Religious bigotry on RallyPoint

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 15:56:42 -0500

I have seen a worrying trend here on RallyPoint lately where religious bigotry has been on the rise. Stereotypes, blanket statements on religions as a whole, and in general a lot of comments that straddle the fence of hate speech. I understand that many people hold religious beliefs close to their hearts, but I find this to be unacceptable.

Should we as a community chastise offending users on an individual basis, or should RP set up and enforce more stringent rules regarding what is and is not up for discussion on this answer board? Put simply, should religious discussion be banned outright? I'm a member of numerous boards that have this policy for the sake of civility and wonder if it could be beneficial, or wanted, here.

If not an outright ban on the subject, then should we consider a list bannable offenses? There are support pages discussing "Inappropriate Answers and Discussions, Comments and Responses," as well as pages covering down voting and reporting unprofessional posts, but as they pertain to this topic there's a lot of things that I would of assumed to be covered that are inexplicably absent.

What do you all think? Do you see a problem that needs to be addressed? If so how do you think we as a community should go about it?

Edit: It would seem that many people have tunnel vision and are focusing on only one aspect of what I'm asking. To be clear, I'm not advocating censorship as the only possible method of dealing with this, as I much prefer for users to self police ourselves. This was an open question to the community about how we should react to this type of communication on RallyPoint.

Inappropriate Answers and Discussions, C...

This article provides examples of inappropriate answers and discussion posts that violate RallyPoint's Posting Guid...

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Dec 18 at 2014 3:59 PM

Capt Richard I P. — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 15:59:52 -0500

SGT Private RallyPoint Member I understand (and share) your desire to maintain a civil discourse. The way to do this is through individual correction, as I've seen you do. Outright banning of topics is certainly not the right way to go. Banning individuals (though a more involved process through reporting to RP admin and staff) should be a last resort when a RP member shows no desire to change their poor behavior. I have found RP staff to be pretty responsive with this when the issue was significant enough.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Dec 18 at 2014 3:56 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 15:56:52 -0500

As long as these threads are allowed, there will be arguing. RallyPoint spent lots of time and money to tailor the ability to pick and choose the threads we can see, and members still join the conversation just to stir the pot. What is worse is the INABILITY of some members to NOT get sucked into the argument. Here is some free therapy from Uncle Mark. If you find yourself CONSTANTLY having issues with members, ask yourself this simple question......"Why am I constantly getting into fights and repeatedly needing to get the administrators to step in?" If you put some thought into this question, you might not like the answer. For the members who feel it is their mission in life to point out how someone else's religion is wrong, that is your right. However, I ask you to attack the issue/statement, not the person. Some members just need therapy.

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Dec 18 at 2014 4:08 PM

SGM Erik Marquez — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:08:00 -0500

SGT Private RallyPoint Member "Despite what I wrote in my topic description banning topics makes me uncomfortable too. "

Admittedly I only came into the thread due to the verbiage of your topic .. I was 1/2 way though a response when i noted the above follow up.

I see now your intent was to foster polite, even if controversial discussion .. Not a ban of things you dislike or disagree with.
Well done

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made Dec 18 at 2014 4:28 PM

TSgt Joshua Copeland — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:28:42 -0500

SGT Private RallyPoint Member, in my opinion, the only thing that should be off limits would be advocating illegal actions.

Morals/Ethics are highly subjective. One would think we all share a common ground with those topics given our shared bond as Service Members. Having said that to expressly forbid things would limit us from discussing when those things do directly impact us. Senior Leader firings, cheating scandals, abuses of power and position.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 18 at 2014 4:29 PM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:29:16 -0500

I just do my best to avoid these conversations. If I want a fight or argument all I need to do is go out into the warehouse and yell "Hook Em Horns!". Works every time. No need to search for a fight online. People are more willing to let their ass hang out on line then they are in person and that's a shame. Civil Discourse is becoming a thing of the past.

I don't agree with banning topics though, let them argue. After a day of reading various posts the new user can see that there are certain types of conversation here that will devolve into moronic back and forth so they are easily avoided.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 18 at 2014 5:32 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 17:32:44 -0500

This grenade has multiple pieces of shrapnel to go around if it's used. Once that pin is pulled, MR. Grenade is no longer anyone's friend. There are certain subjects which probably shouldn't be brought up at all...sex and pornography would probably be a good one to throw out there as something we don't want to see on RP. But religion is a topic which is debatable and useful to discuss. The responses, on both sides, can get unprofessional at times, but that's the way discussions get when they are central to REAL meaningful thought. I find that absolute rules tend to be fought for by extremists on either end of the spectrum. If we don't like what someone has to say...counter it. Respecfully. Even if that person is acting like a clown.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 18 at 2014 8:22 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 20:22:03 -0500

Those who disagree with a religious or anti-religious topic have the CHOICE to read a thread or not. If someone disagrees, they are free to voice their opinion and leave the thread. Banning topics is something that is done by those who cannot logically add to a discussion. The majority of those I see that are intolerant are those who refuse to allow someone else believe how they choose.

