PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
RULES
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
RULES
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
RULES
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
RULES
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
Offline 
unless Ricky devises a good "calling a spade a spade rule."
I apologize for the long delay. But I'm back now, so let's get this thing moving.
Agreed. Posts must refrain from having any sort of derogative language that denotes a religious slur, violent threat, etc etc.
If someone is wrong, immature behavior wont convince them that you're right.
Beauty in brevity.
Probably not a big problem here on the forum seeing as there are few theists, but the point remains; in this forum, quoting the Bible as evidence for the claims of the Bible does not prove the Bible as true. So don't do it. Period.
All quotes cited will show a biblically-themed point and/or provide clarity for a statement that is biblically-themed.
I would say we use the "golden rule", but there seem to be some sadomasochists out there, so I'll just stick to: reason without arrogance.
For Scripture-admirers, emphasis on the end of 1 Peter 3:15.
Agreed. If you can't maturely discuss the topic, we'll give you a big time-out.
So knock it off and don't make me come back there. =]
Sounds good.
-adamryan
"There is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pointless indifference. We are machines for propagating DNA. It is every living object's sole reason for being."- Richard Dawkins
Great idea guys.
It's guaranteed to boost more 'intellectual' debates on the forum here.
The reason I encourage discussion with theists, is blatenly to see (and try understand) why they believe.
I enjoy it even more when, whoever is debating knows their stuff inside an out.
"This is going to be awsome!" - bubbles
God is the omnimax creator by definition of major religions. If there is evidence that the religion is incorrect about the nature of reality, then there is evidence that the God the religion defines does not exist.
Are there any terms which are specifically prohibited? (If you don't want to list them here, just send me a PM, because I am very likely to utilize them.
)
An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.
Insidium, there are too many terms to mention. Just use your judgement. If it's borderline, the word may just be edited. If it's blatant, a warning would likely accompany the edit.
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
No profanity?
You won't see me on here LOL
Just curious. Is there a way for the "recent post" section to denote what catigory the post is in.
It is the place that gives you two tabs "All recent posts" or "my recent posts"
That is where I access the posts and not in the forum listing.
The reason I ask is that it is easy for me to click on a post but miss what catigory it is posted in. Maybe I am being to lazy. But idiot proofing that section for hotheads like me would be nice. Not that you are obligated to do such, just a thought.
I dont want to stumble into "Kill em with kindness and pull out my fangs when they dont have a chance to see it comming"
I do like the fairness of the oportunity of that section. It does give visitors the option of not getting into the boxing ring. I am myself not, as you well know, uncomfortable at all with duking it out ". So I'd be more comfortable in the other sections.
But certainly I would not want to go into the library and shout my head off when I have a drumset in the other room I can use.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
When I first come to the site every day, I come in through the main forum page to access specific forums. That way I know exactly where I am and what the rules are for that forum.
When you then go to a recent post function, posts from those forums (assuming you've read the threads) will not have the notations for now many new posts there are.
Also, on the first page of a thread, the forum is noted at the top in the breadcrumbs.
Home » forums » Sapient » Kill 'em with Kindness [edited to add breadcrumbs example from this page]Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
It might be helpful to have a link to the posting rules for the site within this post so that someone (like myself) does not get the impression they are looking at the complete list of rules when they read the rules for the KWK forum. Simply for the sake of clarity and for those posters who rarely venture outside of this one forum.
this is a good idea. all the forums should be more like this
Hi atheists, I love you.
God
Nobody "hates" you. We merely think you got it wrong with your claims. Since this is the Kill Em With Kindness section, I will keep my fangs retracted.
What you claim "being kind" is universal rule and is, to us anyway, not a law given down from the sky, but natural empathy all humans have the capability of having.
In adition Christians claim, "Love the sinner not the sin". Atheists would say, "Love the person, not always what they claim". We dont know you face to face personally. We are not out to judge you, the individual. But if you make a claim, about anything, and we have questions, we are going to face you with those hard questions.
If you think we pick solely on Christians, you would be wrong. In one of my more recent skeptical responses was to a fellow atheist about claims of teliportation. So just because you hold a label, even that of atheist, doesnt always mean I will agree.
The best thing to surviving this forum is to avoid presumptions of what atheists collectively think. Do not presume that because we blaspheme religion or that we are harsh critics of magical claims, that we automatically "hate" all theists. We dont.
