Any Christians?

[Niki27]

is our thread gonna get closed because of the new guidelines?

 

maybe the next one should be "the fish thread"

 

...

 

after all the fish IS the secret sign of the christians...

 

 

QUOTE FROM NEW FORUM RULES

Relating to this, avoid spreading propaganda of any organizations, movements,

religions or political parties. This includes using avatars and signatures,

other symbols, texts and links to websites, to advertise principles related to

such groups.

 

No the thread isn't gonna be closed, relax

As I've explained before in the politics thread, and here, and as Babs said in the updated guidelines thread, we don't mind the threads themselves at all. But we ask people not to use religious/political signatures or avatars.

The reason is that the MFC is a pluricultural forum, many different beliefs and opinions coexist here. When someone strongly disagrees with or is offended by what's being said in a thread, they can chose not to read it, but they cannot chose not to see the signatures and avies cause these show up in all threads.

 

We have similar "laws" in many european countries: freedom of religion and speech is of course granted, but people are asked not to display their beliefs too openly. Which means, for example, that a woman cannot go to work wearing a burka, nor a shirt with the Christ on it. It's not censure, it's just a matter of respect towards those who don't share your beliefs: you don't force your convictions upon them.

 

Besides, what would happen if someone decided to use a satanist/extreme right avie, for example? I'm sure many people would be shocked, me first, and would feel very uncomfy. But if we allow christian avatars, then we'd have to allow everything else, do you know what I mean? We're only trying to keep the peace on the MFC, really. If you disagree, feel free to PM me, or answer in the guidelines update thread, we're always opened to discussion.

[Soaring Simpson]

is our thread gonna get closed because of the new guidelines?

 

Well, that's what it says- all the links to Christian bands, discussions of how to act- but it's hard to believe that's what it means.

 

And there's the politics thread, and the Any Atheists, the Vegetarians... probably lots more

[racinghorse83]

whoa....

 

i guess its so people dont get upset.

[nico_collard]

Nope! I was just curious if religion played a role in other peoples' choices. Not just for President or whatever, but like... senator, prime minister, what have you.

 

It does me. But I think that's mostly because I'm against abortion, and usually the candidate against abortion is Christian. So... yahhh.

 

Oooh, righto then... for me, it's a bit difficult to consider a candidate's religion in politics cause they don't bring up religion and their beliefs much here... actually, the only time I've ever heard of religion being brought up in any sort of political debate is when the federal government was talking about legalising the abortion pill... and it was only brought up by one of the members of the coalition (John Howard's crew ) - he said he wouldn't be voting for it cause he was Catholic and didn't agree with it... one of the only times I agreed with him too...

 

In Oz they like to keep religion and politics right away from each other, so I guess it's more a question for Americans...

 

Hi friends wot u bin up 2? cant wait til sun, im acolyte! and next sat there is a meating for christians in peterbough. Yahoo!

 

Ooooh! Exciting! Congratulations!

 

No the thread isn't gonna be closed, relax

As I've explained before in the politics thread, and here, and as Babs said in the updated guidelines thread, we don't mind the threads themselves at all. But we ask people not to use religious/political signatures or avatars.

The reason is that the MFC is a pluricultural forum, many different beliefs and opinions coexist here. When someone strongly disagrees with or is offended by what's being said in a thread, they can chose not to read it, but they cannot chose not to see the signatures and avies cause these show up in all threads.

 

We have similar "laws" in many european countries: freedom of religion and speech is of course granted, but people are asked not to display their beliefs too openly. Which means, for example, that a woman cannot go to work wearing a burka, nor a shirt with the Christ on it. It's not censure, it's just a matter of respect towards those who don't share your beliefs: you don't force your convictions upon them.

 

Besides, what would happen if someone decided to use a satanist/extreme right avie, for example? I'm sure many people would be shocked, me first, and would feel very uncomfy. But if we allow christian avatars, then we'd have to allow everything else, do you know what I mean? We're only trying to keep the peace on the MFC, really. If you disagree, feel free to PM me, or answer in the guidelines update thread, we're always opened to discussion.

 

I hate to be pedantic, but you can turn sigs off... even though a lot of people like seeing them...

 

Bear with me, I agree with you (to a point), but I also feel like it's impinging on our right to free speech...