Response by SrA Craig Brockman made Dec 18 at 2014 9:00 PM

SrA Craig Brockman — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 21:00:15 -0500

I have no belief system, but I respect and admire those that do! Operative word is "Respect".

Response by SGT Michael Glenn made Dec 18 at 2014 9:39 PM

SGT Michael Glenn — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 21:39:21 -0500

Hell I am not a bigot or a racist...I hate all people equally !!!!! Let God sort them out, not my place to judge!!! if you are mixed up with a religion that means to harm my way of life with terrorist acts then yes I have an issue with you, go home and leave my country alone or expect to be hunted down. when I look at people I see people, not an ethnic group but a person, either you act like a decent caring person at this point or you dont, this is your choice not mine, I only react to your actions.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 18 at 2014 9:49 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 21:49:02 -0500

I'm not scared.
If I want to put my beliefs out there, or I have the audacity to challenge those of others, I expect a lively discussion. So long as you can remain on subject, refrain from name calling, and make your points intelligently, I love a good debate. I genuinely want to know how those who worship differently from me (or not at all) came to believe as they do. I think it is about as interesting a subject as any.
I don't aim to convince anyone that I am right and they are wrong. After all, who knows? Until we meet our maker or He decides to reveal Himself on Earth, we all have to wait for the truth. Or take it on faith.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2014 1:21 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Dec 2014 01:21:02 -0500

Islamic Intolerance is a far more burdensome issue.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2014 1:26 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Dec 2014 01:26:50 -0500

You CANNOT have a double standard inferring someone else's viewpoint is intolerant. We keep seeing this again and again. It really does baffle me.

Response by SGT Charles Vernier made Dec 19 at 2014 1:57 AM

SGT Charles Vernier — Fri, 19 Dec 2014 01:57:44 -0500

As professionals it is our responsibity to maintain a civil discourse and to recognize the legitimate beliefs of others in the discussion. I am reminded of the words of Chief Tecumseh "Trouble no about his religion. Respect others in their views, and demand that they respect yours." There is a point where opinions can become hateful, hurtful and destructive and there is a point where the offended can become tyrants who put an end to any discourse at all.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2014 3:11 AM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Dec 2014 03:11:20 -0500

I refuse to refuse talking about religion, with thst being said. I try to be as civil as I can be and keep my facts and opinions and share them openly. If you choose to attack me, it on you, not me. I don't take it personal any more. There are strong believers, weak believers and everyone else that is on the fence...meet people where they are. They may enlighten you about something you don't know

Response by SSG Tim Everett made Dec 19 at 2014 7:34 AM

SSG Tim Everett — Fri, 19 Dec 2014 07:34:31 -0500

I've largely stopped responding to religious threads. There are some seriously bigoted trolls and their entourage of down-voters is ridiculous. I refuse to engage and when people tag me for a response, I tend to ignore it. I just refuse to get sucked in. If I want to talk to narrow-minded people who hate Muslims and atheists, I'll go down the street to the dive bar that sits across from the railroad tracks (yeah this is an actual place).

Response by SPC Leisel Luman made Dec 20 at 2014 8:48 PM

SPC Leisel Luman — Sat, 20 Dec 2014 20:48:46 -0500

Merry Christmas! There I said it. I'm old enough to know that some people won't like me because of my color, some consider me the devil because my eyes are blue. Plenty of people won't like that I'm catholic. Guess what lots of people are offended that I was retired from the army including local veterans groups. STOP worrying about offending people and do what you think is right.

Response by PO2 Steven Erickson made Dec 20 at 2014 8:56 PM

PO2 Steven Erickson — Sat, 20 Dec 2014 20:56:06 -0500

We must remain professional. That being said...

There are things that are unprofessional and are "obvious to the most casual observer". As a community of veterans and service members, I expect RP to police its own, and the administrators to promptly remove obvious unprofessional posts. That's not the problem, and we know it. It's the "blurry" end of the scale.

To apply a quote from Supreme Court Justice Stewart Potter from the famous SCOTUS pornography case...

"I know it when I see it."

I love a rational and spirited debate as much as anyone - it's the "domesticated Viking" in me - but my personal rule is that if a poster pisses me off - personally - "Click X to Close"...

WE, the rank and file members of RP, need to avoid and isolate unprofessional posts. Grant these posts / posters NO ATTENTION and they'll wither and die.

BTW, I wish each and every one of you the love and joy that I feel at Christmas, and may your BEST day of 2014 be your WORST day of 2015...

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 20 at 2014 9:45 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 20 Dec 2014 21:45:59 -0500

SGT Private RallyPoint Member, I'm not quite sure that banning a topic is the answer. There is virtually no subject on which all of us will agree.

Response by SPC James Purcell, LCPL made Dec 20 at 2014 10:18 PM

SPC James Purcell, LCPL — Sat, 20 Dec 2014 22:18:46 -0500

The Constitution that we all took an oath to defend guarantee's our freedom of speech and freedom to worship. Now that you feel it may be a hot topic so you want to ban it. Ummm no. Why should something that is a God given right be so bad that you want to ban it. Unless you don't have a religion or believe in God and don't want to talk about it nor anyone else. Once you go down the rabbit hole where does it stop. Believe, don't believe in anyway you want. But don't get your boxers in a wad when someone wants to talk about religion

Response by SGT Edward Thomas made Dec 20 at 2014 10:29 PM

SGT Edward Thomas — Sat, 20 Dec 2014 22:29:20 -0500

If you ask me, to do so would be a form of censorship and I do believe we all fought/served to prevent such a travesty. I do not agree with all the Christian bashing nor do I agree with bashing of service members who are not Christian. I do think it is childish for a service member to remain without their name showing, but yet we can see their unit/MOS/location and then they vote down a response they don't like. Everyone here has their own opinion about any topic. If one doesn't agree just don't respond.

Response by 1LT David Moeglein made Dec 21 at 2014 5:38 AM

1LT David Moeglein — Sun, 21 Dec 2014 05:38:52 -0500

If an issue related to religion and the military life is something that a service member is wanting to figure out and get counsel on, where else would they get that kind of support than on Rally Point? Hopefully the experience and wisdom of fellow RP members will be shared, and tolerated in a respectful manner. However, military service members and veterans are not fragile as a general rule. If we are worried about being PC and hurting others, will we ban the use of bullets, munitions, and bombs during realistic training and wartime? As servicemen and women, we put our lives on the line. It is appropriate to highlight strengths in and provide resources to service members that enhance a mission focus when the bullets are flying. If we don't figure these things out on a friendly website, how will we expect to when the chips are down?

I find the respectful dialogue between differing faiths, atheism, and agnosticism to be refreshing. I think that some of us need to develop thicker skin. E pluribus unum... out of a plurality comes unity!

Response by SPC(P) Micah Lavigne made Dec 21 at 2014 7:19 AM

SPC(P) Micah Lavigne — Sun, 21 Dec 2014 07:19:57 -0500

First, I am going to state I got bored reading all the Responses in this thread. I also want to politely remind everyone the oaths they swore upon service to the United States Military. With that being said Let me input my thoughts on this matter. It is no secret that Religions of all types are getting attacked outside the fence, and in some cases inside our ranks. I find it deplorable.
The United State Army has an E.O. Policy that protects Soldiers Rights not just for Gender and Race but Religion as well.

AR 600-20 para 6-2 tab a states: The U.S. Army will provide EO and fair treatment for military personnel and Family members without regard to
race, color, gender, religion, national origin, and provide an environment free of unlawful discrimination and offensive
behavior. This policy—
(1) Applies both on and off post, during duty and non-duty hours.
(2) Applies to working, living, and recreational environments (including both on and off-post housing).

While I am no lawyer I do have a minimum of 6 years of E.O. classes and military experience to understand this so I shall break this correspondence down.
No Soldier or their dependents shall be mistreated based on their beliefs (God or no God) Ethnicity (White Black Asian Hispanic) national origin (Natural born citizen or Immigrant)
Nor will the Army allow verbal, physical or symbolic assaults against the Soldier and their families based on those origins.
It applies both On post and off (Garrison and the local populace) On duty (PRT 9-5, and field/deployment areas) and off duty (any time after COB or weekends)

So that includes here. While this is not a government site this is a predominantly Military used website for Service Members and Veterans. If you can't say it in person legally what makes you think you can do it here?
Quite frankly Bashing of Religions (or lack of religion) is illegal in the Army and is also considered cyber bullying and is against Federal Law.