Atheists are your family members, co-workers and friends. We merely think that belief in any super natural diety, of any label, is not rooted in reality, but rather ancient myth.
If you are uncomfortable with no holds barred verbal brawels, this section is for you. If you can handle the heat elsewhere in other sections, that is up to you. But either way, the best thing YOU can do for yourself is to treat everyone here as individuals and absorb what you learn here.
You will see that we are just as diverse. Some here are NFL fans while others like soccer, while others are avid readers, and some like hip hop music while others like jazz and classical music. We are diverse in politics too. Some are republican, some are democrat, some are pro second amendment, while others want more gun restrictions. Some here are pro death penalty while others are against it.
You do not have to fear us if you dont assume that we are all alike. The only thing atheists have in common is a lack of belief in the super natural. Other than that, some here like quite library type diolouge, while others are ok with WWE smackdown debates. Some are ok with both.
We do want Christians, or any theist of any label, to come here and engauge atheists so that they can see that we are human and just as diverse. We want to challenge people to think for themselves with objective introspection without blindly accepting what someone tells them. We are pro education and pro science.
You and I do have something in common. Both of use say, "Y|ou got it wrong". Thats all it amounts to, so dont take it personally if we object to, criticise or even blaspheme your deity. To use it boils down to one thing, and one thing only, EVIDENCE.
Atheists wont do anything bad to you. We dont want you arrested. We simply wont adapt your position without evidence. We can still like you as an individual but not find what you claim to be credible. In this section we do take a library tone. But in other sections some atheists, like me, will not mince words.
Enjoy your stay here, just dont presume that atheists hate all religious people when we simply dont find the claims credible. As long as you do that, and treat us as individuals, you will and can have a lengthy and productive stay. You may or may not deconvert, but stick around long enough, at a minimum you can have better understanding and learn something.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
OK Brian37, I'm ready to be educated, please prove to me that God doesn't exist, and of course I want all the evidence to go along with it. You know I don't just believe things with out having evidence to back it up
and if you take the discussion to a new thread as the moderator suggests, please let me know where you put your answer.
Please take this discussion to a new thread.
I'm new to this site. I came to this particular line of discussion because in some of the others I reviewed I was repulsed by the infantile use of profanity. The use of logic, reason and rationality should be the basis of any discussion regarding the existence of God and our responsibility to Him. You spoke of the use of evidence regarding God's existence. My first question would be concerning what constitutes credible evidence. Is this a subjective thing in which each person determines what is cogent argumentation? Obviously, someone has to set the rules regarding evidence that is cogent, valid and convincing. Who makes these rules? Does evidence have to conform to the proper use of the laws of logic? If so, then, who makes the rules for the laws of logic? If logic is merely a set of human "conventions" that facilitate communication, then, can the laws of logic change?
saintkris
Saintkris, these are fine questions, and I'm sure lots of people will be happy to answer, but this isn't the place for it. Please start a new thread in the Atheist vs. Theist thread. You can find a "Create Content" button on the left sidebar. Select "Forum Topic," and then you'll be able to choose which forum to post in.
Thanks
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
This is a great Idea. Thank you for providing a context for the pursuit of truth without all the anger this topic so often provokes.
Stop the hate. - me ( A call to my fellow believers.)
If God doesn't do things the way you think they should be done maybe you should entertain the idea that it's you who doesn't understand.
Why do you not believe in God?.........You believe if you sit down in a chair it will hold you when odds are it may not. ...... And blasphemy of the holy ghost, Is having a physical experiance with the holy ghost and then denying it to be real. Have you ? or your followers?...... Christianity is not a reglion, it is a relationship with Christ.
I am new on this site but I have been atheist for the last 10 years of my life. I realize that it doesn't matter if there is a god. He/she would't care if I am atheist, it supose to judge my acts, not only my believes, which I think is more important than just talking nice about the fairy ghosts.
But I can say that the worst people I've ever met are religious, fanatics, and pathetic. The share a double moral, they don't know if being good believers or good people. I think they prefer to be good believers because it takes a lot to be a kind, understanding and humble person.
They know that, and for them it only can be acomplished by a superior being, that's why they quit, they prefer to believe in something supernatural. "It is so hard to be like that, only Jesus could do it" thus they speak.