 

I see avatars and sigs as being an extension of your personality and what you like. As I said in the politics thread (I actually wasn't kidding), I don't like seeing peoples sigs that have half a dozen Mika shows in them, but I choose to ignore them. My point is, I can't understand why people can't just ignore an avatar or sig. It's not that difficult. The way I see it is it's sort of like taking people's responsibilities away from them - it's almost like you're mothering them and treating them like they can't think for themselves.

 

I see your point about offending people, but I also don't see how an avatar is forcing your beliefs on other people (I had Joan of Arc as my avatar for a while, no-one complained about that)... of course it would be totally different if we went into other threads and started preaching the Bible, but we keep it in the thread.

 

Interestingly though, I've had people ask if I could change my sig and avatar (my avatar was of Pennywise the clown in IT, and he looked a wee bit cranky), and Deb asked me to change my sig cause it had part of a fan fic I was writing... granted, it was Mika and Martin, but it wasn't of anything I thought was offensive (admittedly, if they saw my sig, I'd be embarrassed). The only reason I changed it was because Deb asked nicely.

 

May I ask why the mods decided to add this to the guidelines? As far as I know, Jess and Amanda haven't had anyone complain about their avatars before. I'm also certain that no-one has complained about Liz's (Rainbow Sky's) sigs before. I just don't quite understand where this has come from.

[Niki27]

Nico, I posted in the Christians that some members didn't like these avies long before we added the guideline. Remember not everybody is confident enough to jump into a thread and rant about something they don't like especially when it's a touchy subject like religion...

 

Someone had an avie saying "Jesus is the light" or "the life", I don't remember exactly what it said... but it's close to preaching, imo.

 

I voted in favour of this guideline because I knew if we allowed these, it would be an open door to more. Some people even suggested opening a satanist thread and use satanist siggies as a response to the christians. We wanted to enforce some rules to prevent fights and take-the-piss-reactions to spiral out of control. As I said, I agree christians and democrats are mainstream, and therefore accepted by a majority of people but what if someone started promoting scientology or more radical currents? Have you seen what happened when a girl dared mention she believed in creationism? She was jumped onto. If we allowed christian and democrat siggies/avies, why not a Hamas or an Hesbollah one? These are after all mainstream parties in their country. But how long would it take to have an open war on MFC then? Freedom of speech is sthg I've always defended BUT as they say your freedom stops where the others' starts.

 

Anyway, and now I'm not speaking as a mod but as a member. I was brought up in a very catholic way, spent my hols working in hospitals in Lourdes as a teen helping handicapped people and stuff. But honestly, I was shocked by this thread, and even more by the avies and sigs because they represent everything I hate about religion and everything that made me turn my back to catholicism: rituals, icons,public display and preaching. (I also really disliked your Joan of Arc siggie because I strongly disagree with the idea of a warlord being considered a saint btw ) Anyway what I mean is that christianity is not about icons, it's about tolerance and respect and I think understanding that some members don't want to see religious avies/siggies and respecting that would be a christian behaviour.

[Soaring Simpson]

Nico Collard and NIk27, I sort of agree and sort of disagree with both of you.

 

I think the new guideline promotes intolerance, in that it panders to the sensibilities of people who can't bear to see people supporting different views from their own. I would not like to see a satanist thread or pentangle(?) avatars, but still don't see that as a reason to prevent it. If a lot of people supported such threads, it's highly undemocratic to ban them, and if few did, the thread would fade away.

 

And most people in the UK are appalled by the laws in France etc that certainly do restrict freedom of speech and even freedom to dress how you want.

 

On the other hand, I wouldn't have a "Christian" avatar or slogan myself for the reasons Nik gives and find other "preachy" ones- like the gay pride one- very irritating. (I feel I have to add "though I'm in favour of gay pride", I just feel like I'm being buttonholed). But it's all so subjective. You probably haven't even noticed that one, where it wouln't have occurred to me that Joan of Arc or list of concerts attended could be a problem. (I've even got a concert list myself- sorry NC, though not quite sorry enough to remove it). This might create problems enforcing the rule. (Which as I've said, does not mean exactly what it says anyway- it SAYS this whole thread and others like it are banned.)

 

Also, as MFC is so international, mods would have a massive problem knowing, especially with political parties, which organisations promote offensive views, such as racism or homophobia. This is a point in favour of the guideline, though I don't think it's really a good enough one, as other members from the same part of the world could alert the mods, in the unlikely event of it happening.

