Rule 4.2 revision

[kimber1]

well this is certainly a point but also a point where the Church would say that giving the child up for adoption is more beneficial because then you are not destroying the child but also you are not encumbered with the child that in turn might cause harm to you psychologically as well.... very rare is it that the Church would allow an abortion unless it was so detrimental to the Mother that she would not live, in the process of giving birth....

Life is always put foremost ....but I can agree that this is an agrument of contention.... the point is that it would have to have biblical basis or objective proof as to how it may be done without breaking the confines of doctrine .... I guess that is what they are trying to say....

i understand that debi, but that's the CATHOLIC POV and unfortunately not everyone is Catholic

 

[Debi1967]

i understand that debi, but that's the CATHOLIC POV and unfortunately not everyone is Catholic

No they are not.... but I was addressing you under the mistaken thought of something else so go on dear Sister ..... Sorry to have interrupted you in your argumentation ....

 

[Rochir]

It is very hard to do when we are under the constant attack of those that disagree with us in the other forums to properly instruct our Catechumens (for example, in the Catholic Faith) as to the reasons why it is doctrinal that abortion ( for example ) is not allowed in the Church....

You know, that would be even ok, if at the same time liberal Christians would not be punished if in their own forum they post and teach that gays and lebsians are welcome in the church and that e.g. abortions under certain circumstance are indeed acceptable!

The right to teach according to your faith should extend to all!

 

[OldShepherd]

Betcha $10 it applies both ways.

It does. Any, pro, con, neutral, discussion of the morality of the listed topics will be restricted to the forums listed.

 

[Debi1967]

You know, that would be even ok, if at the same time liberal Christians would not be punished if in their own forum they post and teach that gays and lebsians are welcome in the church and that e.g. abortions under certain circumstance are indeed acceptable!

The right to teach according to your faith should extend to all!

I am all for equality here and what is good for the goose is good for the gander ..... since when have you ever seen me post a post like that in this fora that was not objective Rochir?

That means that every Faith would be able to teach their teachings ..... that is only fair .... I may not agree with some others but that is not my DECISION to make and I can then take that subject to the fora specified to be able to debate it .... can I not?

 

[kimber1]

no problem debi. i know where you're coming from and you where i'm coming from. all i want is fairness to all not only to one piece of the puzzle.

The right to teach according to your faith should extend to all!

that's it right there in a nutshell

 

[Rochir]

When faced with the decision of having to follow God's Law or man's Law who do we follow first? GOD'S ....

And what exactly God's Law is has been under debate from the inception of Christianity onwards!

I am sorry, but your way of arguing implies that there is only one way - your way! Sorry to say but that is not what goes on in this world. in the real world, you have millions of Christians rejecting abortion and homosexuality, and you have millions of Christians accepting these two subjects and embracing them!

It is fine if you declare your view about God's Law on this site - it should be equally valid and proper to voice other opinions about the same Law!

 

[*Starlight*]

True and I see where you are coming from .... and agree that it would be easier for you to be able to post without retribution ....

Lovingly In Christ
Debi

Well, I wasn't talking about myself, because I'm not homosexual... But I'm sure there are people on CF who are in homosexual relationships.

 

[Debi1967]

It does. Any, pro, con, neutral, discussion of the morality of the listed topics will be restricted to the forums listed.

True but how can ANY POV be truly expressed adequately to someone that is searching in their own FAITH if it is cinstantly being contradicted by another?

Thus the reason why it should be extended that if a Catholic wants to know the Catholic POV then they should be allowed to discuss it in OBOB and if a Methodist want sto know a Methodist POV they should be allowed to discuss in the Methodist forum ect .... this way they are not getting conflicting POV that will only hinder them from understanding ....

This is often the problem that we encounter, as I deal with many newbies, or Catechumens that are then asking me questions privately because they go to these forums, and so much information is being given to them they cannot decipher it all ....

This is a matter of respecting someone and respecting the Faiths on the board to be able to express their doctrines and morals freely to one another.... I can understand that open debate about such issues amongst all of us should be limited to certain forums, but I do not understand why we respectively cannot talk about such issues within our own confines.....

