# Poll: Political + Ethical + Religious Threads



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

Now I know I post to these threads and I enjoy them as do many others. I'm not trying to take any kind of high ground here. But I've spoken with one or two people in the past day or so who I haven't seen on the forum or not as much as I used to. Of course they have been busy with life outside of *TC*.

However they did say that the recent spate of political/ethical/religious threads has stopped them wanting to come and post on *TC*. I'll admit I don't like how heated they can get at first it was good natured and fun but now I see agenda's forming. I was surprised when this was echoed by someone in a PM I received today.

Perhaps it's time that these threads were moved to their on section? I know this would take work on the admin side of things so if this was not possible perhaps there could be a temporary ban (self-imposed) on this type of thread in the community section? There is still the *Political Junkies* group after all.

I'm not going to name anyone and I do not mean for them to come forward if they do not wish to but I think it would be a big loss to the site if they stopped posting. After all we're here for the music what do you think?

:tiphat:


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I know that certain topics themselves are rather uncomfortable for some people. Furthermore, certain topics tend to give rise to rhetoric that is inflammatory (or worse). Similar ideas have been raised before. I have two questions.

1) The community forum is for those posts that do not have a focus on music. Are you suggesting adding another forum in addition to the community forum specifically for political/ethical/religious threads (i.e. the political/ethical/religious forum)?

2) There are plenty of threads that do not interest me. Also there are threads that initially interested me but later became unpleasant or uninteresting. I then do not open those threads. Since everyone can choose to avoid threads that they do not enjoy, why do the contents of political/ethical/religious threads cause people to leave? Does the presence of those threads somehow spill over into other parts of the forum? The answer to this question in particular would affect my view on these threads. 

Personally I think it's fun and interesting to have these threads available, but I value the music threads vastly more, and I value participants in the music threads. If there people are really leaving due to non-music related features of the forum, then I think it's worth considering how to minimize that loss.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

I don't think the topics people post about should be policed in this way. The community forum is anything non-music related, and I think that's fine. If you don't like political threads, don't read them. I personally read about 1/10th of posts in the "unread" section - I just ignore that which I can't stand or doesn't interest me. Everyone is capable of this, so why must we ordain what people are allowed to talk about? I personally think the assaults against contemporary music are more unbearable.


----------



## Chrythes (Oct 13, 2011)

Without these topics we'd be left with threads about cats and food.


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

Chrythes said:


> Without these topics we'd be left with threads about cats and food.


I thought perhaps a sub-forum would do. I do enjoy them but if it was at the expense of losing some real contributers when it comes to music I don't see how having a sub fourm would hurt. Other than it being a pain in the backside for admins to introduce.

I don't really want to see them go either but I don't want to lose people over it. At least we've not had any cat foot threads yet *Chrythes* hope I haven't spoken too soon.


----------



## Philip (Mar 22, 2011)

Lenfer said:


> I thought perhaps a sub-forum would do. I do enjoy them but if it was at the expense of losing some real contributers when it comes to music I don't see how having a sub fourm would hurt. Other than it being a pain in the backside for admins to introduce.
> 
> I don't really want to see them go either but I don't want to lose people over it. At least we've not had any cat foot threads yet *Chrythes* hope I haven't spoken too soon.


Hmm the community forum doesn't have anything to do with music, so i don't get why some "contributors" would be deterred from posting about music in the other sub-forums. That doesn't make any sense to me.


----------



## Chrythes (Oct 13, 2011)

Erm, who have we lost because of these threads?
I mean, even if we lost someone because of these topics a sub-forum isn't going to prevent people from leaving, because we'll still discuss these topics and people will still see those topics.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Participation in these threads should be mandatory. Especially for Christians so I can bash them over the head with atheistic dogma.


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

I'm not the slightest bit interested in those subjects, but if they got banned I'd start bringing them up more, that's how I work


----------



## Krummhorn (Feb 18, 2007)

A quick search finds almost 300,000 discussion forums for politics and religion on the internet ... seems there are enough places designated for those types of discussions. 

That said however, we acknowledge that those subjects do come up here for discussion, and we will not stop them ... that is until problems arise, like when ad homs and insults start. 

Let's just state right here and now, that we "agree to disagree" with each other ... Above all, be respectful to your fellow forum members as they have a right to their own opinions too ... Opinions are just that, opinions, nothing more, nothing less!!

It's not likely that we will create a sub-forum for these topics ... too many sub-fora on a homepage adds to confusion and eventually makes the site look messy. Besides, our main purpose here is to discuss Classical Music. 

For those that do not like the political or religious threads, then just don't read them ... rather simple, really.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Couchie said:


> Participation in these threads should be mandatory. Especially for Christians so I can bash them over the head with atheistic dogma.