 

If the mods want to promote tolerance, they should be encouraging people to learn to live with the existance of ideas that they don't share and might actively oppose. And I hope they dealt firmly with the people who jumped on the girl who supported creationism.

[Niki27]

Good points, Soaring Simpson. I agree it all is very subjective, and that mods should - in an ideal world - let people discuss everything and hope they'll behave and will be tolerant, and encourage tolerance. But it's no ideal world, and I'm sorry, but we are not people's parents

 

As for the democracy concept, remember there's no such thing as real democracy. In every country, there are laws which are in place for the wellbeing of the community as a whole and which somehow restrict individual liberties. Same here. If we had to be 100% democratic, then we'd have to let all these Mika-haters come here and post Mika's a ***** in the name of freedom of speech, we'd also have to allow commercial spamming because there's nothing offending about it after all. Etc etc.

I have to disagree tho, when I hear Mandi say the MFC is heavily moderated. I think people are are much more free here than on most forums. As I said, try to go on a christian forum and open a thread about mika and let me know what the reactions there would be:naughty:

 

Like I said earlier, I don't see any problem with the guideline's wording. If we had an hidden agenda and wanted to use it to close religious threads, don't you think we'd have done so already? Besides, only a tiny tiny minority of members actually reacted to it and explained why they disagreed. From experience, when a lot of members don't like a guideline because they judge it unfair, they make sure to let us know quite fast I therefore guess a majority agrees with it, and it's the closest thing to a democracy we can have.

[nico_collard]

Nico Collard and NIk27, I sort of agree and sort of disagree with both of you.

 

I think the new guideline promotes intolerance, in that it panders to the sensibilities of people who can't bear to see people supporting different views from their own. I would not like to see a satanist thread or pentangle(?) avatars, but still don't see that as a reason to prevent it. If a lot of people supported such threads, it's highly undemocratic to ban them, and if few did, the thread would fade away.

 

And most people in the UK are appalled by the laws in France etc that certainly do restrict freedom of speech and even freedom to dress how you want.

 

On the other hand, I wouldn't have a "Christian" avatar or slogan myself for the reasons Nik gives and find other "preachy" ones- like the gay pride one- very irritating. (I feel I have to add "though I'm in favour of gay pride", I just feel like I'm being buttonholed). But it's all so subjective. You probably haven't even noticed that one, where it wouln't have occurred to me that Joan of Arc or list of concerts attended could be a problem. (I've even got a concert list myself- sorry NC, though not quite sorry enough to remove it). This might create problems enforcing the rule. (Which as I've said, does not mean exactly what it says anyway- it SAYS this whole thread and others like it are banned.)

 

Also, as MFC is so international, mods would have a massive problem knowing, especially with political parties, which organisations promote offensive views, such as racism or homophobia. This is a point in favour of the guideline, though I don't think it's really a good enough one, as other members from the same part of the world could alert the mods, in the unlikely event of it happening.

 

If the mods want to promote tolerance, they should be encouraging people to learn to live with the existance of ideas that they don't share and might actively oppose. And I hope they dealt firmly with the people who jumped on the girl who supported creationism.

 

Don't apologise! My only issue with it is cause Mika hasn't been back here in over a year and has been most places... I'm just a whinging Aussie, it's all!

 

Your last paragraph I totally agree with... I don't agree with the whole atheism (sp?) thread, but I ignore it... actually that's a lie... I have been in there and posted once, but seeing as I've already put across my opinion on the whole God/no God thing, it's sort of strange me posting in there... I think people need to learn to tolerate others beliefs and whatever, cause we're not always going to have mods to tell people to pull their heads in...

 

I guess everything comes down to how they are interpreted...

[Soaring Simpson]

Just to clarify, my concern has never been that you're going to close the Any Christians/ politics/ vegetarians etc threads. (If you've already grasped this, sorry, I'm genuinely unsure). And I don't suspect a hidden agenda.

 

It's just that I can imagine a situation in future where you say to someone "the rule clearly states that religious/political links are banned and that's not just in siggies/avatars so you can't have a satanist thread or praise Hamas or whatever, sorry" and they say, "Well what about the Any Christians/ politics/ vegetarians etc threads and the gay pride siggie- the rule clearly bans them too, but you haven't- Are you prejudiced?"

