• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Poll of TAW for rule

Do you want this rule


  • Total voters
    27
Status
Not open for further replies.

FenderTL5

Κύριε, ἐλέησον.
Site Supporter
Jun 13, 2016
5,669
6,633
Nashville TN
✟769,705.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
It's gonna get bad this year.
Unfortunately I must agree. I also have to agree with what gzt said earlier, "We must be very careful not to conflate the demands of our particular political persuasions with our faith."
Statements of faith based on political positions is a dangerous endeavor.
 
Upvote 0

Phronema

Orthodox Christian
Site Supporter
Dec 2, 2016
1,389
1,533
43
Southern PA
✟786,650.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
No, you're right. I posted in haste. Sorry about that
It ISN'T compatible with Christianity. But it also bothers me that it sounds like this book-learning movement when it isn't even that...

I do apologize if I came across as rude archer as that wasn't my intent.

You're right as well that at least some people probably claim to be some "trained" Marxist, and likely aren't really familiar with half of what that even entails. The idea of a potential insurrection though is infuriating to me, and that's what I think of when I hear the term Marxist. Revolutions have a bad habit of following those guys, and it's kind of a touchy subject for me considering my job. But this is political, and not religious in nature so I'm off-topic.

I'll be stepping back from the topic for now though. I apologize again if I came off as rude to you, and I'd ask that you please forgive me.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 15, 2008
19,476
7,488
Central California
✟292,945.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
So I could put a swastika in here or hammer and sickle, picture of Che or other avatar? There are limits.

I'm in agreement that the organization itself is not to be trusted, but I don't think we should police logos (avatars) on TAW.
 
Upvote 0

Nick T

Lurker
May 31, 2010
584
144
UK
✟23,155.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
I'm not so much a regular poster here as a long time lurker and only occasional contributor, so i'm not sure my opinion counts for much, but I'll give it anyway.

Firstly unless I'm missing some vital context, the specificity of the rule seems very obviously targeted at a specific active poster here who, despite having political differences with other posters, has never written anything even implying that he is not an Orthodox Christian in good standing. In fact despite sporting a BLM avatar this poster has quite clearly stated that this is not out of support for any of the unchristian positions the BLM organisation, but simply out of support for the wider protest movement. With that clarification in place what need is there for a witch hunt against him? The whole proposal seems specifically designed either to ban him from the forum or humiliate him by publicly forcing him to change his avatar against his specific wishes. The whole thing leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.
This is a particular shame because in my opinion one of the good things historically about this forum is the practical advice it provides to inquirers without automatically drawing them into the various divisions and debates that plague the rest of the Orthodox internet.

Secondly the proposal itself still seems rather vague to me. What very specifically is going to be defined as "supporting the organisation BLM"? A ban on trademarked images makes sense, but we already have posters who consider even uttering the phrase "Black Lives Matter" an automatic declaration of support for the organisation, despite the fact the phrase is used around the world by thousands who have never even heard of that group and has come to symbolise a global sentiment quite unrelated to any opinion on the nuclear family. Would making such a statement be a bannable offence? What about expressing approval for any of the modern anti-racism protests, as even bishops have done? Or simply believing that systematic racism exists and radical change is needed? Being vague on the specifics will simply escalate the toxicity of discussion as people trade accusations based on their own interpretations of what "support" means. If this proposal is going to go ahead it should be crystal clear what does and, more importantly, what doesn't entail such support so that posters don't have to worry about being accused or banned simply because they express a view that others disagree with.
 
Upvote 0

archer75

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 16, 2016
5,931
4,650
USA
✟301,272.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
So I could put a swastika in here or hammer and sickle, picture of Che or other avatar? There are limits.
I think CF should be the limiting authority.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gzt
Upvote 0

Hermit76

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 5, 2015
1,742
2,191
East Tennessee
✟316,185.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Cussing isn't forbidden by the Orthodox Church... Can I cuss now?

I think the week long vote is a bad idea btw. This needs a yes or no soon. This isn't healthy for anyone #*@€¢£!
 
  • Like
Reactions: rusmeister
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,534
5,295
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟491,917.00
Country
Montenegro
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I'm not so much a regular poster here as a long time lurker and only occasional contributor, so i'm not sure my opinion counts for much, but I'll give it anyway.

