Please read before posting!

[Son of Simon]

Navigating Dangerous Waters: Politics and Religion

Hi folks,

I thought it might be worthwhile to discuss what is considered poor posting, inappropriate remarks/images/avatars etc. Over the last few weeks I have received reported posts, some of which were warranted reports, and some upon further review were deemed not unsuitable for the discussion or the forums. It may seem at first to be a bit confusing- especially on a site that contains a “Politics & Religion” forum, because the subjects by their very nature are divisive, controversial, and are- whether we want to admit it or not- personal.

An individual’s personal political view or choice of religion is indeed a personal matter, so it may seem that someone attacking an opposing viewpoint, or supporters of a viewpoint are in essence attacking YOU.

For example- let’s say you preferred Italian food over Mexican food, and I preferred Mexican food over Italian, and so we entered a debate on the subject. Of course someone could argue the point using data about the earnings of Italian food restaurants over Mexican food restaurants, or someone could relate a personal experience with this type of food, and of course these would be okay in discussion. But then someone may interject something along the lines of “People who think Italian food is better than Mexican food are idiots”, and so as a supporter of Italian food- you are likely to take the comment personally and either attack supporters of Mexican food, or even the poster him/herself.

There’s an important distinction to make here, and notice that I separated the identity of the poster with the larger group of “food fans”. That’s because an opinion of demographic groups is necessary for these types of discussion, yet an abstinence from isolating a member is still enforced. This is extremely important to recognize, otherwise we simply can’t discuss these personal topics.

The difference is association, and you can cut it several ways, yet only one way is offensible. For instance- if I support abortion and another poster calls abortion advocates “murderers”, does that constitute a flame? No. If someone else supports Scientology, and I post that I think Scientologists are psycho-money-grubbing cultists, does that constitute a personal attack? NO.

The preferred methodology would be, “I think the beliefs associated with Scientology depict psycho-money-grubbing cultists.” But let’s be honest, very few of us will recognize the difference in the heat of battle and just assume it is a flame.

A personal attack would be “SoS- YOU are a mean/thoughtless/bad person for believing in Scientology.” Is there a difference? Yes. Is it easy to misinterpret? Yes. Does the fact that politics and religion by their nature affect the members more deeply complicate this? Absolutely.

If there was no separation between personal attacks and aggressive posting towards different political and religious groups, then we’d all be banned:
- Liberals would be banned for calling Conservatives narrow minded and old-fashioned.
- Conservatives would be banned for calling Liberals whiney and treasonous.
- Christians would be banned for calling Muslims hateful and terrorist.
- Muslims would be banned for calling Christians the same.
- Atheists would be banned for calling Agnostics naïve.

I hope you get my point. Based on my own political “mapping”, if I were to use associative reasoning to find out who has called me “what”, I’d be called a treasonist, terrorist-hugging, PoS, whiney, head-in-the-sand, scumbag.

But thankfully, that’s not how it works. Otherwise- we’d all be banned.

What is meant by racially-motivated or offensive images, media, or postings?

This is the subject that makes employers tend to run in fear, and lawsuit-happy people drool at the mouth. Here are some questions that you need to ask yourself when including or posting “suspect” material:

- Does the media glorify or celebrate people, associations, or individual acts of racially motivated hate?
- Is the media intended to celebrate or glorify historical instances of widespread prejudice, racism, or discrimination based on race, color, creed, nationality, gender, age, sex, or sexual orientation?

Remember- the focus is hate. You may find a particularly image offensive to you personally, but there may be no reference to hate or discrimination within that media.

For instance- I find Rachel Ray’s likeness on a box of “Wheat Thins” offensive, but that’s probably hate stemming from my personal bias, and is Rachel Ray’s photo is not intended to be a “hate-inspiring” image. The hate in this instance is most likely coming from me.

One final message- we’re adults, so let’s try and act like it.

It may be fun to try and “push the envelope” and see what you can get away with, or you may end up trying to argue this, that, or the other, but just remember that this is a private site, and IdolMe reserves the right to enforce the rules of the forum as it sees fit. In other words- this isn’t a democracy. Failure to comply with forum rules will be dealt with as IdolMe sees fit, and any judgments made by staff are final.

Thanks and have a nice day.

-SoS