New Faith-Based Threads Rule = Mormon NON-Discussions Board

[_Infymus]

Here is what I'll do.

When I post replies to messages, I will post at the top of each one, that it is a FAITH BASED post, and that the Cult Lapdogs of MDB are not allowed to oppose it, but must create a NEW message in the Terrestrial Forum.

[_Scottie]

I'll re-post what I said in the sticky...

Say someone creates a thread in the Celestial about whether the man who defended Jesus on the cross will be saved in Heaven, even in his sins.

For the rest of this thread, the assumption that the Bible is true, God exists and there is a Heaven are not up for debate. These are the parameters laid down by the OP.

Feel free to discuss what a sin is, how repentance works, does Christ have that much power to forgive.

We just don't want the thread to derail into a "does God even exist" or "the Bible is just a bunch of myths" thread every time an issue is raised. If you feel you must question whether God exists, or the Bible is true start a new thread in the Terrestrial.

Make sense?

[_Moniker]

I like the idea of thread originators setting parameters of their threads if they want to in Celestial. For instance if someone wants to talk about certain doctrine and whether a Prophet said this or that it is NOT helpful (or constructive) for someone to repeatedly come in the thread and say, essentially, "God is not real, truth by assertion is false, yadda yadda yadda". This happens ALL the time. People can discuss the CONCEPT of faith, religion, God without others repeatedly being told God is false.

Hell, I have to REPEATEDLY tell people on this board I do NOT believe in God -- they assume I do (I suppose) because I can talk about the concept. It's infuriating.

[_skippy the dead]

Does Shades' clarification help things?

No.

Agreed.

Here's my problem with what Shades wrote:

Allow me to clarify: Opposing views are just as allowable now as they ever were. The only difference is that a thread starter may now set down certain parameters for his/her own thread.

In other words, if someone posts his or her testimony of Christ or the divine calling of Joseph Smith, you can't challenge that testimony in the thread itself. You are perfectly free to challenge everything he or she said, but you'll merely have to start a new thread about it in the Terrestrial Forum is all. Title it something like, "Challenge to ___'s testimony in the Celestial Forum" or something like that.

So you're still free to say whatever you want. Thread starters in the Celestial Forum are simply allowed a little more leeway to determine the venue is all.

This isn't a freakin' testimony board. If you want to discuss Joseph Smith's divine calling, you should be prepared for people to express why they think he did not have one. Such opinions in the Celestial forum should be free from vulgarity and personal attacks, but why the hell wouldn't we allow them to be expressed in the thread? To protect someone's feelings? Not good enough.

This "prior restraint" just sits badly with me. It needs to be eliminated. I'm not concerned whether or not anybody has availed themselves of this restriction yet - the very existence of the rule is wrong and goes against what this board has stood for.

[_KimberlyAnn]

I'll re-post what I said in the sticky...

Say someone creates a thread in the Celestial about whether the man who defended Jesus on the cross will be saved in Heaven, even in his sins.

For the rest of this thread, the assumption that the Bible is true, God exists and there is a Heaven are not up for debate. These are the parameters laid down by the OP.

Feel free to discuss what a sin is, how repentance works, does Christ have that much power to forgive.

We just don't want the thread to derail into a "does God even exist" or "the Bible is just a bunch of myths" thread every time an issue is raised. If you feel you must question whether God exists, or the Bible is true start a new thread in the Terrestrial.

Make sense?

I'll repost my response to you that I made in the sticky. :)

You know, if the posts don't cross the boundaries of propriety in the Celestial forum, they should be allowed to stay. It's fairly simple to ignore comments. Just don't respond to them! Preventing folks from making them in the first place is unnecessary.

Also, you're understating the reach of the new rule. Liz originally said that, in the case of a "Faith Based" thread, the OP's assertions would be accepted as true. Those assertions cannot be questioned in that thread. That is far more reaching that just asking that folks not question the existence of God. It's out and out censorship imposed by the originator of a thread.

KA

[_Scottie]

This isn't a freakin' testimony board. If you want to discuss Joseph Smith's divine calling, you should be prepared for people to express why they think he did not have one. Such opinions in the Celestial forum should be free from vulgarity and personal attacks, but why the hell wouldn't we allow them to be expressed in the thread? To protect someone's feelings? Not good enough.

This "prior restraint" just sits badly with me. It needs to be eliminated. I'm not concerned whether or not anybody has availed themselves of this restriction yet - the very existence of the rule is wrong and goes against what this board has stood for.

Skippy, how does it further dialog if every time Joseph Smith is brought up, it eventually ends up with thread defending whether Joseph Smith was a prophet or not??

I can definitely see the value is setting a parameter that Joseph Smith was a prophet in some instances.

It's no different than threads devolving into bearing testimony at MAD. Do you know how infuriating that is?

