Misinformation about other religions

[The Kilted Heathen]

If you look at Rule 3, Part 2 you can actually report members for that

I don't think that's quite what Rule 3.2 is saying. It would be more applicable, I imagine, when a user states that another user believes in human sacrifice because of [X Reason], when no such belief has been stated. Damaging things to a persons character, in essence - which isn't exactly the same as User A saying that Heathens worship Zeus under the name Thor, for example.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

This is mostly something I see in the LHP DIR anytime the so called "Eastern" Left Hand Path comes up but it's been a very tense thing for over a year. And it's happened a lot in the religious debates with any number of religions and sometimes in other DIRs as well where someone who's never practiced something claims so and so religion believes or does X when it's not so (at least from x and x's perspective if not more objectively so).

Basically, it seems a lot of people who don't practice a religion speak about it with no practical or theoretical understanding of it. Asserting stuff that isn't true.

It's a little different when it's in a debate but even then it's pretty gross to me. If someone consistently has told you that you are wrong about what they believe and practice, why would you doubt them and go with your own preconceptions?

It just infuriates me that these types of posters continue to be so willfully ignorant. Do you think that there is anything that can be done to curb this? I feel like, normally the staff doesn't know enough about so many varied topics to make an assessment on what's just a matter of opinion and what's truly just untrue. So I don't think that exactly is a solution and hasn't been in the past.

It just feels so wrong. Is there anything we can do to improve an authentic, mutual understanding of eachother's beliefs? Would that help with this kind of thing and maybe sway some of the more stubborn to reconsider?

I dont know if there is anything that can be done. I notice a lot of it is unintended ignorance of specific faiths because they are going by what they know and disregard what the actual practitioner knows. Not really a debate more than just direct misinformation stated as a fact rather than opinion.

In eclectic religions I notice on here people ask permission from the said gods and/or read about what they are using before they use it. Not something Im conformfortable with but its not misinterpreted.

Its indoctrinated ignorance of other peoples faith and disregard of the facts and accuracy of the people who practice it. Unless its prystlizing (dont have spell check on my phone), unless staff Knows about the religions or better practice them, Im at a loss.

 

[Laika]

I wish you were straight.

Rival, that's very disrepectful.

Perhaps I should punish you?

I don't think that's quite what Rule 3.2 is saying. It would be more applicable, I imagine, when a user states that another user believes in human sacrifice because of [X Reason], when no such belief has been stated. Damaging things to a persons character, in essence - which isn't exactly the same as User A saying that Heathens worship Zeus under the name Thor, for example.

In practice, it will be up to the mods to decide but that's how I read it. the rules can be read a number of different ways (same as any religious text for example) which is why having a variety of opinions and input matters so much.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I think its more like this:

Difference of opinion:

Christian: I believe jesus died on he cross
Person Y: I dont believe he died on the cross
Christian: I believe this because MY religion (caps for point) says this is true and here is the bible to show it.
Person Y: In my opinion/belief from MY source, christ did not die.

Disrespecting ones faith:

Christian: I believe jesus died on he cross
Person Y: I dont believe he died on the cross
Christian: I believe this because MY religion (caps for point) says this true and here is the bible to show it.
Person Y: "No." It says in YOUR scripture that you are wrong. He did not die.

Now this can be taken as an opinion from the same source but its disrespecting because Person X by telling the christian person X knows more than the christian.

Its like my putting on an army uniform and because my source tells me I have the right to speak for America, I do so without regard to what is ACTUALLY taught by our government and those who have served.

It is against the law in America. Its morally disrespectful.

Being online doesnt excuse not being respectful well intended, ignorant, or not.

It is one thing if Person X had been corrected one or two times. If it is a direct straight forward correction, if Person X continues to debate THAT is undermiming the other persons faith. It is no longer an opinion.

The only way to know if staff are familar with the faith or if they "kindly without a 'warning'" say please Person X say "I believe" or "In my opinion" (whatever). This will let christian know you are not changing or belittling their faith but offering an opinion they disagree with.

Thats my opinion

 

[Deidre]

This is mostly something I see in the LHP DIR anytime the so called "Eastern" Left Hand Path comes up but it's been a very tense thing for over a year. And it's happened a lot in the religious debates with any number of religions and sometimes in other DIRs as well where someone who's never practiced something claims so and so religion believes or does X when it's not so (at least from x and x's perspective if not more objectively so).

Basically, it seems a lot of people who don't practice a religion speak about it with no practical or theoretical understanding of it. Asserting stuff that isn't true.