 

Incidentally, I notice Mika isn't above a spot of sloganeering. Though only in the Old Pics thread. Do you think this is significant? I must admit I hope not.

[happikali]

knock knock ...

Hiya !

I haven't posted in this thread before .... also I have never posted in a political thread.

I really feel to say just one thing .... & this is me as a member & a mod ... 'cos I feel that it's important for me to walk the talk ...

 

I honestly feel that I would prefer no politics or religion threads in this forum ... NOT because I have my head in the sand ... 'cos I DON'T .... it's just that IMO ... these issues are SOOOO personal .... hhhhmmm , there is more I could say, but for now .... this is all I can find words for ....

[nico_collard]

Oooops! Forgot to quote you!

 

Nico, I posted in the Christians that some members didn't like these avies long before we added the guideline. Remember not everybody is confident enough to jump into a thread and rant about something they don't like especially when it's a touchy subject like religion...

 

Someone had an avie saying "Jesus is the light" or "the life", I don't remember exactly what it said... but it's close to preaching, imo.

 

I voted in favour of this guideline because I knew if we allowed these, it would be an open door to more. Some people even suggested opening a satanist thread and use satanist siggies as a response to the christians. We wanted to enforce some rules to prevent fights and take-the-piss-reactions to spiral out of control. As I said, I agree christians and democrats are mainstream, and therefore accepted by a majority of people but what if someone started promoting scientology or more radical currents? Have you seen what happened when a girl dared mention she believed in creationism? She was jumped onto. If we allowed christian and democrat siggies/avies, why not a Hamas or an Hesbollah one? These are after all mainstream parties in their country. But how long would it take to have an open war on MFC then? Freedom of speech is sthg I've always defended BUT as they say your freedom stops where the others' starts.

 

Anyway, and now I'm not speaking as a mod but as a member. I was brought up in a very catholic way, spent my hols working in hospitals in Lourdes as a teen helping handicapped people and stuff. But honestly, I was shocked by this thread, and even more by the avies and sigs because they represent everything I hate about religion and everything that made me turn my back to catholicism: rituals, icons,public display and preaching. (I also really disliked your Joan of Arc siggie because I strongly disagree with the idea of a warlord being considered a saint btw ) Anyway what I mean is that christianity is not about icons, it's about tolerance and respect and I think understanding that some members don't want to see religious avies/siggies and respecting that would be a christian behaviour.

 

I remember you saying that, although it's more a cultural thing. Europeans might be uncomfortable with it, but Americans, and (to a lesser extent) Aussies aren't. It difdicult to remmber other cultures when you hide out in your own thread for months...

 

I know the sort of avvies you're talking about, but I think some of the avies weren't as obvious as that... even I had to think about a couple of them.

 

The thing is, we're going to get people trying to take the piss out of us (Sydney people were doing it for months before World Youth Day, but when it was on they were mostly patting themselves on the back and saying what a good job they were doing). If someone really wants to start a satanist thread, I don't give a sh!t. I can't speak for the other girls of course, but I would just ignore it (just like I ignore all the fangirly threads around here).

 

If you disliked my avvie, all you had to was ask nicely and I might have changed it (I have done it before after all). I personally don't see her as a warlord.. to me, she encouraged her country to stand up and defend themselves. It wasn't as if she was going out and starting a war without justification (that was England's job ). Anyway, I put her in my sig because she was my chosen saint for my confirmation (we were talking about confirmation saints at the time), so I chose to put her there.

 

May I ask if the person/people who jumped on the poor girl were at least warned? I think people are generally open minded, but when it comes to religion, they feel it's their right to attack it if they don't believe in it.

 

I agree, I wouldn't have been game enough to talk about religion with other people until a few months ago (walking around with thousands of very religious people tends to change your point of view on religion pretty quick!)

 

Anyways, this thread has been around for ages... if it was possibly offensive to others, then why was it not closed, or why didn't the other mods talk to Jo about it? Why leave it when, as you've pointed out, it's a Mika forum?

 

 

 

I'm not trying to cause a fight, but I'm just trying to really understand the point of view the mods are coming from...

[nico_collard]

knock knock ...

Hiya !

I haven't posted in this thread before .... also I have never posted in a political thread.

I really feel to say just one thing .... & this is me as a member & a mod ... 'cos I feel that it's important for me to walk the talk ...

