Need input on whether to respond to a post on an "interfaith" channel

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
1

This is regarding an interfaith corporate internal message board at a large global company that promotes a company culture of diversity, equity, inclusion (using slightly different words). There are many corporate-sanctioned affinity groups, including this one. Others: LGBTQ, cancer survivors, etc. There are around 300 people on this chat channel. Usually people are very, very careful and respectful. Until Monday a week ago, when someone on it posted the “choose life” quote from Deuteronomy 30:19 without any other context.

First, what are your thoughts about the timing and substance of the quote? On the surface it seems so positive, so there’s nothing to object to other than it following so closely after the SCOTUS leak about overturning Roe v. Wade, which broke the news 2 days prior to the post. Second… what would you do if you didn’t agree with it?

I actually messaged privately to the channel manager to ask whether there were any written rules of order, codes of conduct, statements of values, core leadership, etc. I didn’t say anything about what inspired my question.

I thought of the SDMB which has a team of list mods and guidelines by topic, especially Great Debates & Elections. Pretty clear what’s OK and what’s not, and why.

2

Could you report the comment, if you think it’s out of line? Chances are, you wouldn’t be the only one.

3

I’d ignore it - nothing good can come of it.

But if you simply cannot resist, I think I’d opt for a very non-controversial approach. “I respect the opportunity everyone has here to share their own experiences, and recognize that the very nature of an ‘interfaith’ community is that we all bring something different to the table. But I think we should also be mindful that that this is not a political forum, it isn’t a debating forum, it’s an interfaith forum. These lines blur in real life, and likely always will. The same is likely true here as well. I worry that the discussion of a hot button political topic will counteract the purpose of this community. I do appreciate that such topics and people’s stances on them are very much informed by their religious beliefs - but I urge the group to abstain from going down that path.”

4

Yes, considering that as well. I’d like to be careful about how I express my complaint, sometimes less is more if you know what I mean.

5

That is some good wording, thanks. One thing is that the post itself did not reference anything other than the Bible quote itself. So I’m the one who’s making it political…

6

Ah, but I didn’t reference anything either.

7

So…you’re making religious posts on a board run by your work?

Boyoboy, I’d be careful (actually, I’d avoid it like the Inquisition). It wouldn’t take much to run afoul of someone’s dearly-held, or ignorantly-held, beliefs.

I guess I’m pretty strict about The Separation Of Church And Work. And I’d be so careful about what I said that…well, I just wouldn’t post on any message board run by a “large global company” I worked for.

I’m imagine challenging someone, like I do here with Max_S or UltraVires, and then discovering that they have to sign off on the dates I need to take off for a family reunion.

8

It is an interfaith channel, specifically labeled as such, and sanctioned as such by the company. No one on my immediate work teams even knows I’m on this, nor would they care. But yes, your concerns about separating religion and work… well, let me just say it’s a change for me as well.

They don’t define what interfaith means or why it’s there.

One thing I noticed is they don’t have any written rules of conduct, no written guidelines for what is appropriate, and no clear mission statement. I asked about that when I first joined the channel. You have to apply and be added.

I’ve only participated in one other interfaith group, which met monthly for potlucks, with a lecture or presentation from someone. That was clearly a peacenik type group and tthe presos were fairly progressive. Human rights and such.

The rules for that interfaith group were basically, no proselytizing, and everyone welcome, there was even an atheist who attended. I remember a Scientologist, a Jehovah’s Witness, and then there was me, the Jewish Pagan Buddhist Yoga Witch. The only thing they were missing was a Satanist.

9

That is not actually the direct quote of Deut 30:19.

I might respond with the complete quote:

11 “For this commandment which I command you this day is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. 12 It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ 13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us, and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ 14 But the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.

15 “See, I have set before you this day life and good, death and evil. 16 If you obey the commandments of the Lord your God[a] which I command you this day, by loving the Lord your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his ordinances, then you shall live and multiply, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land which you are entering to take possession of it. 17 But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them, 18 I declare to you this day, that you shall perish; you shall not live long in the land which you are going over the Jordan to enter and possess. 19 I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life, that you and your descendants may live, 20 loving the Lord your God, obeying his voice, and cleaving to him; for that means life to you and length of days, that you may dwell in the land which the Lord swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.

More likely, I would avoid getting into a selected quote feud.

10

Oh now that’s interesting… I could have looked it up myself but was so spun out I didn’t think to try that. And yes, not going to do a quote feud!

11

@Munch I want you to know that I adapted some of your verbiage to open a discussion, back channel, and “felt heard” as the saying goes. I think they understand the need to clarify ground rules both for what gets posted, and how people can respectfully disagree.

No blood was spilled, no jobs were lost.

12

I would not respond at all, nor would I participate in any work-organized chat channel on any kind of potentially contentious topic like religion or politics.

People joke about how twitter is like Russian Roulette. 99.9% of the time you’re just joking with your friends in public, and occasionally you get really unlucky and it ruins your life.

Work messaging channels have much worse odds. Keep it professional or light.

13

You could just reply with “Hosea 13:16”, instead…

14

Choose Life. Choose a job. Choose a career. Choose a family. Choose a fucking big television, choose washing machines, cars, compact disc players and electrical tin openers. Choose good health, low cholesterol, and dental insurance. Choose fixed interest mortgage repayments. Choose a starter home. Choose your friends. Choose leisurewear and matching luggage. Choose a three-piece suit on hire purchase in a range of fucking fabrics. Choose DIY and wondering who the fuck you are on Sunday morning. Choose sitting on that couch watching mind-numbing, spirit-crushing game shows, stuffing fucking junk food into your mouth. Choose rotting away at the end of it all, pissing your last in a miserable home, nothing more than an embarrassment to the selfish, fucked up brats you spawned to replace yourselves. Choose your future.

15

Personally I wouldn’t get involved in anything of this kind at work. I can’t see too many upsides of social media, on subjects that can be contentious, tagged with your clearly identifiable identity that is overseen by the people who pay your wages and who are liable to take a dim, risk-averse approach to perceived transgressions.

So no, I wouldn’t respond and I doubt much good will come of it.

16

Darn! Just what I wanted to write! To the music of Lust for Life :grinning: