He cannot be banned anymore than any of the more outspoken atheists can be banned when they hijack a religious thread. An OP starts a thread asking either specifics about religious dogma or opinions about a matter of faith and the virulently venomous atheists (and you all know who they are) jump in with words like “sky pixies”, “invisible pink unicorns” or suggesting that people who believe in some form of C/creator are mentally unbalanced. Those people have never been banned and never will be because they:
are part of a group of “name” members with a certain celebrity status.
provide entertainment for their outrageous behavior.
Oh, yeah? Well, prove that there is one!
Seriously, though. I do feel that having Moderator under your name gives a certain “weight” to your comments, intended or not. Although you might not have put on your moderators’ hat, you are considered an “authority figure” and rebukes or insults from you or other moderators are sometimes viewed as more serious, important or powerful than comments from us mere mortals. You have the power to close threads, issue warnings and ban members. We certainly hope that a mod won’t abuse their power but we know sometimes it does happen. You know what they say about absolute power.
Sorry, Omegaman, I have to join the “nay” chorus here. We’re never going to settle the “Is there a God” debate on this site, but we’re never going to settle “Empire or A New Hope?” either. Few debates on this site have changed my mind 100 percent on a subject. But a lot of them have exposed me to new perspectives, and the religion threads are the best example. I get to talk to Diogenes and Polycarp about religion here. Where the heck else am I going to get both those perspectives?
How is belief in religion any different from what? Are you asking if there is any scientific evidence for the supernatural claims of some religions? No, not as far as I know. But Lekatt isn’t claimimg belief. He is claiming that NDE’s are a fact that is supported by science.
I don’t know what you mean. Dislike what, religion more than science? I don’t dislike science at all. But that’s neither here nor there. Anyone who makes an assertion of fact in GD needs to be able to support it. Whether I like it or not is immaterial.
Temple of the Screaming Electron has a forum called “My God Can Beat the Shit out of Your God” for all discussions religious in nature. Makes me snicker every time. http://www.totse.com/community/ (scroll down)
Scientific studies have documented patients who were clinically dead reporting experiences that some people call Near Death Experience’s. I think what lekatt is asserting is that NDE’s are proof of life after death as in a “divine” plane of existence. And, of course, there is no proof of that.
Well I don’t believe that they can be verified. I don’t see how crossing the threshold of death can be proven one way or the other and I suspect that’s why many scientists don’t attempt it because they realize this is the case. As I am not one, and apparently pretty close to being a feeble minded moron, I wouldn’t know. Again, it is really the constant insulting and pitting of persons on both sides of the fence, concerning religion and this issue that are irritating.
[Eddie Izzard] No smoking in bars, and pretty soon, no drinking or talking [/Eddie Izzard]
This is a horrible idea. Lekatt is a freaking idiot. You don’t change the rules to fit a single poster. He appears to be safely corraled under his very own bridge now, anyway.
If he keeps hijacking, ban him. But banning “religion” from GD is like banning “facts” from GQ or “funny” from MPSIMS.
No, I’m apologize for not making myself clear. I was speaking about NDE’s and religion. I don’t believe that NDE’s can proven or not either. I have certainly seen absolutley no evidence either way.
How wonderful, neither do I. lekatt, on the other hand, not only says that it can be proven, but that he has provided the evidence that does so. Factual claim that needs to be backed up, not religious/mystical belief that doesn’t, so why the fucking hell are you on our case, when it is lekatt that can’t tell the difference between fantasy and reality.
Well the absolute same thing can be said about the belief in God. I have seen no verifiable evidence one way or the other. Are you saying that you don’t find the existence of God to be a fantasy?
Feel free to hurl any insults my way you care to. After much time here I have learned not to take thing so personally.
No need to apologize. To be perfectly honest I don’t expect anything to come of this one way or the other. Much like people who open threads about getting cut off in traffic and whatnot. I just felt it was something that needed to be said and I welcome all input both positive and negative. I think you can tell by talking to me I don’t posses the intellect to keep up with 98 percent of the members here but somebody needs to empty the trash, if you get my meaning.
Omegaman, I think that religious people have a conundrum here on the SDMB. I don’t think you can legitimately remove it as a topic of debate, as it is controversial, and people here like to wrangle over it. On the other hand, the question of whether God exists is not really a debatable question according to the culture of this board. For the most part, people here are interested in the scientific over the spiritual, and IMO trying to view religion through the lens of science is pointless…of course, the existance of God can’t be proven. And if the litmus test in terms of changing minds is to prove it scientifically, well, then religion has lost the debate right there. However, the discussions around here that get beyond “does God exist” can be really interesting…do you really want to put a stop to that?
Well, again, I don’t expect this to change anything. But as I have stated both NDE’s and the existence of God can’t be proven one way or the other but it seems one is ridiculed much more than the other and moderators do little to disuade posters from doing so. Does that seem fair or logical to you?
You’re trying real hard not to get, aren’t you? NDEs are not being ridiculed. Claims that they are, and have been, scientifically verified are what is at issue.
If someone claimed to have scientific verification for the existence of God, he would be under the same burden of proof.
Don’t you think that a person claiming an NDE who could immediately report knowledge of stuff impossible for him to be aware of would be at least evidence for?
We’ve also had threads about what evidence for the existence of god would be convincing. I trust you are using proof in the loose sense.
I solved the lekatt problem by not responding to him anymore. I’ve noted but haven’t looked at the new thread, and applaud Tom for finding that solution. You need not open religious threads if they annoy you. I enjoy them, and enjoy discussing things with interesting believers, including but not limited to Liberal and cosmosdan.
No, but it does seem like a bit of an untruth to me. The debate isn’t whether or not NDEs exist, the debate is:
Whether we should count lekatt’s collection of book reviews, speculative articles and anonymous anecdotes as evidence,
Whether we should ignore lekatt’s continual misrepresentation of said collection as peer-reviewed double-blind studies, and
Whether lekatt’s experience even counts as an NDE at all, seeing as he went to bed, had a dream, supposedly woke from said dream, had a mysterious voice tell him to go back to sleep, had a vision, then claimed he had an NDE. No medical personnel confirmed that he was anywhere near dead, and he refuses to state what he was supposedly dying of.
The debate has nothing to do with NDEs, and everything to do with lekatt’s method of debate.
I guess not, if that is the case. But the truth is, I really don’t care much about the moderating one way or another. I vastly prefer less moderation vs. more, so I’m not going to be in support of any effort that might lead to more.