 

I honestly feel that I would prefer no politics or religion threads in this forum ... NOT because I have my head in the sand ... 'cos I DON'T .... it's just that IMO ... these issues are SOOOO personal .... hhhhmmm , there is more I could say, but for now .... this is all I can find words for ....

Fair enough... everyone's welcome here nad are welcome to share their opinions...

 

 

I really think it's time to point out my last bit... if having a religious thread is such a problem, why leave the thread as it is?

[nico_collard]

I just went and checked the first post!

 

 

Happy birthday to the Christians thread! 1 year old today!

 

 

 

 

Okay, I'll go hide again...

[nico_collard]

Yes, I'm post whoring...

 

 

 

It's here if anyone wants to take it...

 

 

 

 

And if anyone has a problem with it, take it up with Bono! He's the one who came up with it!

[Soaring Simpson]

It wasn't as if she was going out and starting a war without justification (that was England's job ).

 

Actually, it was France's. They conquered England in 1066 and we were just getting rid of them. That "we" is a bit wobbly too- the ruling classes still were French and didn't Anglicise for another couple of centuries.

 

It just seems like it was the other way, because many of the sensible French governing classes (like the Welsh Henry Tudor and the Scottish James I/VI later on) immediately recognised England as a much nicer place to live and started a powerful court there. Which later on wanted to split off.

[Niki27]

Well, Nico, I disliked your siggie but it was a strictly personal opinion about Joan of Arc, I'd also dislike Tokyo Hotels siggies because their music makes me cringe, but hey, it would not be really fair to start whining about them you know? Moreover, as an ex mod, I'm sure you know that when you ask sthg - even gently and mentioning you speak as a member -, people tend to think you're giving an order, so it's always difficult

 

As for the thread, although I've spoken my mind and said what I thought of it when it was created, I do believe that everything can be discussed, I militated for sexuality being an open subject on this forum in the past, so why not religion? But again, I'd rather have these matters confined to threads and not being displayed in siggies and avatars. One can think Mika's gay and state it, for example, it's their opinion and I respect it, but i would feel uncomfy with a "Mika is gay" avie or a "Mika and Martin are sexual partners" siggie, see what I mean?

 

I posted when the girl was attacked about her creationist views and if I recall correctly, I PMed her to see if everything was ok. I admit I don't remember what I said exactly tho, I'm growing old and forgetful But again, these are touchy subjects and everything is subjective. I firmly oppose creationism for example, so it's hard for me to tell people who oppose it to leave it, all I can do is ask them to do it in a nicer way.

[Christine]

May I ask if the person/people who jumped on the poor girl were at least warned? I think people are generally open minded, but when it comes to religion, they feel it's their right to attack it if they don't believe in it.

 

I know I didn't warn anyone because the person in question repeatedly provoked other posters by insisting that evolutionary theory has no scientific basis to the point where it was unrealistic to expect anyone to ignore her. The topic of the thread was atheists (not religion or even atheism per se) and the comments were related to evolutionary theory, not creationism. Evolutionary theory has absolutely nothing to do with religious beliefs.

 

I do not want to see MFC replete with satanist or other piss-taking threads. Yes we can all ignore it in theory, but MFC is not simply a platform for every person with a computer and an internet connection to exercise their rights of free speech. It's a Mika fan club and while the members certainly share interests that go beyond Mika there still exists a certain culture that would be eroded if absolutely anything goes.

 

If I walked into MFC for the first time and noticed half a dozen people in a Mika related thread with Jesus is the Light in their avatars, I seriously would have turned around and never come back. There is very little I come across on the internet that I find truly offensive and certainly supporting Christianity is not one of those things.

 

But it is still offputting and I can't imagine that the Christians in this thread wouldn't find it equally offputting if their first exposure to MFC culture was that we were all a bunch of satanists or more accurately were mocking other members' religious beliefs by having such things in our avatars.

[Soaring Simpson]

Well if it was in the Atheists thread, that's different (I posted the same comment as NC) Despite sharing their beliefs, I wasn't impressed by the number of Christians that popped up in that thread and said so- here- at the time.

 

As to the avatars, I would have been put off if the first thing I saw was an outbreak of SAtanism or a mocking of others' beliefs. But that would be a good thing, as it would have shown me that MFC wasn't the place for me without too much of my time being wasted.

