Dawkins on Alien Rubbish

[Robert_S]

I do not want to
buy thread liability
insurance for this.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

So, Dawkins is on Alien Rubbish. Should he go to rehab or just do the cold turkey thing?

[HomerJay]

You're still not getting it.

What you're describing is abhorrent ... I'm not an advocate of that at all .. I've already stressed that.

Really not sure how to describe what I am okay with more clearly to you.

TBF charlou you started off with:

Objectively delivered comparative religious education is important.

But you've subsequently said that it isn't religious education and it isn't important, a bit of patronising blah about fear and anger, extremism but still no substance.

So who knows?

[charlou]

Oh, for fucks sake ... Ronja asked what Exi and I were talking about and I explained it to her. I didn't try to hide it in order to continue any "in joke" or to otherwise hurt her feelings .. I came right out and told her what we were on about.

Ronja, your desire to control social interaction when you're so often not even fully aware of what's going on is ironic. Your condescension is totally unwarranted. Of course we could all just stfu and leave you to continue in your mistaken view that you're telling us something we don't know ... Or we can find it amusing and point it out to you. I did both the latter. I have nothing against you, but your attitude and behaviour when you take on the role of forum nanny and patronise people really grates, and you've done it several times. Maybe you can take this observation on board .. I certainly would .. indeed, I'm keen to learn from criticism ... or you can ignore it and feel slighted/offended and continue to grate on people the way you have been.

[charlou]

Here's an idea you could try ... in serious discussions, stick to discussing ideas without getting personal.

[JimC]

Charlou a bully? I find that hard to believe.

Keep in mind that English is not Ronja's first language. That makes it easier to confuse 'to bully' with 'to laugh'.

Looks like bullying to me and English is my first language.

Exi5tentialist and Charlou were laughing at the irony of Ronja not getting that Exi fully understood the moderately humorous aspect of JimC's post, not noticing the humour in Exi's comment and then longwindedly and seriously lecturing about humour. That is not bullying.

Perhaps not bullying, but not playing nice, either, given that Ronja c;learly had no intention of being disrespectful or aggressive to anyone, but may have mis-read someone's intentions...

And I resent the "moderately"!

I iz fucking hilarious!

[Atheist-Lite]

Charlou a bully? I find that hard to believe.

Keep in mind that English is not Ronja's first language. That makes it easier to confuse 'to bully' with 'to laugh'.

Looks like bullying to me and English is my first language.

Exi5tentialist and Charlou were laughing at the irony of Ronja not getting that Exi fully understood the moderately humorous aspect of JimC's post, not noticing the humour in Exi's comment and then longwindedly and seriously lecturing about humour. That is not bullying.

Perhaps not bullying, but not playing nice, either, given that Ronja c;learly had no intention of being disrespectful or aggressive to anyone, but may have mis-read someone's intentions...

And I resent the "moderately"!

I iz fucking hilarious!

Wings of the butterfrog causing typhooons.

[Hermit]

And I resent the "moderately"!

I iz fucking hilarious!

And here I thought I was pandering to your pride to being moderate to the core. Sorry for not thinking of Oscar Wilde's bon mot: Everything in moderation, including moderation itself.

As for the 'not playing nice' bit, where does one draw the line? In my opinion, Ronja's post was laughable for reasons stated. Saying so may be unpleasant to her, but I see no reason why it cannot be said. More trenchant criticisms have been directed at her and others without being tut-tutted. Criticism of other members is not out of bounds now, is it?

[charlou]

Charlou a bully? I find that hard to believe.

Keep in mind that English is not Ronja's first language. That makes it easier to confuse 'to bully' with 'to laugh'.

Looks like bullying to me and English is my first language.

Exi5tentialist and Charlou were laughing at the irony of Ronja not getting that Exi fully understood the moderately humorous aspect of JimC's post, not noticing the humour in Exi's comment and then longwindedly and seriously lecturing about humour. That is not bullying.

Perhaps not bullying, but not playing nice, either, given that Ronja c;learly had no intention of being disrespectful or aggressive to anyone, but may have mis-read someone's intentions...

And I resent the "moderately"!

I iz fucking hilarious!

You acknowledge a misreading of intentions ... while at the same time thinking those she misread aren't playing nice?