Being atheist is more than jus not believe, is knowing that is "here and now", no one will punish you, there is cause and effect, not "one cause and one effect".
You say "love" and the first thing that comes to their (closed) mind is "god" instead of "me".
They don't even believe in love. Is not a reallity in their life. And they don't even search for the answears.
It is sad but true, I know I am not going to any hell, even if it exist one. I dont believe in god.
ummm crud.
But the rules need to stop somewhere or all we'll be doing is sitting around holding hands.
Aussies are born swearing. Crickey. My future looks bleak...
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
Lol.
Soooo, what you are saying essentially is that for one particular section of the website you could not possibly forego profanity in favor of the alleged hand-holding?
The idea was built upon the premise of: Different strokes for different folks. I think Brian prefers the 'thousand points of light' description.
Sometimes people are 'scared' to talk to any of us for fear that we will upset their delicate sensibilities. That is reason enough to have a place like KEWK.
It isn't any kind of concession because the initial goal of debate/discussion with theists about theism is still in effect; just without expletives and/or insults.
Even mask-wearing wannabe villains can shrug off their tough-guy facade occasionally to win over the hearts and minds of others to rally them to a cause.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.
I'm ok with this darth - the things that jagged me were the snowballing calls for more and more rules - where would it end, I wondered. And the swearing. Even our prime minister swears in public. I could use the words bl**dy f**ken bast**d in a sentence and be banned in one post. Then there's the fact I never know what part of the forum I'm on when I dip into a thread. How will we know it's time to pull on the angora cardigan?
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
It's not easy to tell you're posting in KEWK so we've been lenient on the rules. We try to have "[kill em with kindness]" edited in to the title of each thread. The forum has been up and running for 3 years and the tentative rules are still the rules and I can't think of anyone who has been banned permanently from the site over it.
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
We are just and loving mods.
Most of the time, the expletive and/or insult gets deleted. Sometimes we drop a private message to 'warn' or mention the problem.
When it happens, I think the best thing we would do is to add [KEWK] to the thread title. However, at the top of the page each time it loads is the forum and subforum the thread inhabits. We really try to move threads to their appropriate contextual place whenever possible. Unfortunately, we don't get every single one, including the one that I posted to you in another thread that was about neuroscience and wound up in philosophy.
Essentially, no one would be banned for a first or even a second offense unless they started complaining about the editing and being 'censored' and using more expletives to describe our respective mothers' sexual proclivities.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.
That makes sense to me. It's a challenge when swearing is a cultural layer of supplementary adverbs.
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
I access posts the same way to see which are most currently active. A simple red box or something on the top left corner would do just fine so those of us who have gotten use to doing it this way are easily warned that we must mind our manners in that thread.
So, does this include saying things like, "Your argument seems irrational to me because of x, y, and z?" Do we make a distinction between attacking and ridiculing ideas as opposed to attacking and ridiculing people?
Just do your best to be as kind as possible in this forum. The sentence you laid out is skirting the edge of the rules.
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Great idea guys.
It's guaranteed to boost more 'intellectual' debates on the forum here.
The reason I encourage discussion with theists, is blatenly to see (and try understand) why they believe.
I enjoy it even more when, whoever is debating knows their stuff inside an out.
God is the omnimax creator by definition of major religions. If there is evidence that the religion is incorrect about the nature of reality, then there is evidence that the God the religion defines does not exist.
(Edited by butterbattle: No advertising please. Refer to the RRS rules of conduct.
Rules of Conduct )
If you want to stay on this website I would advise you to lose your advertisement in your posts. I am no mod, but I can tell you trolls are not viewed kindly, not just here, but at most sites.
If you are a lagi person interested in debate with theists, it most certainly is welcome. But posting links that look like adds in your first posts comes across as advertising.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
This comment has been moved here.
This comment has been moved here.
Hello,
I feel loved in this forum, almost like christmas morning.
Harley, plese note #1 and the rest for that matter lol.
Brian, in the this forum, we are good friends, Harley too : )
I do not know if Jesus loves you, He may hae you, I do know that life is short and that answer will absolutely be known by you someday very soon.
Respectfully,
Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).
A Rational Christian of Intelligence (rare)with a valid and sound justification for my epistemology and a logical refutation for those with logical fallacies and false worldviews upon their normative of thinking in retrospect to objective normative(s). This is only understood via the imago dei in which we all are.
Respectfully,
Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).