It's a little different when it's in a debate but even then it's pretty gross to me. If someone consistently has told you that you are wrong about what they believe and practice, why would you doubt them and go with your own preconceptions?

It just infuriates me that these types of posters continue to be so willfully ignorant. Do you think that there is anything that can be done to curb this? I feel like, normally the staff doesn't know enough about so many varied topics to make an assessment on what's just a matter of opinion and what's truly just untrue. So I don't think that exactly is a solution and hasn't been in the past.

It just feels so wrong. Is there anything we can do to improve an authentic, mutual understanding of eachother's beliefs? Would that help with this kind of thing and maybe sway some of the more stubborn to reconsider?

There's a DIR section, and those types of responses aren't permitted there (debate over religions)

But, it's all fair game in other sections. Who can really say who is right and who is wrong, if all belief systems are based on one's own perceptions, interpretations and opinions?

 

[crossfire]

There's a DIR section, and those types of responses aren't permitted there (debate over religions)

But, it's all fair game in other sections. Who can really say who is right and who is wrong, if all belief systems are based on one's own perceptions, interpretations and opinions?

It IS happening in the DIR sections. That's what the OP stated.

 

[Deidre]

It IS happening in the DIR sections. That's what the OP stated.

Oh, I didn't pick that up.

Well if it's reported, the mods usually take care of it from what I've seen.

 

[sayak83]

This is mostly something I see in the LHP DIR anytime the so called "Eastern" Left Hand Path comes up but it's been a very tense thing for over a year. And it's happened a lot in the religious debates with any number of religions and sometimes in other DIRs as well where someone who's never practiced something claims so and so religion believes or does X when it's not so (at least from x and x's perspective if not more objectively so).

Basically, it seems a lot of people who don't practice a religion speak about it with no practical or theoretical understanding of it. Asserting stuff that isn't true.

It's a little different when it's in a debate but even then it's pretty gross to me. If someone consistently has told you that you are wrong about what they believe and practice, why would you doubt them and go with your own preconceptions?

It just infuriates me that these types of posters continue to be so willfully ignorant. Do you think that there is anything that can be done to curb this? I feel like, normally the staff doesn't know enough about so many varied topics to make an assessment on what's just a matter of opinion and what's truly just untrue. So I don't think that exactly is a solution and hasn't been in the past.

It just feels so wrong. Is there anything we can do to improve an authentic, mutual understanding of eachother's beliefs? Would that help with this kind of thing and maybe sway some of the more stubborn to reconsider?

Should Eastern LHP be shifted within the Dharmic DIR segment?

 

[sun rise]

I think its more like this:

Difference of opinion:

Christian: I believe jesus died on he cross
Person Y: I dont believe he died on the cross
Christian: I believe this because MY religion (caps for point) says this is true and here is the bible to show it.
Person Y: In my opinion/belief from MY source, christ did not die.

Disrespecting ones faith:

Christian: I believe jesus died on he cross
Person Y: I dont believe he died on the cross
Christian: I believe this because MY religion (caps for point) says this true and here is the bible to show it.
Person Y: "No." It says in YOUR scripture that you are wrong. He did not die.

Now this can be taken as an opinion from the same source but its disrespecting because Person X by telling the christian person X knows more than the christian.

Its like my putting on an army uniform and because my source tells me I have the right to speak for America, I do so without regard to what is ACTUALLY taught by our government and those who have served.

It is against the law in America. Its morally disrespectful.

Being online doesnt excuse not being respectful well intended, ignorant, or not.

It is one thing if Person X had been corrected one or two times. If it is a direct straight forward correction, if Person X continues to debate THAT is undermiming the other persons faith. It is no longer an opinion.

The only way to know if staff are familar with the faith or if they "kindly without a 'warning'" say please Person X say "I believe" or "In my opinion" (whatever). This will let christian know you are not changing or belittling their faith but offering an opinion they disagree with.

Thats my opinion

Sorry but I have to disagree with your example. Too often people don't know what is in their holy books or doctrine and it's not disrespectful if it's done properly such as "What about Sally 2:23 where it says that..."?

I've never had people take offense when I cared enough to actually look into someone else's belief system enough ask a question from that person's frame-of-reference.

 

[crossfire]

Should Eastern LHP be shifted within the Dharmic DIR segment?

The nastika Buddhists are already there.

 

[Kapalika]

Should Eastern LHP be shifted within the Dharmic DIR segment?