 

Mocking other people's beliefs/ political opinions should be banned. But when I said I would not object to a Satanist thread I meant it. Assuming it did not breach other guidelines.

 

Incidentally, the theory of evolution was initially welcomed and supported by almost all Christians, even the most biblially rigourous. It was only much later, after people started saying it "proved" there was no God (which I've certainly heard tediously often), that the Creationist movements sprang up.

[Christine]

Well if it was in the Atheists thread, that's different (I posted the same comment as NC) Despite sharing their beliefs, I wasn't impressed by the number of Christians that popped up in that thread and said so- here- at the time.

 

As a participant in that thread I didn't see any problem with Christians voicing their opinions. As a mod however it was worrisome because it is a potential source of problems.

 

The only actual problem I saw related to that thread is the subsequent accusation in several other threads that there have been "fights" in the atheist thread. There was nothing approaching a fight in that discussion and it annoys me when so many people on MFC characterize differences of opinions as fights, whatever the topic. Creating drama where none exists and implying that we are unable to have civilized discussions about controversial issues.

 

I do not want to spend all my time here simply discussing the colour of Mika's shoes and I know there are others who feel the same way. I try to engage only those other people in debate because I realize not everyone enjoys it. But if you willingly jump into a debate or you are simply an observer, do not cry foul when things are said that you don't agree with. No one is forcing anyone into threads clearly marked "Atheists" or "Christians".

 

Incidentally, the theory of evolution was initially welcomed and supported by almost all Christians, even the most biblially rigourous. It was only much later, after people started saying it "proved" there was no God (which I've certainly heard tediously often), that the Creationist movements sprang up.

 

That is why I said that evolutionary theory has nothing to do with religious beliefs. I don't think I've ever encountered anyone in real life who disavows evolutionary theory, atheist, Christian or otherwise.

[Soaring Simpson]

As a participant in that thread I didn't see any problem with Christians voicing their opinions. As a mod however it was worrisome because it is a potential source of problems... No one is forcing anyone into threads clearly marked "Atheists" or "Christians".

 

As usaul, I half agree. Discussion is good. I wouldn't have called Any Atheists a fight either. But (to be honest) I wasn't sure that discussion was what I was seeing- it seemed more like evangelism, at some points. And there is a place for threads where people with the same views encourage each other, without having to permanently defend those views. Like the Any Christians.

 

LIke you I enjoy the variety and depth of the discussions on here. I don't want to see them curtailed.

 

That is why I said that evolutionary theory has nothing to do with religious beliefs. I don't think I've ever encountered anyone in real life who disavows evolutionary theory, atheist, Christian or otherwise.

 

I certainly have met a few who believe in creationism* (and I'm a bit surprised you haven't), though I've met a great many more who've told me Darwin "disproved" Christianity. The one's a knee jerk reaction to the other in most cases- "then Darwin's talking rubbish"

 

*ie, 7 days, no evolution, earth only a few thousand years old, as opposed to the idea that God created the earth, it wasn't an accident, which I and most Christians and (I think) other religions do believe.

[Niki27]

Incidentally, the theory of evolution was initially welcomed and supported by almost all Christians, even the most biblially rigourous. It was only much later, after people started saying it "proved" there was no God (which I've certainly heard tediously often), that the Creationist movements sprang up.

 

I may be wrong but if I remember my history lessons properly, Darwin didnt dare publishing his thesis for a while because he was afraid of the church reaction and when he finally did, he was indeed condemned by it.

[Soaring Simpson]

I may be wrong but if I remember my history lessons properly, Darwin didnt dare publishing his thesis for a while because he was afraid of the church reaction and when he finally did, he was indeed condemned by it.

 

I can't say what he feared, but could list a bunch of prominant Christians and scientists who immediately approved it as shedding light on God's process of creation. (I won't, as the names are not familiar to me, not really being very interested in the subject) And the theory was immediately accepted, in an era when scientists in the west mostly were Christian, like most other people.

 

And with an organisation as big as the church, yes, he was bound to be condemned by some. This would be much more newsworthy than the acceptance.

 

Ironic, isn't it, though, that with the rise of postmodernism, it's now the more faithful Christians who are more likely to place reliance on science?

[Rainbow Sky]

Matthew 5: 9-12 (The Message)

 

9"You're blessed when you can show people how to cooperate instead of compete or fight. That's when you discover who you really are, and your place in God's family.