 

[Debi1967]

Well, I wasn't talking about myself, because I'm not homosexual... But I'm sure there are people on CF who are in homosexual relationships.

Sorry starlight, I should not have assumed .... please forgive me a sinner

 

[pdudgeon]

Sorry, but right now, abortion is a legal choice in many western countries/societies and thus has every right and moral ground of being mentioned and defended. Many Christians in Europe and the USA/Canada support abortion under the law. Just because you do not see it as such doesn’t make it a site rule. The revision of 4.2 doesn’t state anywhere that only one side may be stated! So a thread stating “Abortion after rape should be allowed” under the new rule revision is as much allowed as a thread stating the opposite. As long as no discussion takes place, both sides on the topics outlined under rule 4.2. should be within the rules!

yep, it's covered right here:
f. depicts self-harm, suicide, cruelty to animals or harm towards others

abortion harms the fetus and as such is covered under this rule.

 

[JesusFreak2006]

yep, it's covered right here:
f. depicts self-harm, suicide, cruelty to animals or harm towards others

abortion harms the fetus and as such is covered under this rule.

Great defense!

 

[Debi1967]

And what exactly God's Law is has been under debate from the inception of Christianity onwards!

I am sorry, but your way of arguing implies that there is only one way - your way! Sorry to say but that is not what goes on in this world. in the real world, you have millions of Christians rejecting abortion and homosexuality, and you have millions of Christians accepting these two subjects and embracing them!

It is fine if you declare your view about God's Law on this site - it should be equally valid and proper to voice other opinions about the same Law!

This is true to an extent and I say an extent because even Erwin has defined what is scripturally a biblical marriage and what is not.... he has also then declared that objective proof must be provided to support such opinions .... therefore it is not just an opinion of someone is it but one that is backed up with objective proof .... going back to rule 1, we see what that proof can consist of ....


1.3 You will only post negative statements about another individual’s belief or religious organization (including non-Christian religions) with objective evidence provided. Members are allowed to say “The doctrines X church is false because of Y scriptures and Z other relevant evidence”.

Now as I have had explained to me by the Admins of this site and if I am wrong here they may correct me as necessary.... Just because one rule stands in one section does not mean that it does not also have to be taken in light of the other rules as a whole. Therefore in context of the rules rule 4.2 and this rule would coincide with one another, making the rule of substantiation necessary with objective evidence.... Then considering that some people might consider the fact that if your opinion states that because they are doing this and that they are not then Christian .... this rule would then apply

1.5You will not directly state or otherwise imply that another member is not a Christian if he or she falls under Rule 6.5 and 6.6 and he or she does not have a hidden faith icon without providing substantiation from scripture or doctrine or historic church writtings.

This then tells you the proof required .....

Now I may be corrected here but this is the way that I have been taught to read the rules properly so as to follow them, and so as not to infringe upon them .....

 

[*Starlight*]

Sorry starlight, I should not have assumed .... please forgive me a sinner

It's ok Everyone makes mistakes.

 

[drstevej]

Staff have discussed this for several months and Rule 4.2 has been revised.

