I propose that RP ban all Questions/Discussions relating directly to RELIGION. What are your thoughts?

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 01:10:42 -0500

Religious questions/discussions have/are causing problems in RP. Most responses/comments are respectful; however, some posts are not and members are personally attacking other members.

If this issue is not dealt with expeditiously, RP stands to lose a lot of good members. We have plenty of other topics - ban all religious topics.

Edit as of 6,976 views, 1,228 votes and 491 responses/comments:

My intent with this question was to engage RP members in a discussion concerning in what I believe to be an increasing trend of unprofessional and disrespectful comments. I wanted people to arrive at the conclusion that banning a topic was not the answer, but rather doing something about the individuals making the unprofessional and/or disrespectful comments. In addition to that, I was hoping many members would not only identify the problem being individuals, but also come up with suggestions about how to deal with those individuals.

It is more than having a thick skin - we all have a military background and know what it means to be professional and respectful - it is my opinion there is no room here for members to be threatened, taunted or belittled. We can discuss any topic, agree to disagree, and verbalize our opinion or point of view without having to go there.

I realize there are already ways to report members on RP. Getting additional ideas and suggestions for improvements can never hurt, and most importantly, if we would police our own, giving down votes on unprofessional/disrespectful comments, and calling these individuals out, we can hopefully get them to change their behavior or help RP admins identify the ones who might need to take a break or be banned.

Last and certainly no the least, I am a devoted Christian, and would never support a ban on any topic. I know my question said that, but go back and read why I did it that way.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 1:20 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 01:20:51 -0500

I can go either way on this one CSM Private RallyPoint Member; Personally I will not post on some questions on here though as I know what might come of it.

It does amaze me how rude people can act on the internet when I know very few would be able to do that in person.

Response by GySgt Joe Strong made Feb 14 at 2015 1:37 AM

GySgt Joe Strong — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 01:37:11 -0500

IMHO, the issue would be better dealt with by enforcing civil discussion rather than by banning a topic. Any topic.

Response by MSG Floyd Williams made Feb 14 at 2015 1:41 AM

MSG Floyd Williams — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 01:41:47 -0500

CSM Jim Dula.... It doesn't matter what the topic may be, you will always have some unhappy campers. The topic can be on Religion, Race, Gender, Politics, some people will be offended about Valentine's Day, just to name a few. Somebody will be offended and get on the defensive, an individual accused me of trying to force my religion on people. He couldn't find one comment I made on a post promoting religion, getting rid of religious topics won't make or break anyone. We learn in the military to adapt and overcome, being successful isn't comfortable it is a process, struggle, and a price to achieve but some people will get offended if you give a lecture on being successful. Sure RP may lose some, but I'm more than sure new members will fill the gaps.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 2:17 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 02:17:40 -0500

I'd have to disagree with you there CSM. It isn't the topic that should be banned from discussion as that only creates a taboo around the idea. Instead individuals who can't talk about a subject (I widen my point not only to religion but all things) respectfully and objectfully... Or more to the point those that feel the need to only flame the fire with derogatory use of the subjects should be warned and eventually banned from use of this website.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 2:22 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 02:22:15 -0500

I suggest rather than censoring free speech, people exercise discretion. If they feel the religion issue will make them angry they avoid it. If they read it and get upset, they ignore it and move on. This is a damned social forum, not a classroom with a captive audience. Act like adults instead of children.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 2:24 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 02:24:23 -0500

I disagree... I have no issue with religious topics here... What I have an issue with is people attacking others because of their choice of religion/non-religion, or the over-zealous shoving of one's own beliefs down someone else's throat.

Here's my question: If I have a question, a deep question, about a religious topic, and need some guidance - preferably from like minded individuals, should I be banned from asking such a question?

And, if you ban religious statements/questions, should we next ban political ones because someone doesn't like a conservative or liberal point of view - which I guarantee you is more of a hot topic button than religion - though only by a few degrees?