 

10"You're blessed when your commitment to God provokes persecution. The persecution drives you even deeper into God's kingdom.

 

11-12"Not only that—count yourselves blessed every time people put you down or throw you out or speak lies about you to discredit me. What it means is that the truth is too close for comfort and they are uncomfortable. You can be glad when that happens—give a cheer, even!—for though they don't like it, I do! And all heaven applauds. And know that you are in good company. My prophets and witnesses have always gotten into this kind of trouble.

[Rainbow Sky]

May I ask why the mods decided to add this to the guidelines? As far as I know, Jess and Amanda haven't had anyone complain about their avatars before. I'm also certain that no-one has complained about Liz's (Rainbow Sky's) sigs before. I just don't quite understand where this has come from.

 

Quite the opposite for me, in fact. On numerous occasions I have had people praise my Christ-related signatures. Some comments from people I know, some from people I have barely even spoken to before who PM'ed me just for that reason.

[nico_collard]

Actually, it was France's. They conquered England in 1066 and we were just getting rid of them. That "we" is a bit wobbly too- the ruling classes still were French and didn't Anglicise for another couple of centuries.

 

It just seems like it was the other way, because many of the sensible French governing classes (like the Welsh Henry Tudor and the Scottish James I/VI later on) immediately recognised England as a much nicer place to live and started a powerful court there. Which later on wanted to split off.

 

Oooooh... missed that bit!

 

Well, Nico, I disliked your siggie but it was a strictly personal opinion about Joan of Arc, I'd also dislike Tokyo Hotels siggies because their music makes me cringe, but hey, it would not be really fair to start whining about them you know? Moreover, as an ex mod, I'm sure you know that when you ask sthg - even gently and mentioning you speak as a member -, people tend to think you're giving an order, so it's always difficult

 

As for the thread, although I've spoken my mind and said what I thought of it when it was created, I do believe that everything can be discussed, I militated for sexuality being an open subject on this forum in the past, so why not religion? But again, I'd rather have these matters confined to threads and not being displayed in siggies and avatars. One can think Mika's gay and state it, for example, it's their opinion and I respect it, but i would feel uncomfy with a "Mika is gay" avie or a "Mika and Martin are sexual partners" siggie, see what I mean?

 

I posted when the girl was attacked about her creationist views and if I recall correctly, I PMed her to see if everything was ok. I admit I don't remember what I said exactly tho, I'm growing old and forgetful But again, these are touchy subjects and everything is subjective. I firmly oppose creationism for example, so it's hard for me to tell people who oppose it to leave it, all I can do is ask them to do it in a nicer way.

 

Bold bit: Damn... can't put that in my sig now!

 

The Tokio Hotel bit - I agree... it's the very reason why I don't bitch about Mika sigs (sound bad when I'm a member on MFC!)

 

The whole sexuality thing I thought was toeing the line... actually the boys and girls kissing was pushing it IMO but seems his almighty Freddiness was okay with it!

 

*pats Niki for being old and forgetful* I think you can be forgiven for no remembering, I guess I'm still thinking in a moddy state (it's really hard to get out of it, even when you know it's not good for your state of mind)... It's all part of being a mod... no matter how you ask someone, it's still taken as an order... thanks for getting back to me anyways...

 

I know I didn't warn anyone because the person in question repeatedly provoked other posters by insisting that evolutionary theory has no scientific basis to the point where it was unrealistic to expect anyone to ignore her. The topic of the thread was atheists (not religion or even atheism per se) and the comments were related to evolutionary theory, not creationism. Evolutionary theory has absolutely nothing to do with religious beliefs.

 

I do not want to see MFC replete with satanist or other piss-taking threads. Yes we can all ignore it in theory, but MFC is not simply a platform for every person with a computer and an internet connection to exercise their rights of free speech. It's a Mika fan club and while the members certainly share interests that go beyond Mika there still exists a certain culture that would be eroded if absolutely anything goes.

 

If I walked into MFC for the first time and noticed half a dozen people in a Mika related thread with Jesus is the Light in their avatars, I seriously would have turned around and never come back. There is very little I come across on the internet that I find truly offensive and certainly supporting Christianity is not one of those things.

 

But it is still offputting and I can't imagine that the Christians in this thread wouldn't find it equally offputting if their first exposure to MFC culture was that we were all a bunch of satanists or more accurately were mocking other members' religious beliefs by having such things in our avatars.

