Should I sign up at The Pizza Parlor?
The question, of course, is do I have the time to beat my head against a wall every day?
Esprix
Well, Esprix, that choice is up to you.
The majority of the Pizza Parlor habitues are “my kind of Christian” – people who sincerely care about other people, are less interested in forcefeeding you their beliefs than about you as a person, enjoy a good argument and will back it up with evidence (assuming you’ll allow the Bible into evidence in an argument that focuses on, e.g., morality). There’s a breadth of opinion there, including some participants here that like it there as well.
It originated with people who found the backbiting and intolerance of the LBMB too much, and set up on their own, complete with brass cannon. 
For my money, a committed UU with ability to debate points and the capacity to see both their points of view and what might be wrong with it would be a good thing.
And I don’t think you’ll get a whole lot of headache, provided you stay out of threads where people are talking past each other, as unfortunately happened in the creation vs. evolution threads in the Order Here First board.
That’s IMHO, of course. I’ll wait for one of their mods. (who visit here from time to time) to make further comments.
Me, I enjoy it. But I like spinach, too. 
I just want to point out that great minds think alike.
Now if only I could figure out the ‘rolls-eyes’ smiley, I’d be set.
I know - I only just found it from that very thread, and your very post and link. Took a look. Scared me (though not as badly as the LBMB). Just wondering…
Esprix
Well, just as an FYI…most (not all) of the people over there are very respectful, and willing to debate. I am open about what I believe, and what I believe IN. And I’ve been treated very well. Of course, I do NOT go into the CvE threads. I stay in the news area.
In other words, it’s up to you, Esprix…but don’t assume you’d be treated badly. I haven’t, and lord knows that a pro-choice, liberal Witch sets off all SORTS of alarms over there.
Esprix, have you read the thread “Let’s Talk Homsexuality”? (And that’s how it’s spelled.) You may want to. I am known as Not My Real Name. Polycarp is, well, you know who. The following appears on Page Two with my emphasis:
He explains that this means that y’all are more likely to get obsessed over sex than straight people because of society’s disapproval.
Do you agree? (I haven’t read any of your “Ask the Gay Guy” threads, BTW. I’ve been meaning to, but the CvE discussions have been taking up a lot of my time.)
FWIW, Poly started a thread in GD talking about this very topic.
<smallfont>and the web of cross posts gets a little bit bigger…</smallfont>
…and because of the discussion in the SDMB thread, he has apparently altered his opinion on whether homosexuals are more prey to sexual sin.
You are, of course, my personal hero.
It’s true. It’s true.
Oops. Useful information in the Pit. Sorry.
Aw, shit. Apology in the Pit. Sor—Fuck off.
I say, go for it if you want, Esprix.
I think that joining a message board where you disagree with many of the prevelent views is perfectly acceptable. When I found the ConstituitonTalk MB I registered and immediately began posting my viewpoint that the Constitution is fundamentaly flawed. I don’t think that was trolling. I was prepared to debate in an honest and civil manner. If you are planning on doing the same then what’s the harm? We all might learn something.
On a cautionary note, I seem to be a bit slower on the trigger than you. The Parlor doesn’t have a forum for ranting. I would hope not to see a bunch of Pit threads concerning the trials and tribulations of your sojourns over there. Although I might join in on a quick diatribe decrying Buggyman’s sigs.
Note regarding JAB’s semi-hijack: First, I gather that my finding out the truth regarding my hypothesis on sexual addiction in gay people is more than satisfactory to JAB. Second, thank you to the moderators on both boards who spoke in my defense above. And, regarding the last phrase in Gaudere’s post, I was not so much interested in the sin question as in the addiction-to-behavior/obsession question (which in my framework and that of the PP would be seen as what is called a “besetting sin” in the same way alcoholism is, a condition one needs to struggle to overcome – not that “homosexuality = alcoholism” but “obsessing over sex = alcoholism” – regardless of the orientation involved). My hypothesis that exclusionary treatment over sexual orientation meant that gays were more likely to fall into “sexual addiction” has been more-or-less-conclusively refuted by arguments in the GD thread.
Done and done. No need to hide my identity as I had to on the LBMB, methinks. And I really don’t need another place to distract me from work {snicker}, but it does look like a cut above (much like the SDMB, only in a different vein).
See ya there, Poly.
Esprix