Hi Big Tex...
You're correct, no posting guidelines have been violated. And I'm sorry you feel that my agreeing with Terri's request was an 'ad hoc imposition'. I've not said, nor am I saying now, that disagreement with astrology is forbidden.
No, but you are validating the idea that someone may at whim ask that people who disagree with them stay out of their thread. Can you not see the conflict with this and the words 'DISCUSSION board'?
I am asking that those that want to present the facts against astrology should now start their own thread.
I agree with you on that; I wasn;t going to post onto this thread until I saw the request to not dissent... and that, whether Terri meant it to be or not, is equally a topic of this thread. There was nothing wrong with the way Terri amde the request - she's a nice person. But that is different to whether she was right to ask.
There are two things. First, this for me has nothing to do with Astrology. It could even be about something like, say, movies, where there is no real closure available over the soundness of opinion on what was the best film. Even if an atheist or evolutionist made a thread on their pet subject requesting those with opposing views keep quiet, I would object to their request.
Second, it is the validation of the idea it is okay to ask people not to respond that is the problem.
If it was a discussion about 'Gone With The Wind' being the best movie ever, and the person starting the thread requested that those opposed to this viewpoint didn't comment, I would object. This is, at risk of stressing the point, a DISCUSSION board. It's a PUBLICALLY accessable board. Nowhere does it say this is a board where private individuals can request people stay out of their threads unless they're going to agree with them. How appropriate this request is on a board for survivors of a cultic group where freedom of speech is routinely suppressed is up for the individual to judge and I think you can tell what my opinion is.
If a practising Jehovah's Witness came to this board and started a thread where they requested people with opposing views to those that they held did not comment, they would be ridiculed.
Why is it okay to make a similar request for astrology (or Cavanism, or Islam or whatever).
Maybe I'll actually get an answer to that...
To me, asides for the presise nature of the community on this biard, that request is simply ridiculous on anything called a DISCUSSION BOARD, and would be whether the subject asking for protection was movies, politics, flower arranging, origami or religion.
Gretchen, are there no subjects where people hold views that you find utterly unsound (racism, homophobia, etc.)? Don't you think now that Jehovah's Witnesses have ridiculous beliefs??
I feel to imply that it's okay to hold certain opinions on subjects x, y, z is alright, but to hold them about astrology is not is unsound - unless one can demonstrate a meangful difference between the subjects. As racism is as scientifically sound as astrology, I don't think there is any such differentiation in this case. That one is automatically harmful and one is only potentially harmmful is immaterial; their foundations are equally contrived and insubstansial (for all there are people that believe fervently in both).
Surely we learnt as a process of exiting the Dubbies that any belief you cannot defend is not worth having?
The JW's beliefs are not only not defensable, they create a social structure where their beliefs are protected from the least bit of dissent.
To, even for the best of motives, allow it to be accepted that belief structures that are not defensable should be protected from any dissent, is surely unwise in the extreme.
Xena, why the routine? As far as I can see if people weren't so 'special' and didn't ask for special protection or respond to a discussion they don't want to have (i.e. about the validity of astrology as opposed to the details of astrology), then this thread would go on as Terri originally intended bar the tie on opposing views. It is ONLY the request for no dissenting views that has caused so much fuss, and that's not surprising as it is indefensable (if it is, go ahead).
Maybe some of us poor cult victims are still arguing like chainsaws as a product of our cultic programming, but we have to live with that just as those who still retain uncritical thinking processes as a product of their cultic programming have to live with that - and both of us have to live with each other.