Disagreeing with CONTENT is NOT censoring you.

• Posted by radar pangaean July 15, 2011 - 773 views

  As a followup to my last post, i must also say that i may have been the only reader who noted the IRONY of the complaint that people sometimes forget to focus on the message instead of each word, because in MY view, that's exactly what this complainer had done. As *i* saw this situation, someone had objected to the CONTENT of a line of biblical scripture, because this person, ALSO a Xtian, did not read the same meaning into those passages as the original poster. Yet the person who complained about the "failure to get the MEANING" herself MISSED the meaning of the objection, and instead posted the same TIRED assertion that the objection was to the posting of scripture instead of a disagreement about the MEANING/APPLICABILITY of the scripture.

   

   

  Michael and i were discussing this issue recently We have agreed to disagree in general about it, but he did point out that there have been (RARE) instances of someone specifically complaining about people posting bible verses. OK, IF that occurs, i think it's BS. People can post whatever their hearts desire here, and i'm behind that 100%. Always have been and always WILL be. And i believe that i corrected Michael's assertion that *i* had been objecting to posting scripture because i pointed out that MY response to the person was JUST THE OPPOSITE. I didn't say: "Don't post Bible verses". I had said: "If you post JUST a bible verse, and don't tell us what you think it means or how t applies, you're probably not conveying your message to the reader, since we all have access to bibles already." I explicitly ENCOURAGED the individual to EXPLAIN what the verses meant. So i did resent being lumped in with people HE believed objected to posts intrinsically, and noted that this called HIS objectivity on that issue into reasonable question. 

  I know that a few of our members ran to mommy and daddy (the moderators) with the charge that people were complaining about others posting bible verses, and so the moderators made a spec ial post re-stating that people were allowed to do so. IMO, that was pointless, and even childish, because all the cases *i* saw where people were being accused of "objecting to scripture" were REALLY cases where the responders were stating DISAGREEMENT with the content of the post, which they have EVERY right to do. However, it's fine for the moderators to remind us of the rules from time to time, of course, but IMO they were giving a reminder that the vast majority of us don't need. 

  I see Michael as a VERY righteous and open-minded, accepting person. I suppose he has internalized the lessons his own life taught him from being a gay man in a homophobic faith tradition, but i also assert - and have told him so directly - that eh STILL has similar 'blinders' about OTHER aspects of his belief that his experiences have not given him the same opportunity to question. I'm NOT using his name to embarrass him... just the opposite... i'm using his name because he is a Xtian here that i feel is a REMARKABLE example of tolerance, patience and love, yet he STILL exhibits a trait that those of far less character take too far and map to their apparent need to feel persecuted. 

  When a fundamentalist posts scripture, they don't ever understand that they are JUST POSTING THEIR OPINION. I understand that IN THEIR MIND they are simply quoting the supreme creator of all reality, so the post's content is above criticism or disagreement. They CAN'T help but feel that way, as it's basic to their belief, but that doesn't make it objectively so, and membership in the ULC is NOT limited to those who worship a book. Other people, believers and otherwise, do NOT see that book as their god, and above criticism, so the GIANT copout *i*  get from time to time, i.e. "your disagreement is not with me, it is with God" could not be LESS persuasive, and though i know they sincerely believe this for ME it's just an indication of THEIR spiritual laziness and immaturity. If *i* post something here, say a quote from karl marx, and somebody disagrees, i wouldn't dream of saying: "You need to take that up with Karl." How lame. karl... Just as with the ACTUAL authors of every book in the bible, is DEAD. Karl didn't post the quote, i did, so the person is VERY reasonable in that scenario in expecting ME to address any disagreement they have with the quote. 

  Now i realize that for those who believe the bible is 'god-breathed' or whatever phrase they use, the conversation stops there. If you are required to take the words in a book as if they are always correct and beyond criticism or disagreement, then yeah, you will stop YOUR questioning once you've found an applicable quote. I don't argue with YOUR right to choose that approach to life. But REMEMBER, this is the ULC, not a 700 Club site. OTHER people here should  not be expected to give up their powers of rational thought or criticism of ANY source, just because YOU have chosen to accord one specific book that place in YOUR spirituality.