Why is mentioning the Bible more offensive than profanity?

…asking for a friend.

What's the context?

Christopher Weeks wrote:What's the context?

I’ve had multiple posts flagged on permies for phrasing that I felt was very general and peaceable, referring to creationism as a theory and biblical theology as an idea for an explanation of things… and the staff flags them for revision. (I don’t bother to submit them to a larger staff review because… it just doesn’t seem worth the time or effort.) I am making contributions to these forums using an old iPhone, which can be quite time consuming and limiting. I’ve just deleted what I think they meant is not what they want and move on. (These were not cider press posts… I felt the connections were relevant and I don’t think they would’ve been ‘offensive’ per say if they were from another religious background like Buddhism or Native American beliefs.)

If I posted a rant using every word in the book… I think it would receive apples instead of flags for revision.

This saddens me. But as others have pointed out in the profanity sections of the cider press… this is a voluntary forum.

I do appreciate this forum and the contributors and have chalked it up to… if I want to play in this sandbox, these are the rules.

But I, and friends I’ve mentioned this to, are wondering… why is mentioning the Bible or biblical principles here and generally within society  more offensive than posting & using profanity?

(I hope this helps clarify.)

Because most people mention the Bible to tell someone else what they should be doing. Mostly people use profanity to express their own feelings.

I want to openly own my point of view, so you can disregard it as needed -- I'm comfortable with profanity at home (but usually think it's tacky elsewhere), and a third-generation atheist (but hopefully not usually a jerk about it).

And I also don't know the specifics of your posts, so the following stance is just general and hypothetical.

For me, if the best you can do to justify an opinion is cite the Bible, rather than some actual observation or evidence, then I assume you're spouting counterfactual nonsense. (Not that it's all nonsense, but the good stuff can be backed up with observations or the work of an academic discipline.) As the joe-average reader that I am here, I'd just scroll on by, not argue with you or flag your post for moderation. But if it were my job to maintain the quality of the forum, I'd behave differently. An occasional post like that doesn't really hurt the place but if people get comfortable posting nonsense, the whole place is harmed. That's my first thinking on the matter, but what Casie wrote might be the real story.

I think Casie pretty well summed it up.  I think if you posted "Because I choose to live following Biblical principles, I choose not to X", I don't think it would be flagged.  If you post "My neighbor does X, but I support the belief that I should love my neighbor", I think it would be fine.  Too often though, when people "mention the Bible" it is to show someone else why they are wrong.  As far as creationism being a theory, my opinion is that it isn't, at least if you are talking about the scientific definition of theory, as people usually are when they say something like "Creationism should be taught as another theory in science class like evolution is."

I don't know what the post were, but I do know that we staff have to try to prevent flame wars. We've gotten pretty good at realizing what sort of things will set off other people to start arguing religion.

For example, we've had some really strong atheists who'd get a bee in their bonnet at even a casual mention of traditional creationism. And then, instead of lovely discussions about growing things, we've got a debate about creationism vs evolution. By the time we spot it, we've got to do some massive clean up of the thread. It takes up a lot of moderator time, and it also can create disharmony within the moderators. So, it's often a lot easier to nip things in the bud.

I went looking, and it seems you'd posted:

Additionally, a Bible/health question I have had for a long time for creationists out there do you think Adam and Eve needed to drink water in the garden of Eden or do you think their raw vegan diet options were so lush and filled with moisture that it wasn’t needed?

Generally, if you're asking other people their opinion about a religious question, you want it in the Cider Press. That way, if people decide to go on big rants about why you're wrong, then it's easier to control, because only people with enough apples and pie will be able to join in the discussion (no random troll who joins and just wants to create disharmony).

I've found that it's usually okay to do a small mention of why I think or feel the way I do religiously, especially if it's in the middle of a larger post. But, if I'm asking other people their opinion about a religious issue, it's likely going to cause debate. Not just people with the same beliefs will chime in--you'll get people who believe differently who feel they NEED to tell you how wrong you are.

TLDR:

- Small mentions of personal religious/spiritual motivations is usually okay (like Trace said).

- Mentioning your religious beliefs in an intentional community or singles ad is usually fine (that way people who don't agree know to avoid). Debating those beliefs in those threads will usually get deleted.

- Asking other people their opinion on religious matters should be in the cider press.

- Telling other people why your religious/spiritual/non-religious reasons are amazing, should definitely be in the cider press

- Telling other people they should believe in your beliefs, will likely get deleted

- Telling someone their religious beliefs are wrong will likely get deleted

- Telling someone their beliefs are less than perfect will likely be  deleted.