Violating a Soldier's Religious (or lack of religion) is also a violation of the 1st amendment of the Bill of Rights.

"The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights."

While I have your attention let me point out the Oath of Enlistment and the Oath of Office that Every Soldier swore upon entry of Service

Oath of Enlistment:
I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same

Oath of Office
"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same

By these first parts of the oath we are duty bound to support the Constitution and defend it not only from terrorists but ourselves from destroying it. One might say that attacking religion or lack of religion is the same as becoming an "Insider Threat"

Now the last part of these oaths bind us under penalty if violated:

Oath of Enlistment:
and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice

Oath of Office:
and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice

The same meaning that Under Oath we are bound to follow all regulations and UCMJ to support and defend the Constitution (which includes the Bill of Rights) or risk Prosecution under military and/or Federal Law.

And the last part of the Oaths:

Oath of Enlistment:
So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

Oath of Office:
So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962 states that anyone may choose to say God or any Deity or belief they hold sacred enough to keep their word and as a witness.

So how do we respect beliefs with out being offended?

The answer is simple: Respect it, acknowledge it it doesn't mean you are forced into it.
If a Muslim prays to Allah or a Christian Prays to God or an Atheist Praises science (sorry guys Im not too familiar with how yall deal with no higher power no disrespect), it doesn't mean they are forcing it upon you they are simply practicing their beliefs and individualism. Which is why our military is so great.''

I know this is long winded and I do sadly expect some remarks. I just hope we all have some sense to respect our oaths and Regulations and do so unbiased

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 21 at 2014 1:28 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 21 Dec 2014 13:28:26 -0500

As said already respect should be a factor. That being said, we here as professionals (and adults) should be able to act and respond as such. Are we to be afraid of disagreement? Or worse, are we to silence one, often the majority, in order to appease the other, often the minority? Is that not a concept that is already causing divisive behavior on the civilian side of our country? Is that not the root cause of many things in which many changes unwanted by the majority are taking place? Is not the service to be looked at as an example of effective positive change for the greater good? Undoubtedly it used to be. Good things do not come from caving to the rants and cries of just a few, without considering what freedoms you take away from the many.

Response by Cpl Peter Martuneac made Dec 21 at 2014 1:46 PM

Cpl Peter Martuneac — Sun, 21 Dec 2014 13:46:16 -0500

As long as there are two people in existence, there will be arguments. Any thread can get ugly, not just religion, so where do you draw the line? You can't just ban stuff you don't like.

Response by 1SG David Niles made Dec 21 at 2014 2:46 PM

1SG David Niles — Sun, 21 Dec 2014 14:46:45 -0500

Here is my two cents. I am secure in my religious beliefs. If I don't like what someone says and I don't want to debate it. I move on, if I want to debate it, counter it, I will and am willing to take the response. So no, we do not need to ban it and we don't need to be thin skinned. We are all adults that can read or not read what is posted. God Bless, Four More Days.

Response by CPO Ed Ball made Dec 22 at 2014 9:43 AM

CPO Ed Ball — Mon, 22 Dec 2014 09:43:23 -0500

I have no problem with religious discussions/debates. Yet it saddens me as this nation's trend to silence the Christian Community through their disbelief gains momentum. If they have no belief system, why would they go out of their way to condemn something they have no faith in? So others would be more like them? We all know there is no statement "separation of church and state" in our Constitution, but they continue to build upon such a platform, and further divide communities across this once great nation.

Much can be said of a society that has no respect for the greater good, or their fellow man or woman. I'm old enough to remember the day you left your home, with doors and windows wide open, went to town, did your shopping and returned home to find everything in its proper place. A day when there was prayer in schools each morning along with the pledge of Allegiance.

Those of us that do believe, pray for those that don't, will continue to serve our Lord, and will love our neighbors (even the non-churched) as ourselves. We will work to feed those less fortunate, provide them a community service when needed, and ensure we have the resources to assist them during emergencies.

It doesn't take a government to do what our churches are called to do. We just need to do more of it as a society, believers and non-believers alike, and are, but you won't read about it in your major media outlets. Merry Christmas and Happy New Years to one and all, regardless of your faith or lack thereof! May we all know Peace and comfort in the coming year.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 26 at 2014 3:38 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 26 Dec 2014 15:38:09 -0500

I think the way it is set up is fine. There are going to be ignorant and hateful people no matter what policies are set in place. The beautiful thing about free speech is we can stand up against the bigotry or hatefulness.