Firstly unless I'm missing some vital context, the specificity of the rule seems very obviously targeted at a specific active poster here who, despite having political differences with other posters, has never written anything even implying that he is not an Orthodox Christian in good standing. In fact despite sporting a BLM avatar this poster has quite clearly stated that this is not out of support for any of the unchristian positions the BLM organisation, but simply out of support for the wider protest movement. With that clarification in place what need is there for a witch hunt against him? The whole proposal seems specifically designed either to ban him from the forum or humiliate him by publicly forcing him to change his avatar against his specific wishes. The whole thing leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.
This is a particular shame because in my opinion one of the good things historically about this forum is the practical advice it provides to inquirers without automatically drawing them into the various divisions and debates that plague the rest of the Orthodox internet.

Secondly the proposal itself still seems rather vague to me. What very specifically is going to be defined as "supporting the organisation BLM"? A ban on trademarked images makes sense, but we already have posters who consider even uttering the phrase "Black Lives Matter" an automatic declaration of support for the organisation, despite the fact the phrase is used around the world by thousands who have never even heard of that group and has come to symbolise a global sentiment quite unrelated to any opinion on the nuclear family. Would making such a statement be a bannable offence? What about expressing approval for any of the modern anti-racism protests, as even bishops have done? Or simply believing that systematic racism exists and radical change is needed? Being vague on the specifics will simply escalate the toxicity of discussion as people trade accusations based on their own interpretations of what "support" means. If this proposal is going to go ahead it should be crystal clear what does and, more importantly, what doesn't entail such support so that posters don't have to worry about being accused or banned simply because they express a view that others disagree with.

Hi, Nick,
The need for the rule may have been TRIGGERED by the choices of a specific member, but are NOT meant merely to "target a specific member", but to decide whether a thing may be done in general or not. The issue of an avatar that is at once political and that is decidedly connected by a great many people with anti-Christian and anti-American acts in recent months and a definite, well-known, and well-funded organization that is open about its anti-Christian beliefs. WE have already proposed multiple ways that any member who believes in "systemic racism" could legitimately express that (though I think that it is unwise for any of us to use our avatars to make political statements) while completely disconnecting themselves from the evil associations. "Black lives are sacred, too" would do it; tell me why that is unacceptable. Adhering to the specific wording means insisting on the association, which is the whole problem.
And "trademarking" is irrelevant. Is the swastika trademarked? Is Che Guevara's image under copyright? The trouble with the lawyerly approach is that it ignores natural associations in people's minds. Setting aside the proposition that lawyers are not real people, people are not lawyers. If you fly a flag, we're not going to ask if you have a license for that. We're going to take it that you mean what the most well-known actors flying the flag have meant, and that you agree with and support them. We're not going to inquire into your articles of incorporation.
The trouble with talking about "disagreeing" and "other voices" and "variety of opinion" is that flying a flag connected to evil action and belief constitutes supporting it. It means countenancing the actions and beliefs by effective silence (where is one going to fit loud disclaimers on that same flag disassociating them from the evil?). It is trying to serve two masters. Riots are bad. Anarchy is bad. Sexual anarchy is bad. It ought to be as plain as a pig in a poke that we must not appear to support such things. That's why we have to forbid an avatar of the Ku Klux Klan or Guevara. There is no room for disagreement, or other voices, or a variety of opinion. Guevara or Communist supporters ostensibly desire good things; they hate particular evils created under capitalism and desire to end them. But despite the good intentions of many, the leadership has consistently shown their commitment to evil ends. So it is with BLM. Many people of good intention and will who hate racial injustice and desire to help end it. Their good intentions are irrelevant to what is actually done loudly and with great fanfare in their name. That's why there's no room for it.

