"Thumper" and/or "Bible Thumper"

[Annie]

Having spent more than 5 minutes reading through most of this nonsense, here's my 2 cents worth. It takes hardly any time to be civil to each other. Calling names is not the best way to express oneself, usually rationality stands a chance of at least having the other guy listen to you.

On the other hand, seems that one group just doesn't like derogatory names cast in their direction. While they may be the most vocal group on the board, I figure if it's ok to call names of homosexuals, etc., why not them?

I think it would behoove all of us to treat others the way we wish to be treated. Those that cry the loudest are too often the most judgemental and negative towards those they disagree with.

Personally, I don't get involved in most conversations that I have little interest in or dislike the subject of a thread. I've seen NE bait others by flaming his lifestyle, but then go bonkers for what is said to him. Seems a bit of that is going on here too.

 

[Nienna]

See, this is what the founding fathers meant when they said "Only a moral people can remain free." If people will not control themselves, and choose not to use derogatory terms, be it "thumper" or "f*g" or whatever, then conflict arises, people start saying "it's my right!" and then more rules are suggested. If we want to avoid these tedious lists of rules, everyone just BE NICE!

 

[Annie]

See, this is what the founding fathers meant when they said "Only a moral people can remain free." If people will not control themselves, and choose not to use derogatory terms, be it "thumper" or "f*g" or whatever, then conflict arises, people start saying "it's my right!" and then more rules are suggested. If we want to avoid these tedious lists of rules, everyone just BE NICE!

Thanks Mom4, since I know you are probably one that would be offended by the terms Jeff defined, I really appreciate your saying that.

Things can get really heated in a discussion and sometimes the wrong word will be used in anger. Usually that is accepted by the participants and just needs everyone to take a breath.

However lately there are some that are using words cooly and with full cognizance and purpose of what they are doing-trying to hurt and/or provoke. This is true of a wide gamut of posters-from the right and from the left. The board and members are worse for it.

 

[Mr. P]

See, this is what the founding fathers meant when they said "Only a moral people can remain free." If people will not control themselves, and choose not to use derogatory terms, be it "thumper" or "f*g" or whatever, then conflict arises, people start saying "it's my right!" and then more rules are suggested. If we want to avoid these tedious lists of rules, everyone just BE NICE!

It doesn't work that way Mom..It would be nice if it did..
This is why we have laws and "RULES", because so many can't "Just be Nice"..
We even see it here..some claim speeding on the highway is okay, YOU just need to move..
they don't need to obey the law..
Some bash others, but are "offended" if they are addressed..Tuff..they complain about it all
the time..but oh, THEY never offend anyone do they? NO! They always have a reason for what they say, right? A nice verse to back em, Sure they do.

Are they better than everyone else? yep...some think they are...Cuz...they have the "BOOK" and you don't.
Even if you do have the Book, you damn sure better believe the same as they do, or else.

These are who I call thumpers..Watch, you'll see em..

 

[Annie]

It doesn't work that way Mom..It would be nice if it did..
This is why we have laws and "RULES", because so many can't "Just be Nice"..
We even see it here..some claim speeding on the highway is okay, YOU just need to move..
they don't need to obey the law..
Some bash others, but are "offended" if they are addressed..Tuff..they complain about it all
the time..but oh, THEY never offend anyone do they? NO! They always have a reason for what they say, right? A nice verse to back em, Sure they do.

Are they better than everyone else? yep...some think they are...Cuz...they have the "BOOK" and you don't.
Even if you do have the Book, you damn sure better believe the same as they do, or else.

These are who I call thumpers..Watch, you'll see em..

Well I tried to elaborate on some of what you are talking about. If a group is saying that some cannot/should not use certain words, they should do the same for others. Some in this category have no problem attacking homosexuals in graphic detail.

I'm offended when someone says that I'm not 'Christian' the right way-meaning their way. I'm also offended by descriptions of sex acts that I'd rather not think about, pertaining to gays, bi's, or straits for that matter.

But I'm also offended by those that are angry at some 'rule' or 'lack of rule' and come and bash others just to make their point.

If everyone would read what they are interested in, argue your points of disagreement-without resorting to coarseness, this would be an enjoyable place for all.

 

[dilloduck]

Well I tried to elaborate on some of what you are talking about. If a group is saying that some cannot/should not use certain words, they should do the same for others. Some in this category have no problem attacking homosexuals in graphic detail.

I'm offended when someone says that I'm not 'Christian' the right way-meaning their way. I'm also offended by descriptions of sex acts that I'd rather not think about, pertaining to gays, bi's, or straits for that matter.

But I'm also offended by those that are angry at some 'rule' or 'lack of rule' and come and bash others just to make their point.

If everyone would read what they are interested in, argue your points of disagreement-without resorting to coarseness, this would be an enjoyable place for all.

Agreed--to many unresolved personal agendas are going unresolved and making thier way into the public discourse, however I'm not sure there is any mechanism in place to resolve this problem. People use PMs to flame others rather than to try to work out differences.

 

[Annie]

Agreed--to many unresolved personal agendas are going unresolved and making thier way into the public discourse, however I'm not sure there is any mechanism in place to resolve this problem. People use PMs to flame others rather than to try to work out differences.

If people are abusing pm's, bring it to Jim's attention or block their pm's.

This topic though is on name calling, to hurt/incite/flame/or bring forth a disagreement in an inappropriate fashion.

 

[dilloduck]

If people are abusing pm's, bring it to Jim's attention or block their pm's.

This topic though is on name calling, to hurt/incite/flame/or bring forth a disagreement in an inappropriate fashion.

