Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!genrad!decvax!harpo!floyd!vax135!ariel!hou5f!hou5e!hou5d!hogpc!houxm!hocda!spanky!burl!duke!unc!tim
From: tim@unc.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: net.religion: A Modest Proposal
Message-ID: <5405@unc.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 19-Jun-83 20:05:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: unc.5405
Posted: Sun Jun 19 20:05:43 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 23-Jun-83 00:10:41 EDT
Lines: 52


    This group is a seething cauldron of opposing viewpoints.
Emotionally-charged issues provoke heated debate, and at times human
courtesy is forgotten, even in articles	from members of	religions who
supposedly believe that	they love everyone.  The posting of any
article	is widely seen as an invitation	to attack the foundations of a
person's beliefs.  Only	in net.flame do	articles get more intolerant
and irrational.

    This is inevitable,	and no number of articles urging politeness
will be	able to	change this.  When such	highly contrasting belief
systems	meet, there is bound to	be violent reaction.  This does	not
mean that anyone should	add to this deliberately; however, I do
believe	that it	will never cease as long as the	group exists.  In
fact, it can be	healthy	to see how opposing ideas fare in such a
savage environment.

    The	problem	is that	people are intimidated.	 From my personal
correspondence,	I know that people with	interesting things to say are
often afraid to	make their views public	in this	group.	This seems
very much a shame.  Consequently, I decided to try to find a solution.

    What I hit on was subdividing the group into special interests.
This has been proposed facetiously before as a means for
"ghettoization"	of those who disagree with the proposers.  That	is not
my intent.  Instead, various religions would have their	own groups,
say net.religion.buddhist, in which the	fundamental assumptions	of the
religion would not be challenged.  For instance,
net.religion.christian would contain mostly articles by	Christians on
issues which would only	interest Christians and	those interested in
Christianity.  For instance, a discussion of the various moral views
of the writers of the four accepted Gospels would go in	the subgroup.
In net.religion.jew, one might expect to find Talmudic discussion.
And so on.

    The	main net.religion group	would be devoted to articles in	which
those of different faiths can share their differing beliefs, or	square
off if they prefer.  Any article which had as its intent the
conversion of someone to some religion would appear here, as well as
articles in which different faiths are compared	or contrasted.	It
would probably remain a	"seething cauldron"; as	I've said, that	is
inevitable when	emotions clash.	 However, those	who prefer to simply
explore	the ramifications of a particular faith	that they have already
accepted would have the	appropriate subgroup, in which the mere
posting	would not be considered	a challenge.

    What do the	rest of	you think of this idea?	 I would like to see
more participation in religious	discussions on the net,	and this seems
the only way to	encourage it.  People should not have to be afraid to
share their beliefs with those of like minds.

    Tim	Maroney