No, I think people just need to recognize that they can't try to exclude others. I know so called "western" LHPers can get along with people like me. Some of the LHP people on RF migrated to the Order of the Serpent's forums and not a single time has anyone ever misrepresented my beliefs there or told me I'm not LHP or Satanist or whatever. They actually really liked what I had to say. I really wish that kind of attitude was what we had on RF. But for whatever reason it isn't. I might just stop posting on RF's LHP section if people can't respect others.

Really it's a wider problem I've seen on the forums in general. I think as communities get older they tend to get these kinds of problems and they are not always resolved. I don't know why it's an issue. Since I've seen a sampling of RFers go to a new place and it was much better I know it isn't necessarily the user base. But I'm also not sure why it seems to occur

But I do think part of the issue is how easily a member can become prominent by just saying outrageous things and giving their views more of a spotlight. For example our "featured threads" section is pretty flawed. I can't tell what it chooses to feature other than by the amount of posts or reactions. It's very often either some nonsense post that's only half thought out if that (no effort or logic to it), or a thread about a divisive issue or opinion.

Honestly in my mind, having lurked here for years before joining and having known people here for years too, it's more of the rules being more lax. That can be good in certain sections of the site like certain debate areas or off topic areas but overall you can just get away with so much more.

I'm not saying we should go ban happy, I actually hate the idea of banning anyone unless it's temporary, perma's reserved for the worst cases and used very very sparingly. I've admin before on sites and groups and run communities and guilds so it's comparable. Really it's about being consistent and straight forward with the rules. That, a good appeal system, and a tendency towards second chances with it being clear that they are being given when they are, makes a good system. RF still has a lot of those elements, so it's not all bad.

I guess really what I'm trying to get at, is that we need to all make an effort to not do it ourselves and point out to others, politely as possible of course, that they are doing it. I think that would go a long way to just simply be more aware of it and address it when it happens.

That's part of the reason I put this in interfaith. Because really it's an interfaith effort. If one of your friend's beliefs are being misrepresented, speak up. Don't let them fare it alone. Hopefully everyone can put in an effort and things will improve.

EDIT:

I added that last part to my first post as a quote, I think it got across the idea I wanted to express but got lost in my frustration in the process.

 

[1137]

Do you think we need separate DIRs for Antinomianism and Heterodoxy?

Yes, they are not inherent in the WLHP.

 

[1137]

No, I think people just need to recognize that they can't try to exclude others. I know so called "western" LHPers can get along with people like me. Some of the LHP people on RF migrated to the Order of the Serpent's forums and not a single time has anyone ever misrepresented my beliefs there or told me I'm not LHP or Satanist or whatever. They actually really liked what I had to say. I really wish that kind of attitude was what we had on RF. But for whatever reason it isn't. I might just stop posting on RF's LHP section if people can't respect others.

This means a very great deal to me.

 

[sayak83]

No, I think people just need to recognize that they can't try to exclude others. I know so called "western" LHPers can get along with people like me. Some of the LHP people on RF migrated to the Order of the Serpent's forums and not a single time has anyone ever misrepresented my beliefs there or told me I'm not LHP or Satanist or whatever. They actually really liked what I had to say. I really wish that kind of attitude was what we had on RF. But for whatever reason it isn't. I might just stop posting on RF's LHP section if people can't respect others.

Really it's a wider problem I've seen on the forums in general. I think as communities get older they tend to get these kinds of problems and they are not always resolved. I don't know why it's an issue. Since I've seen a sampling of RFers go to a new place and it was much better I know it isn't necessarily the user base. But I'm also not sure why it seems to occur

But I do think part of the issue is how easily a member can become prominent by just saying outrageous things and giving their views more of a spotlight. For example our "featured threads" section is pretty flawed. I can't tell what it chooses to feature other than by the amount of posts or reactions. It's very often either some nonsense post that's only half thought out if that (no effort or logic to it), or a thread about a divisive issue or opinion.

Honestly in my mind, having lurked here for years before joining and having known people here for years too, it's more of the rules being more lax. That can be good in certain sections of the site like certain debate areas or off topic areas but overall you can just get away with so much more.

I'm not saying we should go ban happy, I actually hate the idea of banning anyone unless it's temporary, perma's reserved for the worst cases and used very very sparingly. I've admin before on sites and groups and run communities and guilds so it's comparable. Really it's about being consistent and straight forward with the rules. That, a good appeal system, and a tendency towards second chances with it being clear that they are being given when they are, makes a good system. RF still has a lot of those elements, so it's not all bad.

I guess really what I'm trying to get at, is that we need to all make an effort to not do it ourselves and point out to others, politely as possible of course, that they are doing it. I think that would go a long way to just simply be more aware of it and address it when it happens.

