Conquer Club

Although this probably belongs in the General Discussion and may end up being moved to Flame Wars, I decided to make it here because this is the most popular forum, plus it affects a lot of what has previously been said in this forum. I particularly dislike this rule

And now the list don't do's:

Bigotry, racism, gay-bashing or aggressively anti-religious language;
Betting or gambling on, through, or because of CC;
Pornography in posts, avatars or hyperlinks;
Trolling (including multiple postings, spam, abusive content, and specific attempts to cause chaos, disruption or headaches to the community members or staff)

the thing about no bigotry, racism, gay-bashing or aggressively anti-religious language really gets me... for one thing everybody knows that I am a bigot, but I am a bigot because that's what my religion teaches(so excuse me for follow my religion). Racism, I believe everybody to be racist and I joke about it sometimes, but I guess I'll have to stop. Gay-bashing, I am 100% anti-gay, because of my religion. And I have 1 problem with the next part about "aggressively anti-religious language"... who's going to decide what is aggressive and what is acceptable? people are bound to have different interpretations as to what is too aggressive...
Please discuss what you like/dislike about the new guidelines... and vote wether or not these guidelines should be re-written.

Is it okay if I voted yes when I cannot completely remember them?

They are guidelines, not set in stone rules. I don't think they will get in the way at all.


--Andy

Here's what I have to say.. they're lame in the first place. .get rid of them and let wicked write some guidelins.

There should be a rule that every post has to rhyme,
and ehm... la la la lime....

The rhyming idea may be good,
If you are a rapper in the hood.
But the rules themselves are A-OK,
So clear out of the Mod's way.

I disagree with C-to the Cruel
Bigotry, it aint so cool.
Still those guidelines, they're kinda smelly
Let's throw 'em out and get some jelly.

qeee1 wrote:I disagree with C-to the Cruel
Bigotry, it aint so cool.
Still those guidelines, they're kinda smelly
Let's throw 'em out and get some jelly.

KY?

And I have no comment on the new guidelines.

They need to include a rule against being aggressively religious, too, or the one about being aggressively anti-religious has to go. Equal rights and protection for all groups.

They should stay as is so I dont have to waste my time reading them again.

Caleb the Cruel wrote:

the thing about no bigotry, racism, gay-bashing or aggressively anti-religious language really gets me... for one thing everybody knows that I am a bigot, but I am a bigot because that's what my religion teaches(so excuse me for follow my religion). Racism, I believe everybody to be racist and I joke about it sometimes, but I guess I'll have to stop. Gay-bashing, I am 100% anti-gay, because of my religion. And I have 1 problem with the next part about "aggressively anti-religious language"... who's going to decide what is aggressive and what is acceptable? people are bound to have different interpretations as to what is too aggressive...

My religion (and I'd rather call it a "relationship") does not teach me to be a bigot.

I don't have a racist bone in my body. As a matter of fact I can't stand racists. It is pure ignorance.

I am anti-gay. Scripture states that it is wrong and sin. But I do not have to "bash" those who are gay. "Ye who has no sin cast the first stone" comes to mind. Jesus came to save the world not condemn it.

*poke's Jay* this coming from the guy that started a thread that had people argueing over religion and if god exists or dont and that were practically at each others throats over it, i think the thread Logic Dictates There Is A God, or as i call it "the thread that must die!!" would be considered apart of the rule of aggressively anti-religious language

wtf is that??? i mean is there specific words that are considered "dirty" to religions... i mean you can bring up like (not that i would say this or think many would at all or any) "holocaust should have continued" i mean that anti-religion... but also rasicst i think (though we are all of the same species so racism is kinda not a correct word for it.... but ya anyways).... i dont know.. i think these rules dont need to be installed least not here, most people are pretty friendly even the logic thread was still pretty fun and gave me a laugh at what people were saying and what was said to me if anything said to me... ya...

You are all worrying a little too much. Has anything changed since the guidelines have been out?


--Andy

jay_a2j wrote:My religion does not teach me to be a bigot....Jesus came to save the world not condemn it.

In the Bible, Mark 16:16 states: "Whoever believes and is baptized, will be saved; whoever does not believe, will be condemned."

Jesus' parting command to his church on earth was that it teach people "to observe ALL that I have commanded you." While Lutherans certainly believe that the Gospel of salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone is the central teaching of Scripture, and that all who truly believe in Christ will be saved, the LCMS also believes that the church does not have the right or freedom to reject or ignore all the other teachings of Christ and the Bible, or to regard them as "petty matters" that "really don't make any difference." On the contrary, the LCMS believes that these other teachings of Christ are intimately related to the Gospel that we hold so dear, and that errors in any of these areas can lead to a misunderstanding or even rejection of the Gospel itself.


"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (John 14:6)

That sounds pretty bigoted to me. There's only one way to heavan, and Christianity is the only religion that has found that way.

AndyDufresne wrote:You are all worrying a little too much. Has anything changed since the guidelines have been out?


--Andy

no, but now it is possible for things to change because there are guidelines put in place... I'm for an ammended set of guidelines or just go without the guidelines, like before

Caleb the Cruel wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:My religion does not teach me to be a bigot....Jesus came to save the world not condemn it.

In the Bible, Mark 16:16 states: "Whoever believes and is baptized, will be saved; whoever does not believe, will be condemned."

Jesus' parting command to his church on earth was that it teach people "to observe ALL that I have commanded you." While Lutherans certainly believe that the Gospel of salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone is the central teaching of Scripture, and that all who truly believe in Christ will be saved, the LCMS also believes that the church does not have the right or freedom to reject or ignore all the other teachings of Christ and the Bible, or to regard them as "petty matters" that "really don't make any difference." On the contrary, the LCMS believes that these other teachings of Christ are intimately related to the Gospel that we hold so dear, and that errors in any of these areas can lead to a misunderstanding or even rejection of the Gospel itself.


"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (John 14:6)

That sounds pretty bigoted to me. There's only one way to heavan, and Christianity is the only religion that has found that way.

"whoever does not believe, will be condemned" Not by us! It does not say kill the unbeliever! You have taken Christianity to an EXTREAM. They will be condemned if they die still not believing in Christ..... but it will be God who condemns, not christians.

He is the Way the Truth and the Life. Pray for them not condemn them. They will know we are Christians by our love.

I did not say to kill unbelievers, I just won't stop unbelievers from killing other unbelievers(as said in the Israel...For or Against thread) unless one group of unbelievers wants to convert. I fully favor conversion over death. However,
...in the War, unbelievers shall be given a choice, convert or be removed...
now I'm not sure if "removed" means be killed or deported, but I'm currently leaning towards depotation
and there is a verse that is states to have people do God's will or something to that effect, but I am too lazy to find it at the moment, so I shall find it for you soon

AndyDufresne wrote:You are all worrying a little too much. Has anything changed since the guidelines have been out?


--Andy

ya, a mod made me get rid of my siggy cuz aparently it was to big *weeps for my siggy*

That's understandable though. Giant sigs make the flow of forum posts hard to follow when a picture takes up half the page.


--Andy