 

Bold: That puts a whole new light on the matter... not that that's what we're talking about...

 

Again, I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I probably would have found it a bit offputting if I saw people with those sorts of things in their avvies too (either Christian or Satanist - though we're talking real extremes here!), though I'd prob ignore it or not socialise with other people. The thing that would make me not want to come back is if people started preachng to me. I don't care what they believe in, I don't really like people preaching to me, esp when I've chosen my religion. Even the Mormons that come around preaching I don't really like (sure, they're nice, but not interested... and yes, I have heard of a book called the Bible - have about 12 of them around the house)...

 

Sorry, had to put in my usual responses for what they ask...

 

 

Anyways, my whole point was, we'll keep the religiousness in here (unless people start talking religion in another thread), and if you don't want religious avvies, we'll keep to that (even if we don't agree to it)...

 

Incidentally, the theory of evolution was initially welcomed and supported by almost all Christians, even the most biblially rigourous. It was only much later, after people started saying it "proved" there was no God (which I've certainly heard tediously often), that the Creationist movements sprang up.

 

The theory of evolution is the only thing we have tosay how life came to be... just because some of us believe God made everything, doesn't mean that evolution doesn't exist.

 

As a participant in that thread I didn't see any problem with Christians voicing their opinions. As a mod however it was worrisome because it is a potential source of problems.

 

The only actual problem I saw related to that thread is the subsequent accusation in several other threads that there have been "fights" in the atheist thread. There was nothing approaching a fight in that discussion and it annoys me when so many people on MFC characterize differences of opinions as fights, whatever the topic. Creating drama where none exists and implying that we are unable to have civilized discussions about controversial issues.

 

I do not want to spend all my time here simply discussing the colour of Mika's shoes and I know there are others who feel the same way. I try to engage only those other people in debate because I realize not everyone enjoys it. But if you willingly jump into a debate or you are simply an observer, do not cry foul when things are said that you don't agree with. No one is forcing anyone into threads clearly marked "Atheists" or "Christians".

 

 

 

That is why I said that evolutionary theory has nothing to do with religious beliefs. I don't think I've ever encountered anyone in real life who disavows evolutionary theory, atheist, Christian or otherwise.

 

I've only seen in one place where anyone has said there were arguments in the Atheist thread... I've seen in a couple of places where someone's said there's been arguments in here... I've only seen one, and I really wasn't an argument (more likely someone expressing their opinion, but in a way that we didn't appreciate)... we (mostly) solved it ourselves without calling every mod possible in here... No doubt that if there was an argument in the Atheists thread (or any other thread for that matter) people can sort it out for themselves...

 

I can see there being a possible problem with an us versus them mentality... I would hate to see it (actually, I'm sure everyone who posts in either thread would hate to see it cause we're all reasonable people)... and I agree with the "crying foul" bit Christine...

 

As usaul, I half agree. Discussion is good. I wouldn't have called Any Atheists a fight either. But (to be honest) I wasn't sure that discussion was what I was seeing- it seemed more like evangelism, at some points. And there is a place for threads where people with the same views encourage each other, without having to permanently defend those views. Like the Any Christians.

 

LIke you I enjoy the variety and depth of the discussions on here. I don't want to see them curtailed.

 

 

 

I certainly have met a few who believe in creationism* (and I'm a bit surprised you haven't), though I've met a great many more who've told me Darwin "disproved" Christianity. The one's a knee jerk reaction to the other in most cases- "then Darwin's talking rubbish"

 

*ie, 7 days, no evolution, earth only a few thousand years old, as opposed to the idea that God created the earth, it wasn't an accident, which I and most Christians and (I think) other religions do believe.

 

Actually, I remember sitting in the Catholic Studies class i did at uni, and the theologist was saying about how a Christian was trying to get people to not believe in the evolutionary theory (in a courthouse I believe). When he was cross examined by a lawyer, he admitted that the 7 days bit in the bible might not strictly be 7 days... days could represent a longer space of time...

 

I think it was the same theologist that was talking about how a lot of the old testament came about when the Jews were in exile after the Babylonians kicked them out, and to get the younger people back to their religion rather than worshipping the Babylonian gods they made up stories to put across their religious beliefs...

 

I hope that made sense...