Don't you mean so that you can bash them over the head with Wagneristic dogma?


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Ya, I don't see any reason anything needs to be banned. I ignore subjects that are likely to make me upset all the time, such as any post in the community section that is likely to turn out gloomy and depress the hell out of me (about war, global warming, things like that). That doesn't mean other people shouldn't be able to talk about these things though.


----------



## Andy Loochazee (Aug 2, 2007)

This dubious proposal looks very much like an over-reaction to a few responses to the OP's own venture into the political thread scene lately. Anyone posting a controversial topic in that place should expect a reaction, and not propose the wholesale closure of that type of thread merely because they didn't always receive a friendly, chummy kind of response.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Andy Loochazee said:


> This dubious proposal looks very much like an over-reaction to a few responses to the OP's own venture into the political thread scene lately.


Presumptuous and wrong.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Just chuck 'em all in their own subforum. I never look at those threads anyway and it's annoying how many of them there are in the Community Forum when I want to post stuff about:


Chrythes said:


> cats and food.


----------



## pollux (Nov 11, 2011)

Couchie said:


> Participation in these threads should be mandatory. Especially for Christians so I can bash them over the head with atheistic dogma.


Hi, you green thing. I'm one of those Christians who are supposed to be bashed. 

I voted for the _Things Stay As They Are_ option. I have never had any problems with people expressing their opinions, provided they let others express theirs, too. The main reason why I haven't taken part in these kind of forums is because my proficiency in English is not so good as is needed when talking about certain matters. In fact, I had to look for the word "bash" in the dictionary! 

What I don't understand is the euphemism you all use when referring to "Religious threads". Since I've been here, I've not seen a single thread talking about religion, whereas I've seen lots talking about atheism. Which has surprised me. Obviously, I've not been surprised by atheists -they must talk about what they know about- but by religious people. Particularly, by those American Christians. You know, here, in our definitely misguided Europe, nothing can surprise me anymore. But I mistakingly thought that in America there was a bigger culture for publicly expressing religious belief.

All this has convinced me of the necessity to go on with the "Scrooge" thread I started a month ago, which I left incomplete. I invite you all to take a look at it, because it will susprise you. It will surprise you so much that many of you will think I've gone mad.

Couchie, you're invited too. But take your Walkyrian helmet with you. You will need it. :devil:


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

Seems to be a pretty decisive vote so far, fair enough.  I was not in favour of a ban myself I just think it's a shame it makes some uncomfortable.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

violadude said:


> Don't you mean so that you can bash them over the head with Wagneristic dogma?


That's what the Classical Music Discussion forum is for.


----------



## Guest (Mar 23, 2012)

pollux said:


> Hi, you green thing. I'm one of those Christians who are supposed to be bashed.
> 
> I voted for the _Things Stay As They Are_ option. I have never had any problems with people expressing their opinions, provided they let others express theirs, too. The main reason why I haven't taken part in these kind of forums is because my proficiency in English is not so good as is needed when talking about certain matters. In fact, I had to look for the word "bash" in the dictionary!
> 
> ...


I'm not sure what you mean here - are you surprised that Christians are not being more proactive in expressing their beliefs, that more threads should be started by them? If not, please explain.

For the record, there were several Christian-themed threads in the past, if not in this particular forum. There was one regarding inspiration from God in classical music, and some others along the same lines.

As anyone who knows me here will tell you, I am not afraid to speak up for my beliefs as a Christian. I just don't go out of my way to start threads of that nature. Sure, I will jump in quickly once they have been started, but I try to not start them. To paraphrase Billy Joel, "I didn't start the fire."


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

^^^Which god?


----------



## pollux (Nov 11, 2011)

DrMike said:


> I'm not sure what you mean here - are you surprised that Christians are not being more proactive in expressing their beliefs, that more threads should be started by them? If not, please explain.


Well, in a forum that is devoted to music I didn't expect any thread about religious, philosophical os scientific topics at all. That was my first surprise. But what shocked me the most was seeing so many threads devoted to atheism and not a single one devoted to religion. I think this is by no means a balanced state of things. I was just expressing my susprise, not asking anybody to do anything. At least, that was my intention.


----------



## Guest (Mar 23, 2012)

I see. From my perspective, having seen how quickly the attacks pile on once religion is brought up, I fail to see the point in starting a thread devoted to religion. I doubt I will change any minds here, and usually it devolves into a free-for-all attack on religion. There is a Religious Discussion group, though, where these topics are discussed in more detail.

