful.

Still can be useful. I mean, on the level of NSG as a whole, it's not useful. On the other hand, before I came here, I hadn't actually really had to defend my beliefs pretty much at all*. NSG was useful for that. I might leave at some point, now that I've been here for over a year and a half, but it's still entertaining.

*Yes, there are places on the Internet less conducive to reasoned, intelligent discussion than NSG. And no, I'm not talking about 4chan or Youtube.

[Hurdegaryp]

Doesn't mean the discussions are very often productive in any way, though . Just a back and forth circle of posts going nowhere useful.

Still can be useful. I mean, on the level of NSG as a whole, it's not useful. On the other hand, before I came here, I hadn't actually really had to defend my beliefs pretty much at all*. NSG was useful for that. I might leave at some point, now that I've been here for over a year and a half, but it's still entertaining.

*Yes, there are places on the Internet less conducive to reasoned, intelligent discussion than NSG. And no, I'm not talking about 4chan or Youtube.

There's always a soft spot for the Ancient Ones in my heart.

[The New Sea Territory]

From a moderation standpoint, I think it's less "NS isn't tolerant of religion" and more "NS has low tolerance for radical anything, period."

Basically, you're telling us we're a bunch of centrists.
As a commie, I feel that I've been discriminated against by your mod self. Cue text-walls in General and Moderation featuring my whining against the evident modly bias against non-centrists.

I think really radical rightists, Nazis and radical religious posters are ones that aren't tolerated. Plenty of communists and anarchists run free.

[Valkalan]

Let us assume that today the sun is shining and the sky is blue. If Mike insists that the sky is red, would you be offended? Probably not. Mike's claim is patently absurd.

Why then must religious people feel offended by criticism of their beliefs? Could it be that under all of those pretenses of faith, that there exists an element of insecurity? The divine beings of whom the world's religions profess ad nauseum never speak for themselves. Instead, men of questionable backgrounds place words in the mouth of god.

Is NS less tolerant of religion? There exist no limitation on the religious community's ability to express their views. Therefore I would say that NS is not in any way intolerant of religion. Rather, it is the religious community that is sensitive to criticism.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I would like to think no, it's not less tolerant.

The religious opinions of some people are becoming more and more radical though.

[Vazdaria]

From a moderation standpoint, I think it's less "NS isn't tolerant of religion" and more "NS has low tolerance for radical anything, period." As mentioned by other folks earlier in the thread, past polls on the forums have typically shown a slim majority claiming to be religious over non-religious, and the mod team's got a pretty diverse spread of religious and political ideologies as well.

Sure, in theory you can argue any position, no matter how abhorrent without breaking the site rules. In practice however, the more radical a position, the less likely proponents will be able to do so. Classic example; how long does the typical serious white supremacist last before running foul of the rules? Generally not very long, because their radical position tends to also teeter right over the edge with tenets about so-called degenerates or undesirables and what to do with them.

In my observations, proponents of especially radical positions, whether they are religious, political, or even fandom-related are more likely to respond to criticism and counterarguments by hurling flames and other abuse. The radical atheist that barges into the Christian discussion thread screaming about how they're horribly wrong/stupid/whatever for believing in that set of religious beliefs is just as likely to get shouted down by NSG and smacked by the mods as the radical Christian that barges into an atheist/Wiccan/Muslim/etc thread screaming how all those heathens will burn in hell for not accepting Jesus.

Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of the site's users aren't radicals of any sort, and manage for the most part to argue with one another with a thankfully minimal amount of mod smiting involved. Seriously, look at NSG's post count- upwards of 6,500,000. If just 1% of that was mod-smiting, that'd be in the ballpark of 65,000 mod action posts smiting people. I don't think we even have 10,000 posts of mods smiting users in NSG! Despite allowing discussion of the entire unholy trifecta of religion, politics, and sexuality, more than 99% of what you guys write is reasonably civil and within the rules and doesn't require moderator intervention. How awesome is that?

NSG:where radicals can't express their views.

[Reploid Productions]

From a moderation standpoint, I think it's less "NS isn't tolerant of religion" and more "NS has low tolerance for radical anything, period." As mentioned by other folks earlier in the thread, past polls on the forums have typically shown a slim majority claiming to be religious over non-religious, and the mod team's got a pretty diverse spread of religious and political ideologies as well.

Sure, in theory you can argue any position, no matter how abhorrent without breaking the site rules. In practice however, the more radical a position, the less likely proponents will be able to do so. Classic example; how long does the typical serious white supremacist last before running foul of the rules? Generally not very long, because their radical position tends to also teeter right over the edge with tenets about so-called degenerates or undesirables and what to do with them.

In my observations, proponents of especially radical positions, whether they are religious, political, or even fandom-related are more likely to respond to criticism and counterarguments by hurling flames and other abuse. The radical atheist that barges into the Christian discussion thread screaming about how they're horribly wrong/stupid/whatever for believing in that set of religious beliefs is just as likely to get shouted down by NSG and smacked by the mods as the radical Christian that barges into an atheist/Wiccan/Muslim/etc thread screaming how all those heathens will burn in hell for not accepting Jesus.

Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of the site's users aren't radicals of any sort, and manage for the most part to argue with one another with a thankfully minimal amount of mod smiting involved. Seriously, look at NSG's post count- upwards of 6,500,000. If just 1% of that was mod-smiting, that'd be in the ballpark of 65,000 mod action posts smiting people. I don't think we even have 10,000 posts of mods smiting users in NSG! Despite allowing discussion of the entire unholy trifecta of religion, politics, and sexuality, more than 99% of what you guys write is reasonably civil and within the rules and doesn't require moderator intervention. How awesome is that?

NSG:where radicals can't express their views.

In theory, they can. Not our fault if in practice they tend to prove unable to actually do so.