That's part of the reason I put this in interfaith. Because really it's an interfaith effort. If one of your friend's beliefs are being misrepresented, speak up. Don't let them fare it alone. Hopefully everyone can put in an effort and things will improve.

EDIT:

I added that last part to my first post as a quote, I think it got across the idea I wanted to express but got lost in my frustration in the process.

Cool. I was saying that many Hindus and Buddhists would be well versed with Eastern LHP practices associated with tantra, but they are more likely to be in Dharmic DIR than in LHP DIR. For example I know a lot about how Kaali is worshipped being from Bengal and having a family Kaali temple back home, but before you posted this thread, I have never really noticed the LHP DIR at all.

 

[1137]

Yes, they are not inherent in the WLHP.

I don't mean this negatively BTW. I think they should be subcategories in the LHP DIR, because to my knowledge that covers both east and west.

 

[Kapalika]

Cool. I was saying that many Hindus and Buddhists would be well versed with Eastern LHP practices associated with tantra, but they are more likely to be in Dharmic DIR than in LHP DIR. For example I know a lot about how Kaali is worshipped being from Bengal and having a family Kaali temple back home, but before you posted this thread, I have never really noticed the LHP DIR at all.

That's a good point. I think a lot of the complexity comes fro mthe fact though that the term was appropriated with an altered meaning and then the meaning was altered more and for a lot it actually came full circle back to the original meaning (both today and decades ago).

I would be better IMO to include a "dharmic" section more or less into the LHP DIR if anything. Making a totally different section in the dharmic DIR helps reinforce the idea that they are distinctly different when it's actually more often the case that they are more similar than different.

Maybe if all the Satanisms DIRs were made into 1, and the "dharmic" type of one added, I guess vamachara would work, then there would be 2 less sub DIRs that are never used and the origins would be represented too

 

[crossfire]

That's a good point. I think a lot of the complexity comes fro mthe fact though that the term was appropriated with an altered meaning and then the meaning was altered more and for a lot it actually came full circle back to the original meaning (both today and decades ago).

I would be better IMO to include a "dharmic" section more or less into the LHP DIR if anything. Making a totally different section in the dharmic DIR helps reinforce the idea that they are distinctly different when it's actually more often the case that they are more similar than different.

Maybe if all the Satanisms DIRs were made into 1, and the "dharmic" type of one added, I guess vamachara would work, then there would be 2 less sub DIRs that are never used and the origins would be represented too

Put the Theistic Satanists and the non-theistic Satanists together? I'm not sure that would work. If anything, it would probably create more problems.

 

[Kapalika]

Put the Theistic Satanists and the non-theistic Satanists together? I'm not sure that would work. If anything, it would probably create more problems.

They already post in eachothers DIRs most of the time and no one in the LHP DIR even respects the boundries anyway. Also Ive never seen atheist satanists and theist satanists go at it on this forum now that I think of it. Maybe they have in the past but its rare that even an atheist satanist is really even here

plus it doesnt seem to cause a whole lot of arguements considering they got a satanism section they share anyway. I dont see the point in having 3 sub DIRs when they are rarely used. the front page of any has topics dating back years. if it was all put into one it might see a little more use. we dont have seperate DIRS for theistic and nontheistic luciferians afterall. why not just have Luciferian, Setian, Satanist and Vamachara (another sanskrit word might work better) or something like that? No sub sub dirs just those 4 under LHP. The old administrative side of me doesn't like redundancy or unused parts in forum sections. it screws with my sense of organization lol. its easy enough to merge them at least in my experience, dunno on whatever system this forum uses

 

[1137]

Jeez what's going on in the DIR? I haven't been over there in a while.

 

[crossfire]

<...>
we dont have seperate DIRS for theistic and nontheistic luciferians afterall.

Worship is not part of LHP Luciferianism, (Lucifer bows down to no one) so the difference between theistic and non theistic LHP Luciferianism is not really relevant. Worship is considered RHP by LHP Luciferians.

why not just have Luciferian, Setian, Satanist and Vamachara (another sanskrit word might work better) or something like that? No sub sub dirs just those 4 under LHP. The old administrative side of me doesn't like redundancy or unused parts in forum sections. it screws with my sense of organization lol. its easy enough to merge them at least in my experience, dunno on whatever system this forum uses

While you might have the tendency to merge, others might have the tendency to separate. Non-worshippers tend to want to be separate from worshippers. I see this as quite reasonable. Same goes with Antinomianism and Heterodoxy. Antinomianism tends to want to be separate from Heterodoxy, while Heterodoxy considers them to be the same thing. Again, I see separating them as being quite reasonable.