If anything, I find Ronja's passive aggressive and condescending approach to manipulation of social interaction could be construed as bullying if one were to feel one should actually stfu when she speaks from her self appointed and often erroneous position of social psychologist. What makes the likelihood of her succeeding unlikely here is that intelligent, confident people are involved (diversity of personality and views notwithstanding).

[charlou]

Anyway, so long as she has me on ignore and unwilling to discuss it herself I think I'll drop this. Not keen on discussing this behind her back, nor engaging in a one sided argument.

[JimC]

And I resent the "moderately"!

I iz fucking hilarious!

And here I thought I was pandering to your pride to being moderate to the core. Sorry for not thinking of Oscar Wilde's bon mot: Everything in moderation, including moderation itself.

As for the 'not playing nice' bit, where does one draw the line? In my opinion, Ronja's post was laughable for reasons stated. Saying so may be unpleasant to her, but I see no reason why it cannot be said. More trenchant criticisms have been directed at her and others without being tut-tutted. Criticism of other members is not out of bounds now, is it?[/quote]

Absolutely not, in any mod terms, but one can still criticise a criticism, can one not?

[Hermit]

And I resent the "moderately"!

I iz fucking hilarious!

And here I thought I was pandering to your pride to being moderate to the core. Sorry for not thinking of Oscar Wilde's bon mot: Everything in moderation, including moderation itself.

As for the 'not playing nice' bit, where does one draw the line? In my opinion, Ronja's post was laughable for reasons stated. Saying so may be unpleasant to her, but I see no reason why it cannot be said. More trenchant criticisms have been directed at her and others without being tut-tutted. Criticism of other members is not out of bounds now, is it?

Absolutely not, in any mod terms, but one can still criticise a criticism, can one not?

Certainly. Wasn't my point precisely that criticism per se is OK?

Feel free to start criticising any time you like. I promise not to confuse it with neither not playing nice nor bullying, unless there is an element of either included in the post as a bonus extra. And before you ask, sarcasm, parody and ridicule are OK with me too. as long as they are targeted at the issue rather than the author.

Edit: I should have used the long hand expression "Criticism of other members's posts" earlier for clarity, but it seems you understood what I meant.

[JimC]

And I resent the "moderately"!

I iz fucking hilarious!

And here I thought I was pandering to your pride to being moderate to the core. Sorry for not thinking of Oscar Wilde's bon mot: Everything in moderation, including moderation itself.

As for the 'not playing nice' bit, where does one draw the line? In my opinion, Ronja's post was laughable for reasons stated. Saying so may be unpleasant to her, but I see no reason why it cannot be said. More trenchant criticisms have been directed at her and others without being tut-tutted. Criticism of other members is not out of bounds now, is it?

Absolutely not, in any mod terms, but one can still criticise a criticism, can one not?

Certainly. Wasn't my point precisely that criticism per se is OK?

Feel free to start criticising any time you like. I promise not to confuse it with neither not playing nice nor bullying, unless there is an element of either included in the post as a bonus extra. And before you ask, sarcasm, parody and ridicule are OK with me too. as long as they are targeted at the issue rather than the author.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Any hope of a split on this?

[Coito ergo sum]

I wouldn't mind at all if visiting priests/rabbis/sheikhs/etc. came to the school to talk about their religion and beliefs. Potentially, it could be a lot more instructive than leaving it to a teacher (at primary level). However, in order to make it useful and non-indoctrinatory, I think it would need to be done in a way that presented multiple religions together. Perhaps having a representative of each of the world's six largest religions come in to give a half-hour talk each week for six weeks in a row.

If I were a religious person, I am sure I wouldn't want that. Imagine one is a devoutly religious Muslim and one's child is being sent to this school which will have a variety of religions come in and talk about their beliefs? I think what you're suggesting would be acceptable to most of us, because it would tend to undermine faith or conviction in one particular religion. For the same reason, a devoutly religious person who thinks their child's afterlife depends on following the proper religion would not be fond of that.

Currently, primary school children here do learn about a selection of religions, but there is a heavy emphasis on Christianity almost all the time, with one special project being done each year about one of the other major religions. A couple of years ago, for example, my son visited a Hindu temple with the school and the spent the week learning about Hindu festivals, etc.. The quality of the (comparative) education about other religions seems very good, but they do use a volunteer evangelical minister to do a lot of their Christian RE, and I do find it a concern that an evangelical is being given free access to a captive audience of kids who's parents are completely unaware of that.

Sounds like Britain doesn't have separation of church and state.