It's FINE to be against racial injustice, especially if you have been racially unjust yourself. Joseph Pearce was a white supremacist advocating violence against minorities who did prison time, met Chesterton, became Catholic, and now blasts white supremacism. But protesting against an attitude in people's hearts is vain. There is sin in our own hearts. Protesting a specific injustice is NOT vain. You can hope to achieve justice. But when you do protest against something specific (and a huge portion even of people who peacefully protest are protesting against a general attitude and avoid being specific) you have to be sure you are disassociated from those openly doing and advocating evil. A refusal to do that IS to associate yourself with them. Claiming that you are not is as silly as a person flying a swastika denying connection to the Nazis. If, say, a violent organization arose to combat abortion using known logos or symbolism, and I adopted that symbolism because I think abortion the one political issue on which there is no doubt - immediate abolition is the only answer, I would be just as guilty, however right I am to hate abortion.

In the end division is unavoidable. Everyone has to choose their side. Because of the evil associations, a majority of us here are voting that people choose another way to express their political desires and disassociate from the organizations using those symbols and slogans.
 
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,534
5,295
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟491,917.00
Country
Montenegro
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I'll think on this for a while, considering I've had my fill of all the insanity in this world that seems to keep going. Divisions, hate, insane sayings and ideas thrown about throughout social media. Cancel culture - the biggest insanity at this moment. It's like things just keep getting worse and worse. The evil one is having a picnic with all the destruction and hate going on in the world. Because of all of this, I'm not ready to take on another issue with a rule on language and beliefs and disallowing voices. We're in desperate need of civil discourse in this country. I think the answer is somewhere in between.

Sorry. Give me some time...
I'd say the same to you that I said to Nick, Dot. We can't tolerate all things and all opinions. Sometimes we have to take a side. With prayer, repentance, seeing ourselves as the chief of sinners, believing in God's mercy anyway - and it IS mercy, and we very much deserve our fates that He wants to save us from. We'd like to be nice to everybody and for everybody to be nice to us. Niceness is pleasant. But goodness is not always nice, and niceness is not always good. But we are called to goodness.
 
Upvote 0

archer75

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 16, 2016
5,931
4,650
USA
✟301,272.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Wow, I'm sick of this. This all really makes me want a separate and hidden sub where we can read this stuff...or not.

No more chat on this thread for me. My vote's no unless the wording is changed to prevent most possible future bickering about interpretation of the rule.
 
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,534
5,295
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟491,917.00
Country
Montenegro
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Unfortunately I must agree. I also have to agree with what gzt said earlier, "We must be very careful not to conflate the demands of our particular political persuasions with our faith."
Statements of faith based on political positions is a dangerous endeavor.
I totally agree. One excellent reason why I think making one's avatar a political statement (and, yes, in its most innocent form it remains a political statement) a bad idea. It communicates to others "This is what is most important to me", in a forum dedicated to our Faith.
 
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,534
5,295
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟491,917.00
Country
Montenegro
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Wow, I'm sick of this. This all really makes me want a separate and hidden sub where we can read this stuff...or not.

No more chat on this thread for me. My vote's no unless the wording is changed to prevent most possible future bickering about interpretation of the rule.
Who's NOT sick of it? Why do you think the issue ever came up?
If people weren't committed to the specific logos and slogans, it would never have become an issue.
 
Upvote 0
Dec 16, 2011
5,214
2,557
59
Home
Visit site
✟251,766.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Eternal Life Matters, not any other kind of life. But social catch phrases aren't going to correct evil in the world. Only when a person fights against the evil in their own heart does any good come, and that good is God working in and through such a person. Do this, and throw away that idolatrous (ideological) sign/banner.
Divine Love? Or A Conceptualized Love Made Into An Idol (ideology), Thirsty For Human Blood Sacrifice?

The Continuing Saga Of The B L M Sign (continued From Previous Post)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Jude1:3Contendforthefaith

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dec 28, 2017
3,873
2,899
Arizona
✟603,355.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
So I could put a swastika in here or hammer and sickle, picture of Che or other avatar? There are limits.


200.gif


.
 
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,534
5,295
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟491,917.00
Country
Montenegro
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Hi, SFB,
Let me talk about something else for a minute, by way of illustration. My mother has joined Ahmadi Islam in the US. The Ahmadi are a small group considered heretical by mainstream Islam, as they deny Islamic tradition around jihad and violence as an option, among other things. This makes them very attractive to Westerners, who are tired of Christianity, tired of hearing what they have never heard, yet still seeking spiritual life in organized religion. The Ahmadi identify as Muslim even though they are not recognized as proper Muslims by the vast majority, very much like Mormons vis-a-vis Christianity.