.: Forum Rule 4 :. Rule No. 4 - No "Offensive" or "Illegal" Posts, PMs, Links, or Images
4.1 You will not post, attach, use or send any posts, PMs, links, images or files:
a. that are obscene, vulgar, or sexually explicit (including any descriptions of sexual organs or activities in any detail). This is a PG-rated website.
b. that are hateful, racist, or sexist (discussions regarding certain biblical interpretations on the roles of men and women will not be considered "sexist" under this rule).
c. that violate or promote the violation of local or international laws and regulations (including the posting of any copyright material such as songs, movies or text). All quoted articles from external sources such as news articles must not be more than 10% of the original article to be legal or else copyright is infringed. A link must be provided to all quoted material. The only exception is quotes for AP (Associated Press) articles which are limited to one sentence only.
d. that are blasphemous or satanic (including posts that take the Lord's name in vain).
e. puts down or belittles Christianity as a whole, a Christian group or denomination or God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, the Bible or any other Christian objects of significance (as this is a Christian website after all).
f. depicts self-harm, suicide, cruelty to animals or harm towards others.
4.2 You will restrict any posts debating the morality of the following controversial topics to the Ethics & Morality, Liberal Theology or Christian Philosophy forums (threads and posts related to these topics, which do not debate the morality of these topics, are allowed):
a. drug use.
b. gambling.
c. polygamy.
d. extramarital sexual activity.
e. abortion.
f. homosexuality.
g. transsexuality.
This site uses the scriptural definition of marriage which is a union between a man and a woman. In addition, the debate of the morality of the above topics must be backed by evidence complete with citations. Standard citations are acceptable but links are preferred. The above topics are also disallowed in profile entries including avatars and signatures as these are not intended to be used in such a manner.
4.3 You will remove any word and use an alternative if the word you posted is automatically censored by the site. You will not bypass the automatic word censor in any way.
4.4 You must be 18 years of age or older and female to post replies in the “Women’s Discussion” forum; the only exceptions are the "Men's Shed" and "Teen Girls" sticky threads. You must be 18 years of age or older and male to post replies in the "Men's Corner" forum; the only expections are the "Ladies Bathroom Stall" and "Teen Guys" sticky threads.




​

The main difference that if a post or thread is not about the morality of the listed controversial topics then they can be posted anywhere on CF.

Also, you only need to post evidence if you are debating the issue.

We'll see how things pan out with this revision.

So, if a post simply discusses one's abortions (etc) in a manner that presents this as a normal (morally neutral) aspect of life without specifically stating that it is normal it's OK anywhere on CF?

EXAMPLES (Post in female teen forum):

The last month my lesbian partner had an abortion which was an answer to prayer.

(Post in male teen forum)

Anyone know where to go for an inexpensive abortion?

(Teen forum post)

Any advice on the process of getting a gender change? I am finally ready for this step.

AND in these examples any responses that challenge these acts as sin is subject to moderator action?

CF will be a very different place under the new rule.


Sad.

 

[Avatar]

Homosexuality is morally offensive to God and Christians. Abortion is morally offensive to God and to Christians. Extramarital Sex is morally offensive to God and to Christians, etc.

No. Yes. Yes.

 

[Debi1967]

So, if a post simply discusses one's abortions (etc) in a manner that presents this as a normal (morally neutral) aspect of life without specifically stating that it is normal it's OK anywhere on CF?

EXAMPLES (Post in female teen forum):



(Post in male teen forum)



(Teen forum post)



AND in these examples any responses that challenge these acts as sin is subject to moderator action?

CF will be a very different place under the new rule.


Sad.

umm these are situations that I did not think of ..... WOW! what if this did come up? then this means that essentially if it wasn't posted in the forums specified then we could say nothing to dissuade the person ....

AS CHRISTIANS we have an obligation to!!!!!!!

 

[*Starlight*]

So, if a post simply discusses one's abortions (etc) in a manner that presents this as a normal (morally neutral) aspect of life without specifically stating that it is normal it's OK anywhere on CF?

EXAMPLES (Post in female teen forum):



(Post in male teen forum)



(Teen forum post)



AND in these examples any responses that challenge these acts as sin is subject to moderator action?

CF will be a very different place under the new rule.


Sad.

Why sad? It's just that the morality of it can't be discussed in any way... It can't be promoted, but it also can't be condenmed.

 

[Debi1967]

No. Yes. Yes.

Yes yes & yes ..... there is a Catholic icon by your name am I right and did you just say that homosexuality was not morally offensive to God? Just asking for clarification here..... As I want to make clear that according to the Church and Her Teachings it is....

 

[Debi1967]

Why sad? It's just that the morality of it can't be discussed in any way... It can't be promoted, but it also can't be condenmed.

In all the situations that he stated he stated situations that would illicit promotion of some sort of the act......