- Sometimes staff see something you can't see, and to prevent big issues, they might take action that confuses you. We discuss everything and don't make moderation decisions lightly.

- Staff comes from a wide variety of religious/philosophical/political backgrounds, we're not discriminating against one belief system or another.



I'm going to move this thread to Tinkering with This Site, because it seems to be more about moderation, than about religious beliefs (and posts about moderation outside of Tinkering usually get deleted)

Nicole Alderman wrote:I don't know what the post were, but I do know that we staff have to try to prevent flame wars. We've gotten pretty good at realizing what sort of things will set off other people to start arguing religion.

Thanks for specifying Nicole. I don’t want any flame wars or to waste moderators’ precious volunteered time.

I am genuinely curious if people here on permies think that water has been a necessity for humans to live since the beginning of time? How much water? What kind of water? Were humans carnivores or vegans since the beginning of time? How would/do these effect their permaculture philosophy and design? Have their beliefs changed over time?

Anyhoo, I’m not feeling very well today so I ought to be looking for home remedies that I haven’t tried yet.

Alana Rose wrote:
I am genuinely curious if people here on permies think that water has been a necessity for humans to live since the beginning of time? How much water? What kind of water? Were humans carnivores or vegans since the beginning of time? How would/do these effect their permaculture philosophy and design? Have their beliefs changed over time?

Sounds like a good fit for the Religion/Spirituality forum in the Cider Press! I have some thoughts on the matter, but they're probably best shared in a thread devoted to the question in the cider press!

The answer is:   because this site is fucking awesome.  


We enjoy the full beauty of the english language while talking about permaculture.  

There are other sites teaching how to hate through the power of religion(s) while simultaneously shaming people for words they have randomly decided are shameful.

The moderators of this site are epic.  What's more, we are all volunteers.  Except for Paul.  Paul pays a crazy amount of money to keep this site up and running.  Thanks Paul.  We appreciate it (and if you want to show your love for this site, you can help keep it going by buying PIE)

It seems like the reaction to this thread was: "oh look, the title of this subject says "bible" therefore I can spread my judgement on religion and go into great depths why my religion is awesome and those who believe differently are shitheads." without actually reading the thread.  Only I'm paraphrasing in a much nicer way.  Many posts have been removed from this thread for saying variations of that theme.

The funny thing is, those people probably don't see anything wrong with their post at all.  It seems exactly nice to them.

This is why religion is restricted to the Cider Press where people who have proven they can be nice are allowed to post.  It's a compromise.  It means don't have to go back to banning all hot-button topics completely from the forums.  And although most of you will never see the posts because the STAFF here are so quick to keep things civil, this thread has proven a great example of why we do this.  

It's called censorship.  Freedom for me and not for thee.  

I also want to mention that the volunteer staff are encouraged to remove posts that do not meet publishing standards quietly and without explanation.

If this is happening to you, then please review the publishing standards before posting again.

It may be that permies isn't the kind of site that you like and that's okay.  For you, the rest of the internet awaits.  

This site is built for a very narrow subset of the population who like to talk about certain topics in a very specific way.  

Donna Flores wrote:It's called censorship.  Freedom for me and not for thee.  

Yes!  The freedom is all for me and those that enjoy this path!  Yes!  We get to have a place too!

And then the people that wish to have a different path will exercise their brand of censorship on the site they pay for.  

It worked out perfectly for everybody.

Donna Flores wrote:It's called censorship.  Freedom for me and not for thee.  

This is a highly moderated community.  
We are very selective about the kind of content we choose to publish on this site.  But you can go to other sites to say different things in different ways.  The internet is a large place.  


Oh look, we've already got a thread for that:
https://permies.com/t/10914/tnk/CENSORSHIP-Paul-Wheaton-requested

r ranson wrote:I  volunteer staff are encouraged to remove posts that do not meet publishing standards quietly and without explanation.

I would appreciate the opportunity to have a second opinion.  It is just ............ civil.

2-0 is better than 1-0 and that is fine by me.

My post was related to humanure - not about something absolutely safe and effective.

This thread started in the cider press.  For really good reasons.  

Since it talked about moderation choices for this site, and it had stayed civil, nicole moved it to the tinkering forum.

And now there have been a lot of comments that really need to be in the cider press - but since this thread is no longer in the cider press, staff have removed those comments.  

Alana, if you like, perhaps you can start a similar thread in the cider press?

In the meantime, I am going to lock this thread.  I think the point has been covered and too many people are getting their stuff deleted.