Response by SSG Leonard Johnson made Feb 14 at 2015 2:26 AM

SSG Leonard Johnson — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 02:26:24 -0500

Ban Religion Top???? WOW..... I suppose Liberals like you want to ban someone from saying telling or giving a suggestion on different fire arms for example... I like this, If you see a post u don't like or what ever......delete it or ignore it. No one says you have to respond to a post

Response by MAJ(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 3:39 AM

MAJ(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 03:39:33 -0500

My honest take is, if we remain professional, we can talk about anything.

If you're not sure how to conduct yourself as such, just imagine that every response or debate is happening "in person." If you're seperated from the military, imagine you're still in uniform.

If all of the members discussing any topic were in uniform and sitting around a table, I bet we would conduct ourselves accordingly and as professionals.

If not, then we might as well ban politics, sexual preference, and every other "hot" topic.

What seperates RP from any other open forum is the uniform and our service to our country and each other. Why is it so hard to remain professional?

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 4:18 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 04:18:16 -0500

Or, one can do as I do, and not partake in discussions that bother me or have no interest in on a public forum such as politics and religion. Just my $0.02 CSM Jim Dula

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Feb 14 at 2015 6:31 AM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 06:31:00 -0500

Politics Religion. Two of the most explosive topics. Better to remain professional when tackling these subjects. If we as professionals can't remain professional when talking these subjects, then don't comment. It's on each one of us to police ourselves and keep the standards as they should be.

Response by SPC James Mcneil made Feb 14 at 2015 7:30 AM

SPC James Mcneil — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 07:30:16 -0500

I do not see the benefit of banning a topic because it is controversial. We are (or should be at least) professionals, and that means that we conduct ourselves in a professional manner. We would lose more from banning a controversial topic that has woven itself into the fabric of many of our lives than we would by standing up for what we believe in and weeding out those that cannot remain respectful.
Just my humble opinion of course.

Response by Sgt Jennifer Mohler made Feb 14 at 2015 7:47 AM

Sgt Jennifer Mohler — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 07:47:40 -0500

Not an entirely poor suggestion. A creative solution to an ever prevalent problem within society. Not like it isn't done on other sites.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 8:11 AM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 08:11:11 -0500

I disagree. I support both sides. I agree folks should be able to practice their religion freely and discuss freely. But I also agree with the folks who are frustrated and feel that they're getting slammed or forced to participate in religious ceremonies and freely discuss that.

Additionally, I don't feel we should ban religious ceremonies, but no one should look down on anyone who respectfully declines to participate. But I also agree that if atheists or other non-religious groups want to have ceremonies, they should be able to as well. What would be best is if both groups respected each others' rights and didn't disparage the other group. We all have rights.

We live in America. Freedom of speech is our hallmark. Sometimes it's gonna be real uncomfortable for either side. But that's what it takes to truly be "inclusive" and "Diverse."

Didn't we all sign up and swear allegiance to the Constitution? That means all of it and not just from our own viewpoint.

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Feb 14 at 2015 8:29 AM

Cpl Jeff N. — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 08:29:46 -0500

Well then let's ban all of the LBGT posts too. While we are at it, let's ban any posts on Islamic terrorists, or anything political in nature as well. Or we could just let people post what they want and if you don't like a post you don't have to read it because no one really makes you read any of them.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 8:44 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 08:44:59 -0500

CSM Private RallyPoint Member Sweeping the problem under the carpet and forgetting about it never solved the problem...

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Feb 14 at 2015 8:49 AM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 08:49:25 -0500

From reading the CSMs other posts, I was a little surprised at this topic, but one needs to read through the lines. I have a feeling this is a way the CSM is using to make us stop and think about what we are posting. As I get the drift of it, we all need to watch our Ps and Qs and stay on the straight line, not pasting labels on people nor abusing them over the net.

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 8:53 AM

CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 08:53:16 -0500

The only cure for stupid is death.....you will never get rid of those that for one reason or another cannot engage in a debate without turning the issue personal.....once that happens they go on the attack and lose all ability to keep it civil.....if you eliminate religious posts then you are removing a topic that many are looking for professional inputs on to deal with a situation.....hearing both sides is beneficial to all....do not ban any specific topics on RP as that is just a bandaid fix to stupid, it still remains when the bandaid is pulled.....