The other Muslims in the West use this to their advantage. Thanks to the doctrine of taqiyya, which allows them to lie to us even about the doctrine of taqiyya, allows them to ignore their differences while the Ahmadi pick up converts and Islam spreads in the US, which it is doing with frightening speed. It is clear that when they achieve enough political power to effectively rule a large enough portion of the nation (Michigan and Minnesota are increasingly coming under their thumb), the Ahmadi will be swept aside as such, and many converts like my mother will face a choice between becoming a disdained and persecuted minority or accepting Shiia or Sunni Islam. It won’t matter that they were sincere, wanted good things, and hated bad things. They would already be seen as apostate Muslims (however bad as Muslims) and Sharia Law has the harshest penalties for that.

And one more thing - from Chesterton’s amazing novel (it literally is like a maze that amazes), “The Man Who Was Thursday”:

Do not confuse it,” replied the constable, “with those chance dynamite outbreaks from Russia or from Ireland, which are really the outbreaks of oppressed, if mistaken, men. This is a vast philosophic movement, consisting of an outer and an inner ring. You might even call the outer ring the laity and the inner ring the priesthood. I prefer to call the outer ring the innocent section, the inner ring the supremely guilty section. The outer ring—the main mass of their supporters—are merely anarchists; that is, men who believe that rules and formulas have destroyed human happiness. They believe that all the evil results of human crime are the results of the system that has called it crime. They do not believe that the crime creates the punishment. They believe that the punishment has created the crime. They believe that if a man seduced seven women he would naturally walk away as blameless as the flowers of spring. They believe that if a man picked a pocket he would naturally feel exquisitely good. These I call the innocent section.” 34
“Oh!” said Syme. 35
“Naturally, therefore, these people talk about ‘a happy time coming’; ‘the paradise of the future’; ‘mankind freed from the bondage of vice and the bondage of virtue,’ and so on. And so also the men of the inner circle speak—the sacred priesthood. They also speak to applauding crowds of the happiness of the future, and of mankind freed at last. But in their mouths”—and the policeman lowered his voice—“in their mouths these happy phrases have a horrible meaning. They are under no illusions; they are too intellectual to think that man upon this earth can ever be quite free of original sin and the struggle. And they mean death. When they say that mankind shall be free at last, they mean that mankind shall commit suicide. When they talk of a paradise without right or wrong, they mean the grave. They have but two objects, to destroy first humanity and then themselves. That is why they throw bombs instead of firing pistols. The innocent rank and file are disappointed because the bomb has not killed the king; but the high-priesthood are happy because it has killed somebody.”

I think it’s the same with BLM. The small organization you try to deny as significant, which is the heavily-funded one and is using the larger movement of “the outer circle” of innocent people who rightly hate racial injustice to advance their real cause of tearing down Western civilization and rebuilding it in their own godless image, is running the show and even using the people of the innocent outer circle here. That they themselves are being used by the devil is not on their radar, I guess, but they do believe that they need to put an end to what is left of the once-great Christian civilization; its natural decadence is not enough for them. It may be that their impatience in pushing riots, destruction, and mayhem will be their undoing. And they do use the apparent support of the outer circle to claim legitimacy for their mad destruction. All of the people in all of the “movement” serve them, whether they will or nill. Anyone flying one of their standards serves them, and gives the appearance of popular support to them; the more so because these same people do NOT come out and loudly condemn the organization.
And once they wield power, the “outerlies” will be swept aside, as the more innocent communists were in Russia and China, and they will rule by fear, and you could find yourself a new Boethius, perhaps in prison for your beliefs, writing your own “Consolation of Philosophy”.

“The wisest thing in the world is to cry out before you are hurt. It is no good to cry out after you are hurt; especially after you are mortally hurt. People talk about the impatience of the populace; but sound historians know that most tyrannies have been possible because men moved too late. It is often essential to resist a tyranny before it exists. It is no answer to say, with a distant optimism, that the scheme is only in the air. A blow from a hatchet can only be parried while it is in the air.” GKC, “Eugenics and Other Evils”
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.