[_Yoda]

This should make Nehor and Bourne ecstatic. They can now sit and write happy messages about how everything is wonderful and perfect in their closed-in world of the Cult.

MDB started as a refuge for those kicked out of FAIR/MAD. On the Mormon Curtain I purposefully do not direct anyone to this site who is looking to recover from Mormonism. Look at this place, mods who are all Mormon, Lapdog Cult members who attack anyone who says anything contradictory about their Cult - and they do so by calling names and making kindergarten statements such as "Have your mommy change your diaper", etc, etc.

No, I think it's par for the course here on MDB. It is moving more and more to a pro-Mormon site to discuss only Mormonism. I'm pretty sure the Cult members here (including the Moderators) will move this site into another MAD board.

WTF are you talking about? I am the only active Mormon Mod on the moderating team. Everyone else is either ex-Mo or never-Mo.

And, for the record, this Faith Based Rule was NOT my original idea! Ironically, the suggestion for the Faith Based Thread came from Marg, a proclaimed atheist!

Take a look here:

http://mormondiscussions.com/discuss/vi ... 055#140055

Here is what I'll do.

When I post replies to messages, I will post at the top of each one, that it is a FAITH BASED post, and that the Cult Lapdogs of MDB are not allowed to oppose it, but must create a NEW message in the Terrestrial Forum.

If you can actually create a post that doesn't involve profanity and vulgarity, then go for it. Such a thread, as you described, would be perfectly acceptable under the Faith Based rule.

[_Jason Bourne]

This should make Nehor and Bourne ecstatic.

Read this dude-Kiss my ass. You are the one who needs protection imbecile. Who is the one who refuses to respond to my posts. You are the one who makes asinine accusations and then fail to back it up.

They can now sit and write happy messages about how everything is wonderful and perfect in their closed-in world of the Cult.

If you had an IQ more the negative 23 you would know that I defend when there is reason to defend and I critique when there is reason to critique. So stop you false accusations of me jerk off.

MDB started as a refuge for those kicked out of FAIR/MAD. On the Mormon Curtain I purposefully do not direct anyone to this site who is looking to recover from Mormonism. Look at this place, mods who are all Mormon, Lapdog Cult members who attack anyone who says anything contradictory about their Cult - and they do so by calling names and making kindergarten statements such as "Have your mommy change your diaper", etc, etc.

I respond in like kind. I slam you when you slam me first. You call me names and rarely offer substance to the debate. In the thread where I said what you said I gave an initial reasonable response to our criticism. You were the one to come back and start calling me names. You want civil discussion clean up your own style. If you really cannot see that you are at the root of this then you really do have serious issues or you really are sadly intellectually flawed.

That said I agree with you Kimberly and am opposed to this new move here.

[_Yoda]

I like the idea of thread originators setting parameters of their threads if they want to in Celestial. For instance if someone wants to talk about certain doctrine and whether a Prophet said this or that it is NOT helpful (or constructive) for someone to repeatedly come in the thread and say, essentially, "God is not real, truth by assertion is false, yadda yadda yadda". This happens ALL the time. People can discuss the CONCEPT of faith, religion, God without others repeatedly being told God is false.

Hell, I have to REPEATEDLY tell people on this board I do NOT believe in God -- they assume I do (I suppose) because I can talk about the concept. It's infuriating.

Exactly, Moniker! That's all we were trying to do here.

[_Scottie]

I'll re-post what I said in the sticky...

Say someone creates a thread in the Celestial about whether the man who defended Jesus on the cross will be saved in Heaven, even in his sins.

For the rest of this thread, the assumption that the Bible is true, God exists and there is a Heaven are not up for debate. These are the parameters laid down by the OP.

Feel free to discuss what a sin is, how repentance works, does Christ have that much power to forgive.

We just don't want the thread to derail into a "does God even exist" or "the Bible is just a bunch of myths" thread every time an issue is raised. If you feel you must question whether God exists, or the Bible is true start a new thread in the Terrestrial.

Make sense?

I'll repost my response to you that I made in the sticky. :)

You know, if the posts don't cross the boundaries of propriety in the Celestial forum, they should be allowed to stay. It's fairly simple to ignore comments. Just don't respond to them! Preventing folks from making them in the first place is unnecessary.

Also, you're understating the reach of the new rule. Liz originally said that, in the case of a "Faith Based" thread, the OP's assertions would be accepted as true. Those assertions cannot be questioned in that thread. That is far more reaching that just asking that folks not question the existence of God. It's out and out censorship imposed by the originator of a thread.

KA

If you feel a strong urge to argue the existance of God in a thread where the OP has asked that the existance of God is an assumed truth, don't participate. If your only argument is to deny God's existance, how is that helping to foster good debate??

I honestly believe this rule will help to further good dialog.