Response by MSgt Michelle Mondia made Feb 2 at 2015 12:04 AM

MSgt Michelle Mondia — Mon, 02 Feb 2015 00:04:11 -0500

We are already at war...maybe we can strive to have kinder words for each other. We serve alongside all various "believers" and Non believers alike. If you want to reflect the truth hold up a mirror. People need to see for themselves how they being are perceived. When we begin to tolerate intolerance the whole team is degradated. Morality is what it is, God or no god we need to do right by one another and guard against "self" righteousness. The media is a big huge contributor in the polorazation of this country. We see disrespect, one upping and flat out insults on a daily basis from the various pundits during there so called "news" reporting. It's practically encouraged...we need to be conscious in our disagreements. The goal is to understand not belittle or proselytize our audience. But we have less and less examples of this in media and Pop culture.

Response by CPT Pedro Meza made Jun 17 at 2015 4:52 PM

CPT Pedro Meza — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 16:52:52 -0400

SGT Kenneth Robertson, But if we do away with the religious bigotry all these guys that have issues with gays, lesbians, transgenders as well as other religions would have no argument, you would force them to accept All American and serving military members past and present as fellow human beings. Rally Point would then become a mature military professional site offers advice, helps mold and support serving military service members.

Response by CPT Pedro Meza made Jul 7 at 2015 12:51 PM

CPT Pedro Meza — Tue, 07 Jul 2015 12:51:41 -0400

SGT Kenneth Robertson, Religious beliefs do not belong on Rally Point, because from observation I have notice far too many non-serving individuals who take upon themselves to use RP as a podium from where they pontificate their religious views and never take into account the effects of their words on our current serving military service members. Support and guidance for all our current service members should be the most important aspect here in Rally Point.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 11 at 2015 3:09 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 11 Jul 2015 03:09:05 -0400

Well, with all the new talk of monitoring online posts for what constitutes as acceptable behavior from service members, the ideas listed within your post are not unreasonable and quite logical. However, there would definitely need to be definitive guidance. One rule I have lived by my entire life is "The Grandma Clause". If I would not be comfortable saying something in front of her, I should probably refrain from saying it in any written or verbal form of expression. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and beliefs, but that does not mean those need to be expressed and pushed on others. Great post on this subject matter.

Very Respectfully,
1LT Krohn (Equal Opportunity Leader)

Response by SGT Robert Zuniga made Aug 17 at 2015 12:24 PM

SGT Robert Zuniga — Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:24:46 -0400

If you do not like what is on TV, change the channel. Do not refuse everyone else the choice to watch it. There's billions of people in the world. Not everyone wants to be forced to be the same. Does anyone remember who Hitler was? HELLO!!

Response by SGT William Howell made Dec 11 at 2015 11:10 AM

SGT William Howell — Fri, 11 Dec 2015 11:10:56 -0500

So what you are saying is, "Should we limit the rights of those who do not think the way we think they should?"

So lets break bigotry down so we can just get rid of all these intolerant people.

Webster defines it as: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group

So let's hit it. I think we have to first figure out people, ideas, etc. Hummmm. So I take that to mean just about everything
.
I think we can all agree most everybody on here has strong opinions on just about everything.

So how do we decide what is unfairly refuses to accept a group? We can start with sports. Got a team you dislike. Have they ever done anything to you personally? Your out! What about my pet peeve. Minivans, never fails they always seem to be in the fast lane driving slow. Ever feel like that. Your out! Chevy or Ford..don't matter your both out! McDonalds or Burger King..out! What about Saggy pants pro or against. Anybody here ever been attacked by a kid in droopy drawers? If not your out. This can go on all day.

We all have opinions and we can justify to some extent our beliefs. Others may see them as unfairly. I bet you David Duke can justify his hate of all those that are not white. Which one of us gets to be the moral compass? Which one of us has all the right answers. None of us!

We have to decide for ourselves what is right and wrong. If you don't like a post then move on. You are never REPEAT, NEVER, going to win an argument about religion. There is not a person here that will ever change my faith in my God. We have been killing each other in the name of gods since we could walk upright, don't look for it to change anytime soon.

There is no easy answer. Now in saying that, it is your choice if you want to open you hearts and home up to something that may or may not kill you. That is a personal decision if you have faith in the human kind. No one can fault someone for having that faith. I personally do not and that makes me a bigot. I can live with that, because so are you.