Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: Question about the nature of this Group [View all]dmallind
(10,437 posts)2. And the difference would be what? The idea that somebody dares to subject religion to critique?
Should only elected officials be allowed to have opinions in political threads? What's the difference between that and allowing the non-religious to discuss religion, to dismiss religion, to criticize religion? It affects our lives more than most political matters do after all.
You after all can easily ignore ontological arguments, and offer us all the joy of your theoligical pearls of wisdom
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
36 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
And the difference would be what? The idea that somebody dares to subject religion to critique?
dmallind
Dec 2011
#2
I apologize if my attempt at humor was condescending. I did not intend it to be so. n/t
TygrBright
Dec 2011
#14
actually some of us regulars would welcome posts on buddhism taoism hinduism &c&c
struggle4progress
Dec 2011
#9
1. Whatever the believer believes it means; 2. Which yana? As stated in my post...
TygrBright
Dec 2011
#25
I think it can serve both purposes, but would like to see it more focused on the first.
cbayer
Dec 2011
#24
Did you perhaps miss the "Progressive People of Faith" portion of the group title to the left?
darkstar3
Dec 2011
#27