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 9:02 AM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 09:02:38 -0500

While I don't think your proposal is necessary CSM Private RallyPoint Member I do understand the sentiment and know that it's coming from a good place and not a wish to silence others. I think the RP staff should start actively suspending or banning people who cannot have a respectful discussion here.

Debate can be lively. It can be heated. It should never resort to actively attacking someone.

One thing that would help (and it's been said before) is for all members of this site, serving members and veterans alike to remember that this is a military site and you should maintain your military bearing. Be a professional! I've been out of the Navy for 20+ years now and when a 25 year old Lt addresses me or I respond to their comment I act like I'm the enlisted man I was and say sir when appropriate. When a CSM or MCPO makes a remark I respond with all the respect due to them, even if they are my contemporary in age. Why is this so hard to do? You voluntarily joined this site knowing it is a professional military site. If you behave as if your chain of command can see your posts then most likely you will moderate yourself. That applies whether you are active or if you are retired or a veteran.

I wish I could agree to shutting down the topics but I can't. I do however believe RP should be shutting down some people who just cannot moderate their own behavior.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 9:58 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 09:58:56 -0500

Lets ban books that insight debate and disagreement too while were banning things.

Censorship is one of the first steps down the slippery slope.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 11:21 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 11:21:46 -0500

I strongly disagree with banning all religious topics. You learn something, and you learn who has respect for their fellow soldier and who's just a big whiny baby who'll use their rank to shut people up. That's useful to learn.

Response by MSgt Michelle Mondia made Feb 14 at 2015 11:39 AM

MSgt Michelle Mondia — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 11:39:38 -0500

Some one tried doing this With books back in the day...regardless, I think we're all grow men and woman with thick enough skin to be or have been in the military so we can deal with this. Even though it seems disrespectful I feel like it's cathartic, people need to express themselves and hear some real talk. If it turns discriminatory then those individuals should be dealt with. But saying we can't handle philosophical discussions isn't right. I hope we continue to keep sharing and keep the conversations free of judgment.

Response by COL Ted Mc made Feb 14 at 2015 12:11 PM

COL Ted Mc — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 12:11:59 -0500

CSM Private RallyPoint Member CSM; could you be a little more specific in your definition of "relating directly to RELIGION"?

Would your proposal mean that it wouldn't be acceptable to describe murderous sociopaths whose conduct directly contradicts the contents of the Qur'an and the teachings of Muhammad as "Islamic" and we would all be forced to type "murderous sociopathic terrorists" rather than "Islamic terrorists" (a 72% increase in effort)?

Would your proposal mean that people would have to learn how to distinguish between "cultural" and "religious" factors?

Would your proposal mean that people would have to base their positions on actual facts that they have done something to verify personally and not simply on labels or what someone else has told them the facts are and how they are supposed to think?

Response by LTC Stephen C. made Feb 14 at 2015 12:15 PM

LTC Stephen C. — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 12:15:45 -0500

It does get touchy with religious (and political) topics CSM Private RallyPoint Member, but banning various topics is not the answer. I think RP would be in danger of losing more members by dictating topics than by allowing them to remain. I think that SSgt John S. has given a good response.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 12:16 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 12:16:10 -0500

I think the answer is voting down those who are obviously attacking others, trolling or the like. Enough vote downs and they should be gone. I don't really enjoy the religious debates on here myself, but doesn't mean others shouldn't have them. I'd rather loss a dozen members than other peoples choice to discuss religion as long as it is professional.