I, too, have noticed that vocal religious individuals are not represented in as great of numbers here as vocal atheists. I don't know if it is due to there being more atheists than theists, or if it is just an issue of being silent.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Aren't there already thingamajigs for those subjects? 'Groups'? Rough-and-tumble places where irrational diatribes and strong language can be uttered?

I suspect that those groups are not popular because many members possess delicate constitutions. I admit my own lack of interest in those groups, but that's because my 'position' on each subject is correct and impervious to argument


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Have there really been that many explicitly atheistic threads? I know that in political threads atheism and theism get brought up, but I don't recall seeing many threads about the existence of deities.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

DrMike said:


> As anyone who knows me here will tell you, I am not afraid to speak up for my beliefs as a Christian.


Dont you you mean your beliefs as a fringe psuedo-Christan occultist?


----------



## Krummhorn (Feb 18, 2007)

This thread was created to poll the members on 'what should happen' to threads on religion and politics ... it was not created as a new discussion thread on religion ... 

As another mentioned, GROUPS are another way to do these discussions ... Groups are not regularly monitored by the forum staff unless we are called in by a report or at the request of another member. 

The "Group" creator controls "who" can see and participate in the discussion.


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

Andy Loochazee said:


> This dubious proposal looks very much like an over-reaction to a few responses to the OP's own venture into the political thread scene lately. Anyone posting a controversial topic in that place should expect a reaction, and not propose the wholesale closure of that type of thread merely because they didn't always receive a friendly, chummy kind of response.


Nope I have no problem with these threads I know people who do though and I don't think they should be put off coming here by these threads. I'm quite capable of looking after myself thank you very much, I did expect a comment like this from someone just surprised it took this long.

I agree pretty much whole heartedly with what *Krummhorn* said. I didn't think these topics would be banned or moved to their on section/sub forum but thought I'd take the time to put it to a poll. I felt I owed the other member who contacted me to say that was in part the reason why they had not been posting that much.

It is pretty simple just not to read things that disagree with with what you think. Some people however get offended when they see someone saying whatever it is they might be saying. Others (perhaps even I) do get carried away and say things they later regret I thought by starting this thread it would cause people to think twice before saying or acting rashly.

For the record *Andy* I've always contributed to this sort of forum since I joined. Just because someone disagree with me I don't see it as a bad thing. I do however try to make sure that whatever is said that I still stay on good terms with whoever I may be replying to. I see no reason why people can't disagree and still be behave in cordial manner on the rest of the forum.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Politics and Religion can certainly lead to some combative and antagonistic responses... but quite honestly, threads questioning certain avant-garde developments in music, Richard Wagner, Herbert von Karajan, Stokowski, and other aspects of music have been just as heated.


----------



## samurai (Apr 22, 2011)

Especially in the cases of Wagner and HVK, where their politicial and racial views always seems to be a part of the discussion concerning them, regardless of other simply musical issues associated with them.


----------



## Dodecaplex (Oct 14, 2011)

Polednice said:


> Have there really been that many explicitly atheistic threads? I know that in political threads atheism and theism get brought up, but I don't recall seeing many threads about the existence of deities.


I guess you've forgotten about all the threads that were created to shove the dogmatic beliefs of evolutionism down everyone's throats.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Dodecaplex said:


> I guess you've forgotten about all the threads that were created to shove the dogmatic beliefs of evolutionism down everyone's throats.


Point me to them and I will gladly stand corrected.


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Politics and Religion can certainly lead to some combative and antagonistic responses... but quite honestly, threads questioning certain avant-garde developments in music, Richard Wagner, Herbert von Karajan, Stokowski, and other aspects of music have been just as heated.





samurai said:


> Especially in the cases of Wagner and HVK, where their politicial and racial views always seems to be a part of the discussion concerning them, regardless of other simply musical issues associated with them.


I've seen the "*Karajan Hero or Hype*" thread but have never looked inside. What do people have against him? I'm not trying to start anything I don't honestly don't know and to be honest I'm to tired to go find the thread. :lol:

Heated debate on music related topics can be expected on a music forum I would have thought. I don't mind other types of debate heated or not but it makes some uneasy. I don't want to see people stop posting because of it.

I've thought about it and _my_ one problem with non-music topics here is that they now seem to get pages and pages of replies. Which is fine but it may be to the detriment of music threads. However I was not trying to dictate what other people choose to post on.


----------



## Dodecaplex (Oct 14, 2011)

Polednice said:


> Point me to them and I will gladly stand corrected.


This.

This. "Many of the things in Religion are disproven or confirmed by science" is the funniest part.

And this.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Lenfer said:


> I've thought about it and _my_ one problem with non-music topics here is that they now seem to get pages and pages of replies. Which is fine but it may be to the detriment of music threads. However I was not trying to dictate what other people choose to post on.


