Poll of TAW for rule

[Hermit76]

truncated by me

I feel the same way about MAGA.
I find that to be equally, if not even more, polarizing and just as anti-Christian.
If we're going to start banning social/political slogans and imagery, perhaps all of them should be done away with.

I disagree. A slogan that represents a candidate vs an evil organization. It's not the same thing.

 

[FenderTL5]

I disagree. A slogan that represents a candidate vs an evil organization. It's not the same thing.

you left out an adjective. evil candidate vs evil organization
no difference in my estimation

 

[Hermit76]

Well, but here's the thing: somebody with a BLM logo is arguably following the lead of the head of the largest jurisdiction of Orthodox Christians in America, which arguably encompasses the majority or Orthodox Christians in America. He is also the head of the Assembly of Bishops, which is kind of like the conference of all Orthodox bishops in America, to give context for the moderator who posted this thread initially. This is something that has happened and quite recently at that. You say this is a bad justification for allowing it because you can come up with a hypothetical that is arguably structurally dissimilar involving Planned Parenthood. I think this is laughably sloppy even if the analogy were better. Fair, Archishop Elpidophoros will likely never be on this forum. But we are dealing with something that has actually happened here! I really don't think we want to get into a position of trying to force people to be more Orthodox than the heads of major jurisdictions.

We commemorate Patriarch Kirill of Moscow. Should we make believe he was on here as well? I mean he is the Patriarch of the largest segment of Orthodox in the world. How pious is your submission to bishopric after all?

 

[Hermit76]

you left out an adjective. evil candidate vs evil organization
no difference in my estimation

All candidates are evil. I believe there is basis to forbid the promotion of BLM without forbidding the promotion of a Candidate. I feel the same about Joe Biden slogans.

 

[archer75]

Maybe we should keep things on a low flame here and just discuss this rule.

 

[archer75]

double post

 

[FenderTL5]

All candidates are evil.

I tend to agree. The last election and now this one is most often characterized as the lesser of evils.
To support the lesser evil is still support of evil.

I believe there is basis to forbid the promotion of BLM without forbidding the promotion of a Candidate. I feel the same about Joe Biden slogans.

the MAGA imagery and paraphernalia has become a touchstone of anger and
hate. Most of which is perpetuated by the candidate's rhetoric.
Again, in my opinion, if we ban one we should ban them all.

I asked who proposed the rule and for what purpose. No one has answered.
I can only presume it is based on partisan political objectives.

 

[gzt]

Well, I don't think we should ban any statements Patriarch Kirill has marched in favor of either, yes. EDIT: I'm not sure if you have something in mind?

 

[Hermit76]

Well, I don't think we should ban any statements Patriarch Kirill has marched in favor of either, yes. EDIT: I'm not sure if you have something in mind?

Sorry gzt... I'm lost with this. Patriarch Kirill hasn't mentioned it but the Vice Chancellor did:

The movement Black Lives Matter in the US, UK and some other countries is becoming increasingly anti-Christian and anti-civilizational character. This was indicated by the Vice-Chancellor of the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), Bishop of Zelenograd Savva (Tutunov)

 

[prodromos]

you left out an adjective. evil candidate vs evil organization
no difference in my estimation

All the candidates are evil.

 

[gzt]

Why we're having this discussion on this non-Orthodox board is beyond me. I guess it's because the volunteer mods keep this place livable...even though they're not Orthodox.

I think the real issue isn't Orthodox vs non-Orthodox mods, as fair moderation can be done either way. What is a problem is that we don't have rules against questioning the Orthodox faith of others who are Orthodox. This leads to people making accusations on non-dogmatic matters of a lack of faith. Now, not being Orthodox, I suppose the moderators are unable to tell whether these accusations are about matters of faith or not, but being Orthodox would not fix the problem if they were mistaken about it, as (for instance) somebody would be if they were to claim that young earth creationism is Orthodox doctrine. Or that having a Black Lives Matter logo of some sort is against the Orthodox faith. There are big problems when people try to make something a rule of the Orthodox faith something that absolutely is not a rule of the Orthodox faith.

 

[gzt]

Sorry gzt... I'm lost with this. Patriarch Kirill hasn't mentioned it but the Vice Chancellor did:

Well, I'm not going to suggest banning somebody who has that opinion. Both that opinion and its contrary can coexist on the board.

 

[archer75]

I think the real issue isn't Orthodox vs non-Orthodox mods, as fair moderation can be done either way. What is a problem is that we don't have rules about questioning the Orthodox faith of others who are Orthodox. This leads to people making accusations on non-dogmatic matters of a lack of faith. Now, not being Orthodox, I suppose the moderators are unable to tell whether these accusations are about matters of faith or not, but being Orthodox would not fix the problem if they were mistaken about it, as (for instance) somebody would be if they were to claim that young earth creationism is Orthodox doctrine. Or that having a Black Lives Matter logo of some sort is against the Orthodox faith. There are big problems when people try to make something a rule of the Orthodox faith something that absolutely is not a rule of the Orthodox faith.

I meant "gee, I wonder why we're here...oh, I guess it's because there are plusses to being here." i.e.—i.e. we're not being kept prisoner here by people in heterodox communions.

 

[prodromos]

It would be odd if the Archbishop of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America were somehow blocked from posting here because of a hopelessly vague and inaccurate rule.

The Archbishop has done some questionable things and would not be above moderation. Why he is marching alongside a politician who fought for an abortion clinic is beyond me.

 

[Hermit76]

Well, I'm not going to suggest banning somebody who has that opinion. Both that opinion and its contrary can coexist on the board.

Not according to the statement I shared. I will remind you that you are the individual that has continually utilized a Bishop's actions to justify your usage of the BLM agenda on this board.

 

[Hermit76]

The Archbishop has done some questionable things and would not be above moderation. Why he is marching alongside a politician who fought for an abortion clinic is beyond me.

We are talking about a Bishop's that has blocked large segments of his faithful on social media.

 

[Lukaris]

I think the BLM symbol should not be banned. I personally believe it is really against all lives mattering. Misguided individuals subscribed to this need to be persuaded, not forbidden, to subscribe to it. Of course social matters are not looking good either.

 

[gzt]

This message board allows people to block other people as well! Doing so doesn't stop you from being on the message board, I'm not sure why it's at all relevant.

 

[gzt]

Not according to the statement I shared. I will remind you that you are the individual that has continually utilized a Bishop's actions to justify your usage of the BLM agenda on this board.

I don't see why allowing somebody to state those things on the board is inconsistent with somebody else on the board supporting Black Lives Matter?

 

[FenderTL5]

Who proposed the rule change and for what purpose?