Response by SGT Jim Z. made Feb 14 at 2015 12:34 PM

SGT Jim Z. — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 12:34:45 -0500

I vote aye and not because I am not religious but there are many on here that are narrow minded and will not accept others' opinions.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 12:53 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 12:53:15 -0500

CSM Private RallyPoint Member I respectfully disagree people who act unprofessionally (flame, troll, and are overly defensive) when discussing topics that are sensitive should not be here, However, due to that unlikely happening it needs to be banned. Its a shame that we can't talk about hot button issues.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 1:04 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:04:01 -0500

I say we ban all topics regarding Ranger School too. Everyone get's their panties in a twist about that. Way too touchy. Don't want people getting offended.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 1:13 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:13:29 -0500

I used to feel the same way, CSM. No more. I'm not religious. But I know which religion has declared war on America. I know which book says to kill! I know in which gods name, these bastards murder. We didn't start this war. I'd rather piss em off than relinquish all my beliefs to their censorship.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 1:28 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:28:10 -0500

I say leave it. This way as a whole we can see who is doing the dumb stuff and correct it. Not saying I want an ARCOM but hey, who knows.

Response by CDR Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 1:28 PM

CDR Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:28:37 -0500

The problem if you ban all religious topics is that for many people religion permeates multiple other discussions that have a place on Rally Point like how does someone deal with certain events, etc. Preventing everyone from discussing something because of a few how are immature and disrespectful is the wrong action. The ban should be on disrespectful people. If people make disrespectful comments then their comment should be removed and member warned then 3 warnings and you get bannned drom making posts for a minimum period of time.

Response by SPC Brent Morrison made Feb 14 at 2015 1:30 PM

SPC Brent Morrison — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:30:56 -0500

I hear a lot of people say that government is taking all of our rights away.
What I have noticed is that they don't have to. We do a good enough job relinquishing our own rights. This is a fine example of that.
Ironically, the answer to members attacking other members is God himself.
Not only is he the answer to this problem but all the worlds problems.
To ban religion from Rally Point is to ban God and I can't get down with that.
I respect your point of view and your point is valid but I believe your solution is counter productive.

Response by 1LT Nick Kidwell made Feb 14 at 2015 1:40 PM

1LT Nick Kidwell — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:40:22 -0500

Sorry, CSM Private RallyPoint Member ...not gonna happen.

People do need to behave in a professional manner, but you cannot legislate niceness and common sense.

Response by SFC Walt Littleton made Feb 14 at 2015 1:47 PM

SFC Walt Littleton — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:47:39 -0500

I'm a Christian and this is a subject that needs to be dealt with respect. All true religions preach Peace, Love and happyness. Evil people creat their own religion to meet their agendas.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Feb 14 at 2015 2:21 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 14:21:37 -0500

CSM Private RallyPoint Member I feel your pain, brother. I don't think any one thing should be banned from discussion. In time, after all the subjects that are red flags for members become banned, we will be left quoting regulations. There is a huge problem with desrespect and members not knowing how to discuss and debate without resorting to becoming bullies on the playground. There are members who offer no valuable support of the community and exist merely to enrage people when a religion thread populates. Religion is a hot issue in the military and is going through waves of changes in our culture. We have to stay up with the developing situations as it pertains to all of us. We can't just shut it down because this month we are all having a nervous breakdown dealing with individuals that need to be tagged and bagged by the head shed.

Response by LTC John Wilson made Feb 14 at 2015 2:25 PM

LTC John Wilson — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 14:25:54 -0500

Religion is a tough topic and it is emotional depending on the persons's beliefs. I agree we should suspend all discussions on religion that are not pertinent to military operations or deployments.

Response by LTC John Wilson made Feb 14 at 2015 2:32 PM

LTC John Wilson — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 14:32:37 -0500

wow, I haven't even been into the topic for ten seconds and have read some heated discussions. I guess I erred when I said I agree with banning religious topics, because it makes me at odds with something I believe very strongly. Thomas Jefferson said, "I may not believe in what you say, but, I will support your right to say it 100%>" If you don't agree with the subject, be respectful enough to say I don't agree and move on. Same if you agree. We are adults and should be able to discuss anything on here that will effect our lives.

Response by TSgt Tim (lj) Littlejohn made Feb 14 at 2015 3:10 PM

TSgt Tim (lj) Littlejohn — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 15:10:07 -0500

So you want to ban all Questions/Discussions relating directly to RELIGION, on this site! A site for SMs active and retired. Boy I sure wish that was all it took to stop all the wars, that are fought, because of religion. It all started when Cain killed Able!