I think name calling is often a RESULT of people who have personal vendettas against each other which is why I addressed it here. I HAVE brought it to Jims' attention and the attention of several mods and am waiting for a response. Frustration such as this, without a mechanism in place for addressing personal vendettas, will naturally result in increased public flaming and incitement. No big surprise there.

 

[Annie]

I think name calling is often a RESULT of people who have personal vendettas against each other which is why I addressed it here. I HAVE brought it to Jims' attention and the attention of several mods and am waiting for a response. Frustration such as this, without a mechanism in place for addressing personal vendettas, will naturally result in increased public flaming and incitement. No big surprise there.

And just like the problem cited with the name calling, this type of behavior hurts everyone and those that continue with it are considered by many to be ignorable. Just a thought.

Reasonable discussion works, for most, if you don't burn bridges.

 

[dilloduck]

And just like the problem cited with the name calling, this type of behavior hurts everyone and those that continue with it are considered by many to be ignorable. Just a thought.

Reasonable discussion works, for most, if you don't burn bridges.

Name calling vs. freedom of speech
pick your poison--there will ALWAYS be people who take offense at what is said--are we to shut up everytime?

Apparently reasonable discussion does not occur very often as evidenced by the tone of the board recently. If a person refuses to discuss a personal issue with someone I would say that that person hasn't even tried the bridge.

 

[Annie]

Name calling vs. freedom of speech
pick your poison--there will ALWAYS be people who take offense at what is said--are we to shut up everytime?

Apparently reasonable discussion does not occur very often as evidenced by the tone of the board recently. If a person refuses to discuss a personal issue with someone I would say that that person hasn't even tried the bridge.

Ok, seems you pick poison, I choose not to. I would hope that there are more that want to discuss issues rather than personalities, that's what a board is for, IMO.

 

[dilloduck]

Ok, seems you pick poison, I choose not to. I would hope that there are more that want to discuss issues rather than personalities, that's what a board is for, IMO.

Choosing free speech or name calling ?

I guess straddling the fence is legit--I'll be interested to see what Jim decides since he has to make a choice here. It's been fun!

 

[Abbey Normal]

When I arrived here, I noticed that a couple of people used terms that many people consider offensive, with impunity. However, it seemed to be limited, and overwhelmingly, people debated with civility. I have also been on a MB where people who make any sort of personal attack on another poster are immediately warned, and then banned if they do it again. That resulted in little if any real debate, and the board was kindly but boring. Like the MB version of kissing your sister. It's a shame that some people can't debate without name-calling, but that seems to be a given these days.

I guess what I am trying to say is that I agree with Kathianne (?) that name-calling in the heat of battle is sometimes inevitable, but people who repeatedly and calmly use a particular offensive phrase to get a rise out of others need the MB version of etiquette classes.

 

[Isaac Brock]

I have no issues calling homo's faggots... or an over-zealous Christian a "Bible Thumper" - a moronic black person a ****** - a white idiot a cracker (whatever else fits white idiots) - an asian idiot a gook - or whatever.. Call a spade a spade - if the shoe fits does that mean it's an insult?

To me they're just names to describe incredibly idiotic people - am a dork at times? Sure.. aren't we all?

It's time for folks to GET OVER IT with the labels and stop being so damned politically correct - "Ooo.. he called me a Bible Thumper"... "Ooo he called me this or that" - it doesn't bother me in the least.

Especially when it's coming from the likes of Mr. P or Nucular - gotta consider the source sometimes Jeff...

You have the right certainly, and I'm not suggesting otherwise, but how much effort does it take to be civil? None.

 

[Isaac Brock]

this does not mean you are going to lock this thread...I believe it needs to be aired...just a thought!

I never suggested otherwise. It is important point to be discussed as I do believe it is an issue on our board. One that is easily resolved, but that must be agreed upon if civility is to be chosen.

 

[dmp]

The bullshit and arrogance in this thread is nausiating. Some of you focks are So full of yourselves it's beyond belief.

 

[dilloduck]

When I arrived here, I noticed that a couple of people used terms that many people consider offensive, with impunity. However, it seemed to be limited, and overwhelmingly, people debated with civility. I have also been on a MB where people who make any sort of personal attack on another poster are immediately warned, and then banned if they do it again. That resulted in little if any real debate, and the board was kindly but boring. Like the MB version of kissing your sister. It's a shame that some people can't debate without name-calling, but that seems to be a given these days.

I guess what I am trying to say is that I agree with Kathianne (?) that name-calling in the heat of battle is sometimes inevitable, but people who repeatedly and calmly use a particular offensive phrase to get a rise out of others need the MB version of etiquette classes.

Interesting solution--so are you suggesting that BOTH parties in a name calling squabble receive a "time out" until they can settle thier personal issues or at least agree not to air them publicly?

 

[Abbey Normal]

Interesting solution--so are you suggesting that BOTH parties in a name calling squabble receive a "time out" until they can settle thier personal issues or at least agree not to air them publicly?

Nope, sorry, that's not what I was saying.

 

[archangel]

The bullshit and arrogance in this thread is nausiating. Some of you focks are So full of yourselves it's beyond belief.

Everyone in this forum... not just some... have been nauseating and arrogant from time to time...it is called being human...anytime one talks about religion or politics it is bound to happen...you as well as I and everyone else is guilty as charged....thats why this thread is good...let's those who have a beef get it out ...air the dirty laundry sorta speak...relieves tension! :bangheads

 

[dilloduck]

Nope, sorry, that's not what I was saying.

oh damn----I guess Jim will have to rely on a "who started it" decision or maybe who said the worst things. Thought you had something going there.