My concern would be that if we curtail the discussion desires of one group, then they may well be the ones who leave - the community is made by those who constitute it, and if you force it in one direction, there will be people who abandon ship. The question is whether or not we're throwing people overboard because we prefer others.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Dodecaplex said:


> This.
> 
> This. "Many of the things in Religion are disproven or confirmed by science" is the funniest part.
> 
> And this.


This discussion was about threads, not about individual posts that you want to be pedantic and petty about. You've managed to locate one thread about evolution - the others were about general religiosity and your childish, ill-conceived philosophy, both of which may have contained thoughts on science and evolution, but which also went in other directions given their broad scope. You do have a mighty large chip on your shoulder, or maybe a rod up your ****, I can't quite tell.


----------



## Dodecaplex (Oct 14, 2011)

Polednice said:


> This discussion was about threads, not about individual posts that you want to be pedantic and petty about. You've managed to locate one thread about evolution - the others were about general religiosity and your childish, ill-conceived philosophy, both of which may have contained thoughts on science and evolution, but which also went in other directions given their broad scope. You do have a mighty large chip on your shoulder, or maybe a rod up your ****, I can't quite tell.


Yes, please go on with your dogmatic and disrespectful assertions. Typical of evolutionists and their deep-seated desire to show their nonexistent superiority. If you were to get off that horse for a second, you would have noticed that all three threads show a remarkable amount of disrespect towards other beliefs, and that doesn't even begin to mention the arrogance and misguided certainty that evolutionists use in order to compensate for all the spanking their mummy gave them when they were kids.


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

Polednice said:


> My concern would be that if we curtail the discussion desires of one group, then they may well be the ones who leave - the community is made by those who constitute it, and if you force it in one direction, there will be people who abandon ship. The question is whether or not we're throwing people overboard because we prefer others.


I don't want anyone thrown overboard. I think people should be free to do as they wish when it comes to posting to the site as long as stays with in the T&C set by *TC*. I'm not for banning these threads I did not vote in favour of a ban. However this is a music forum I would think that anyone who left because they could no longer debate Red hats vs. Blue hats was not all that interested in the music in the first place.

Even this thread has become an exchange between two groups and it always starts to get personal. I foresaw this possibility but thought people would realize this was the thing I was trying to bring to people's attention. :angel:


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Dodecaplex said:


> Yes, please go on with your dogmatic and disrespectful assertions. Typical of evolutionists and their deep-seated desire to show their nonexistent superiority. If you were to get off that horse for a second, you would have noticed that all three threads show a remarkable amount of disrespect towards other beliefs, and that doesn't even begin to mention the arrogance and misguided certainty that evolutionists use in order to compensate for all the spanking their mummy gave them when they were kids.


Awwwwwwwwww, the enormous irony of your comment is so sweet! I just want to squeeze those massively naive cheeks.


----------



## Dodecaplex (Oct 14, 2011)

Polednice said:


> Awwwwwwwwww, the enormous irony of your comment is so sweet! I just want to squeeze those massively naive cheeks.


Which logical fallacy is this? Appeal to ridicule, or something?


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Dodecaplex said:


> Which logical fallacy is this? Appeal to ridicule, or something?


I was actually speaking with the utmost sincerity.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Dodecaplex said:


> Yes, please go on with your dogmatic and disrespectful assertions. Typical of evolutionists and their deep-seated desire to show their nonexistent superiority. If you were to get off that horse for a second, you would have noticed that all three threads show a remarkable amount of disrespect towards other beliefs, and that doesn't even begin to mention the arrogance and misguided certainty that evolutionists use in order to compensate for all the spanking their mummy gave them when they were kids.


Disrespecting creationism... is such a thing possible. Surely the mere existence of creationism disrespects everyone with functional cerebral cortex?


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Dodecaplex said:


> This.
> 
> This. "Many of the things in Religion are disproven or confirmed by science" is the funniest part.
> 
> And this.


It seems that you don't like "evolutionists" (whatever those are). Then why did you create a thread to "shove the dogmatic beliefs of evolutionism down everyone's throats? (the third thread you listed)


----------



## Krummhorn (Feb 18, 2007)

And ...

*Now back to the OP, please ... and thank you *

This thread is about to be closed ... this thread was not created as a startup on religion or politics discussion ... it was posing a question/poll about what people think should happen to them.

If you are responding to the questions on the poll, fine ... further attempts to derail this thread into a religions/politics thread will cause the thread to be closed.


----------



## Dodecaplex (Oct 14, 2011)

Sorry for all the trouble, krummhorn.

By the way, I was trolling. The third link should have made that clear.


----------