As I posted earlier religion and politics were not supposed to come up at family gatherings. When they did it was time for the Funk and Wagner's or the Bible to prove your point! No proof, time to shut-up, no using whole chapters just to fog everything up.

The few wars that didn't start with religion, started with politics, that my friends is why history keeps on repeating it's self

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 3:28 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 15:28:39 -0500

It's not only "Religion"
AF SSgt John S mentions "censorship has never been, and never will be the answer".
Sorry to burst the RallyPoint so-called "First Amendment" bubble, there's not one.

Jim, one of many reason's I did not re-up a third time: hypocrites. The type that consistently "ask for input" then usurp credit or simply ignore it. E.g. I post a valid ISIS "Geneva - Hague" topic (straight out of University 4000 level Political Science texts),
only to have it removed.

I'm not under oath. I was consistently invited to join RP. I have read far worse topics, and many RP members appear more concerned with tot-board popularity, showing their vast, broad-range life knowledge at twenty or thirty something than learning anything of value.
The disrespect shown to "Intelligent" Retirees and Veterans is simply astounding.
I will be considering resignation. taking my offered FREE knowledge with me.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 3:46 PM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 15:46:34 -0500

Check out the three threads in a row I just saw on RallyPoint. This happens quite a bit -- similar themes in successive discussion threads. I thought this was neat.

Response by LTC David S. Chang, ChFC®, CLU® made Feb 14 at 2015 10:15 PM

LTC David S. Chang, ChFC®, CLU® — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 22:15:56 -0500

I don't think we need to go this far. I think people can just ignore religious discussions if they don't want to be a part of it. Since the founding of this country, religion has played a large role in the development of the nation.

There are always strong opinions on each side and I think that is ok. It is healthy if done in a respectful manner.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 11:18 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 23:18:31 -0500

I disagree.

Response by 1SG Cameron M. Wesson made Feb 14 at 2015 11:40 PM

1SG Cameron M. Wesson — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 23:40:28 -0500

CSM Private RallyPoint Member Jim.... Let's not go that far. Lets police up the strays and try to keep people professional. Hell some young officer, NCO, or soldier might learn something important... And you never know where those lessons come from... Even the negative lessons are worthwhile if the troop takes it and uses it to the positive!

My 2 cents anyways.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 12:19 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 00:19:51 -0500

SSG Wesley Buchan , I do not understand why you gave me a down vote. If you simply disagree, it is customary to simply post a response stating "I disagree" and then state why, if you wanted.

Also, when giving someone a down vote, it is customary to let them know why, which you haven't done, nearly a hour after the down vote.

You have the right to do what you want, but in my opinion, you are being unprofessional in your actions, and I respectfully ask you to consider your actions in the future.

Response by SGT Christen Newell made Feb 15 at 2015 12:54 AM

SGT Christen Newell — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 00:54:44 -0500

So let's censor the things that some people dont like to discuss. Sounds like a slippery slope. What do we ban next? When did censorship ever come to any good? If you don't agree with say so and move on.

Response by PO3 John Jeter made Feb 15 at 2015 1:09 AM

PO3 John Jeter — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 01:09:46 -0500

The root cause of many of our problems today is our inability to calmly discuss beliefs we disagree with. If we cannot learn to come to terms amongst ourselves, we shall never be able to negotiate reasonably with the outside world. I'm actually fairly surprised at how well many of the discussions have gone. Many of us are pretty stubborn about our beliefs and we don't easily accommodate others views. But when the opposing view is presented with respect, you can at least agree to disagree without rancor or hatred. That's an important step in understanding each other. By the same token, those who refuse to extend respect or are determined to just hate will expose themselves for what they are. After a while the haters get tired of being ignored and they drift away.
I am very apprehensive at the idea of restricting any subject matter unless there is an overwhelming outcry or a legal reason.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 3:19 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 03:19:23 -0500

