Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

You truly are the King of Kings.

Either that or obsessed, I'll go with the latter.

Originally posted by PrinceofBlades
Either that or obsessed, I'll go with the latter.

Are you baiting me?

shifty maybe...

Originally posted by PrinceofBlades
shifty maybe...

you DO realize I'm not REALLY obsessed with you, right? Be careful, or I'll have to start calling you sweet cheecks.

Oh dear

Honestly, can we get a mod to sticky this first post? Storm? Lil?

I second that.

I' ll rewrite and stick it.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I heard that.



You do realise he wrote it long before you came to KMC correct?

But yes, it stands as a positive guide to the forum.

Even the bit about how debates should be manly. Arrrr.

Originally posted by Alliance


Well it's true: real men debate.

<<< real man.

Originally posted by Alliance
<<< real man.

One can never tell what lurks under the mask of a ninja.

Originally posted by Alliance
<<< real man. Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Arrrr. Pirate >>> Ninja

Erm. F*ck no.

Pirates beat Superman... And Superman beats Jesus.

Ill give you that logic.

Originally posted by Alliance
Ill give you that logic.

Arrrrrrr.

Oh-arrr.

arr.

Originally posted by Alliance
arr.

Pirate ninja.

Clone/Ninja-Jedi

Originally posted by Alliance
Clone/Ninja-Jedi

Who daylights as a pirate. That would be the most potent creation ever.

Anything you want to add or things you want to see left out, remarks?

Originally posted by Storm
Anything you want to add or things you want to see left out, remarks?



I think there are many times when personal belief without support is valid in a discussion of religion. I also feel that JIA provides more support for his views than most, and yet his posts hold less validity for many than the majority of people stating their personal beliefs. Given this, support is extremely subjective in a religious discussion. If a request for the rational/support behind a belief are made, then the individual should be prepared to respond with such.

Claims against another's beliefs must be supported, claims as to personal beliefs that are not being used to invalidate a belief do not necessarily need support, imo.

Also, what constitutes support? JIA's use of the Bible when speaking to non-Biblical members does not constitute support, imo.

The problem comes when beliefs are stated as facts, and others mocked for not believing them.

People do have to understand that a belief is open to be attacked in ways that something supported by evidence really is not- which is to say you can attack a belief simply because you don't like it, unlike with something supported, where you would have to bring support to your attack for it to be a reasonable post. And if you are purporting that your views are credible among standard rational lines, then only a defence along such lines actually works. That being the case, using the Bible to validate the Bible doesn;t swing, because you have to claim entirely different rules to rationality, and that is simply not a reasonable thing to enter into, debate-wise.

JIA said a while back he was not here to prove anything, and so as long as he didn't open up lots and lots of threads to preach the same views, that was fine. But more recently a line has come where some people have stated their views as facts supported by evidence, but instead of backing this have simply mocked anyone who disagrees. JIA now very much seems determined to convince others or disprove them. Doing this by mere statement and not entering into a rational discussion about it... that is what is being ruled out here.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
The problem comes when beliefs are stated as facts, and others mocked for not believing them.

People do have to understand that a belief is open to be attacked in ways that something supported by evidence really are not- which is to say you can attack a belief simply because you don't like it, unlike with something supported, where you would hgave to bring support to your atack for it to be a reasonable post.

JIA said a while back he was not here to prove anything, and so as long as he didn't open up lots and lots of threads to preach the same views, that was fine. But more recently a line has come where some people have stated their views as facts supported by evidence, but instead of backing this have simply mocked anyone who disagrees. That is what is being ruled out here. That makes sense. I think the wording of Storm's post needs to be cleaned up so that this is understood. When I read it, I understood it differently. Perhaps include much of your post in Storm's to clarify the purpose and intent of these guidelines.

I added a bit more to my statement, to further clarify.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
I added a bit more to my statement, to further clarify. I agree with the statement still, and believe its contents should be added in some manner to Storm's.

I think this is wrong:

Be Willing to Learn & Change Your Mind

That would cancel the rules of not trying to convert people. I would say this is more suited:

Be Willing to Learn & Open Your Mind to Others

To add my two cents.

Any thread title with the opening.

"Your religion is BS"

"The followers of that religion are idiots"

Stuff like that should be either edited or closed. These are no open to discussions. They are intentional and aim at personal hatred or plain ignorance from the thread starter. We've had these in the past. Quite frankly, I wish not to see them again.

I' m working on it.

But I have a general complaint or remark in the meanwhile. I believe every human being deserves some basic minimum of respect right from the beginning, regardless of what they believe. Their actions and beliefs may lead to greater respect over time, or they may strain your ability to maintain that minimum. Be respectful of other members even when you get frustrated or angry. Treat others as you would like to be treated. I' m rather tired of the accusations I see members making towards each other, and I' d like to see that end.

Then I guess my comment would be that mods need to do a better job of enforceing these rules.

If members like JIA continuosly jsut state things and don't back them up...it just becomes spam posts. These aren't delt with and members like JIA have clearly crossed many lines in recent days. Now, I don't know if mods have delt with these issues privately, but certainly from a public perspective, it seems like nothing is being done. Perhaps this forum needs its own junior mod.

It' s a two way street, and both parties have been in the wrong. While there aren' t blatant violations of the forums rules, there are annoyances and irritations accumulating which are ruining the atmosphere and create hostility.

Originally posted by Alliance
Then I guess my comment would be that mods need to do a better job of enforceing these rules.

If members like JIA continuosly jsut state things and don't back them up...it just becomes spam posts. These aren't delt with and members like JIA have clearly crossed many lines in recent days. Now, I don't know if mods have delt with these issues privately, but certainly from a public perspective, it seems like nothing is being done. Perhaps this forum needs its own junior mod. just put him on your ignore list.........I am getting to where I don't really read much of his long Scripture posts anyway.

Originally posted by Storm
It' s a two way street, and both parties have been in the wrong. While there aren' t blatant violations of the forums rules, there are annoyances and irritations accumulating which are ruining the atmosphere and create hostility.

I agree. The problem is that transgressions aren't clear. Personally, you're correct, that its an accumulation factor.

Originally posted by debbiejo
just put him on your ignore list.........I am getting to where I don't really read much of his long Scripture posts anyway.

Yes, but I'm not here to ignore people, I'm here to socialize. Perhaps you're right.

Well they become redundant. It is as if he is talking at you and not to you......I like to at least have a two way conversation.

Yes. At that point, they no longer become a productive member of the forum.