|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 9:10 pm
i'm thinking of starting a keeping the peace campaign that would ask that guilds that are christian, and non-political, but have members starting political conversation that might hurt people of one side (usually the more liberal side) of the debate, that those guilds would enact rules that would keep them from discussing politics. mean Radical Green Crayon and some other people have been chewed out for being more liberal. so in guilds, not like this one, but in general fellowship guilds, that there will be a rule against politics, so that liberals and conservative would not argue. now this guild wouldn't have to, because its a guild for liberal christians. who thinks that that would be easier for people, cuz its really hard to argue when its 2 against 20 and it causes problems between members later
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 1:27 pm
Within a given guild, if the situation calls for it, it might be a good idea; but as a general rule I don't think those kinds of limitations help matters. In fact not talking about the intersection of religeon and politics only reinforces the misconception that christians back deplorable falwellesque agendas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:30 am
oswulf Within a given guild, if the situation calls for it, it might be a good idea; but as a general rule I don't think those kinds of limitations help matters. In fact not talking about the intersection of religeon and politics only reinforces the misconception that christians back deplorable falwellesque agendas. Ok, the second to last word I didn't understand, but all I'm trying to do is remind people not to attack the person, but the issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 7:38 am
falwellesque referring to Rev. Jerry Jalwell. There is far too much of an assumption out there that his views are representative of Christians, and if politics is a taboo topic, then that assumption doesn't get addressed.
I have no quarrel with asking people to attack the issue, not the person. I do not think that calling for the banning of political discussion is the best way to achieve this goal. If a given community needs to do so that may be understandable, but that shouldn't be anywhere near the table until other options have been exhausted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 08, 2006 8:14 pm
it would take some persuasive diplomacy within each particular guild, i feel.
i doubt an organized campaign "from the outside" will have much impact.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