I am not for the banning but I doo not reply or comment on them in general. I will discuss religion and politics on occasion but I am like many others and I compartmentalize my life. Rally Point is just not the place I go to so I can discuss politics and religion

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 5:25 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 05:25:10 -0500

My outlook on religious discussions.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 8:48 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 08:48:48 -0500

I have down voted this question. How could censorship ever be a good answer to any problem? What, are we commies, or Hitlers Germany?
We as Americans are forgetting to engage in meaningful dialog about God and religion. If we can't discuss it, how will we ever learn where people are coming from? Ignoring points of view and not allowing discussion will only add to our downfall. Every great nation that has ever existed has fallen, and censorship is usually one of the first steps.

Response by SPC Mark Beard made Feb 15 at 2015 11:03 AM

SPC Mark Beard — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 11:03:44 -0500

I think no matter what subject is brought up there will always be someone who does not like this are that I say no with all do respect , also that is how each subject should be brought up and discussed with respect for your brothers and sisters

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 1:09 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 13:09:24 -0500

The format of RP needs to be changed so that we can identify and engage on the topics of importance and put the yelling matches somewhere else.

Settled or repeated discussions should be combined thus limiting the many different discussions on the same topic.

Response by PO1 Steven Kuhn made Feb 15 at 2015 1:21 PM

PO1 Steven Kuhn — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 13:21:36 -0500

CSM Private RallyPoint Member the good thing about being in America is that we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights. I am not quoting the Bible or using religion, just our precious Constitution and it guarantees us freedom of speech. I do not feel that any subject should be taboo, as long as we can respect the individual posting or responding to the question, and we can stick to the subject and refrain from attacking the person or topic. We are all active duty or retired military personnel who have had to endure some pretty harsh situations in the performance of our duties. If we are going to lose a lot of good members because of a topic then maybe they are not such good members after all because they will lobby to have their way and take away another individual's freedom. The great thing about RallyPoint is we are conversing and sharing our ideas with people we should be able to respect: people who have put their lives on the line for the freedoms we enjoy in America! And here you come with a veiled threat that RallyPoint will lose a whole bunch of members if we do not heed your warning and ban discussion on religion. If you do not want to be a part of the conversation, then you are free not to comment. If you disagree with a viewpoint, you can discuss it via posts in a manner that expresses respect for the individual's viewpoint and perspective. While I will agree with you (from personal experience) that the discussions revolving around religion can become heated, it is not the topic but the lack of respect and maturity of the people involved in the discussion. If we who fight for the freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution try and boycott or subvert them in a way such as you are proposing, we are doing a great disservice to those who lost their lives or livelihood defending the Constitution. You and I took an oath to support and defend that document (and the ideals it contains) against all enemies foreign and domestic and that oath has no expiration date. I would hope that you would consider this a respectful comment to your post. For the record, I firmly believe in God, and know as a record of historical fact that our country was founded on the foundation of the Christian faith by men who followed their faith and put their lives on the line because of it. I believe that we should honor the right of every person to express their faith, feelings and opinions as long as these do not involve the imminent harm to another person or our country. May God bless you with a wonderful day!

r/

Steve

Response by LTC John Wilson made Feb 15 at 2015 2:11 PM

LTC John Wilson — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 14:11:24 -0500

Wanting to keep peace within Rally Point and asking that we not discuss religion is a request and not ordering it to be suspended. We are veterans here that are supposed to be mature enough to agree and disagree without getting too sensitive over remarks made by anyone. Let' not start with the Liberal tag, the Conservative Tag, and use it in an insulting manner. disagreement is healthy and we all learn from it. Let's be courteous and let's grow from the conversations.

Response by MAJ David Hoyer made Feb 15 at 2015 2:16 PM

MAJ David Hoyer — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 14:16:50 -0500

I agree. Religious discussion is likely to cause more trouble than benefits in this venue.

Response by SFC Ian Lumgair made Feb 15 at 2015 2:31 PM

SFC Ian Lumgair — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 14:31:03 -0500

I think your proposal is in poor judgement. This is a discussion board it a modern version of what our for fathers intended when they place the freedom of expression speech and religion As the 1ST amendment or more properly 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. sights like this are the reason or current version of the stated expression of that 1st amendment . hurt feeling or not get over it. you dont like the discussion state your objection and move on banning well that just sounds a little Nazi ish to me.

Response by TSgt David Holman made Feb 15 at 2015 3:26 PM

TSgt David Holman — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 15:26:11 -0500

I think that is taking it a bit far. There is a difference between discussing beliefs and service, and starting a political/social flame war based on someones personal beliefs. If any post is directly offensive, it should be removed. If a post is started simply to troll/start a flame war, it should be removed and the author should be warned/banned accordingly.

Response by Sgt Jay Jones made Feb 15 at 2015 3:56 PM

Sgt Jay Jones — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 15:56:30 -0500

CSM Jim Dula, I truly understand your concern and fully respect what you are saying. There is not one person here on Rally Point did not that raise his/her hand took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States. One of the foundations of this document is "Freedom of Speech". If we cannot as brothers and sisters who have defended this country honor this document, who can? I would prefer to see Rally Point members insist that discussions be conducted with respects. I am a Conservative Democrat. I support our President. I have endured a lot of criticism and name calling because of this. I don't have a problem with people disagreeing me. What I do have a problem with is when people become disagreeable. If we can find a way to keep people from being disagreeable on any discussion, then I think we are headed to where Rally Point truly wants us to be.

Response by LCpl Steve Wininger made Feb 15 at 2015 4:23 PM

LCpl Steve Wininger — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 16:23:21 -0500

I almost down-voted you. What you propose is essentially censorship, at which point if it is implemented,, than I will have to sign off.

You might as well propose a ban on many topics as the tend to get heated also, that is the precedent that will be set.

People get passionate about a variety of subject and tend to get aggressive or defensive. We are not a bunch of school kids that have to loose recess privileges just because there are some that tend to be aggressive.

I recommend not participating in such forums, and submit those who are overly aggressive to RP STAFF, not admin. self policing is the best policy.

Response by CW5 Jim Steddum made Feb 15 at 2015 4:33 PM

CW5 Jim Steddum — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 16:33:56 -0500

I am all for policies against proselytism in a private forum. However, policies preventing the discussion of religion would keep us from talking about both a freedom we are sworn to defend and the threat religious zealots pose to our Nation and our way of life.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 4:40 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 16:40:16 -0500

Why do you hate free speech, CSM Private RallyPoint Member? *SARCASM* I don't post in threads that deal with religion or sexuality, as my views are definitely going to be controversial, and it will do nothing to promote the purpose of Rallypoint's existence.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 6:51 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 18:51:28 -0500

I don't agree with CSM Private RallyPoint Member's proposal to ban all religious topics from RallyPoint.... but I see no need to engage in namecalling.

Also, political positions should not be used the same way racial slurs are, and if you do that, you're basically saying someone must think like you or they're a bad person. Reasonable people can disagree reasonably on how to do things. Demonizing political opponents...well...just don't do it when you're in my physical presence.... prison orange is not my color.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 7:09 PM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 19:09:58 -0500

Although those discussions do generate the most down votes and heated posts, I think it would be a bad idea to ban them. If RallyPoint goes to topic-based areas for questions, instead of everything in one feed, it will be easy to avoid those discussions. Even now it's not that tough to avoid them. Just stay out. (Like I do when there's a lot of sniping and personal attacks going on)

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Feb 15 at 2015 7:49 PM

SSG (ret) William Martin — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 19:49:28 -0500

CSM Dula, My suggestion to everyone is that if you see a sign above a door and if you don't like that sign, don't turn the door knob and then enter. It is too easy. Nowadays, too many people including service members find something they don't like and they want to kill the entire program for everyone else. That is basic liberal 101 - taking it from everyone when a few people get their feelings hurt.

Response by PO1 Richard Sloniker made Feb 15 at 2015 9:04 PM

PO1 Richard Sloniker — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 21:04:58 -0500

censorship

Response by SFC Cindy Paris made Feb 15 at 2015 9:41 PM

SFC Cindy Paris — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 21:41:39 -0500

I don't think topics should be banned. However as individuals if we can not control ourselves and remain professional I have no problem putting someone on notice and the restricting them if they can not "play nice".

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 9:55 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 21:55:09 -0500

CSM Dula I agree and disagree. There's two subjects where everyone is right and wrong at the same time and it seems there can never be an amicable agreement reached. And those subjects are Politics and Religion.

But on the other hand I feel people should be able to discuss whatever topic(s) are close to their heart in any forum without censorship. It's part of our first amendment right.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 10:12 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 22:12:07 -0500

CSM Jim Dula, I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one. However that doesn't mean I don't think we need to do something about people who are obviously spoiling for a fight. When you detect someone trying to start a fight, post a big TROLL in response and unfollow the post.

Those who want to argue with the troll can. Those who want to suck up to eachother can as well. But it's just possible that we can teach civilized behavior to trolls without banning them.

Response by SGT Ben Keen made Feb 15 at 2015 10:19 PM

SGT Ben Keen — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 22:19:58 -0500

I think banning any topics would be worse for RallyPoint. We, the members, must remember that this is a professional networking site. While it's okay to disagree with someone says, you can do so without disrespecting the person.

Response by SFC Charles W. Robinson made Feb 15 at 2015 11:48 PM

SFC Charles W. Robinson — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 23:48:19 -0500

Not!

Response by LCpl Joseph Lundgren made Feb 16 at 2015 12:35 AM

LCpl Joseph Lundgren — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 00:35:34 -0500

I think the general consensus here is that banning religious topics is a terrible idea, especially on a site full of people who have defended the right to free speech. This does, however, bring up a very important topic that I think almost everyone in the world, especially victims of "cyber bullying", has seem to have forgotten. The internet gives us a very, very, important and useful ability, which allows us to IGNORE IT!!!! If you feel you are being "attacked" by another user on RP, you can simply move to a different discussion, or just stop reading what they post.

Response by Sgt Stephen Browning made Feb 16 at 2015 3:18 AM

Sgt Stephen Browning — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 03:18:33 -0500

I would rather we carry out our conversations with a bit more respect for the opinions of others. i may not agree with a comment,but that should'nt give me a right to belittle anyone for their thoughts. although I am a pastor, I would like to hear the comments of all,as long as they are as respectful as i am in return.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 16 at 2015 4:18 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 04:18:46 -0500

I adamantly object. As long as you're not being DISRESPECTFUL towards anyone's personal, political, or religious views, why not? Maybe it's time to a few ignoranuses here on RP to learn how to respect and 'agree to disagree', and why not here?

Personally I'm a Christian faithful servant, but I will NEVER press my views onto others. I will profess my faith in love and kindness and will 'turn the other cheek' if offend someone.

No disrespect, CSM, but I'm a bit disappointed by this question :-(

Response by SSG Robin Rushlo made Feb 16 at 2015 6:50 AM

SSG Robin Rushlo — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 06:50:49 -0500

It is just like this I found a rock in my back yard. I say it is a Diamond. You tell me it is a hunk of sand stone. It is my rock I found it and if I say it is MY DIAMOND it is my diamond period.

I do not say ban the religion discussions, I say ban the posters that want to chance my to theirs because I do not bow, make the sign of the cross meditate or bend one knee.

I do what I do and you do what you do. If I think your wrong I can say so without personal attacks, DO it once and leave it alone.

As my grandmother would say it all comes out in the wash.

Response by SPC Joshua H. made Feb 16 at 2015 8:18 AM

SPC Joshua H. — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 08:18:57 -0500

So CSM Private RallyPoint Member, just because you don't agree with religious questions/discussions you would like them banned? Sorry, I took the same oath as you to protect and defend the Constitution, and last I checked we had freedom of speech AND religion.

I would think as a vet you would have thick enough skin to deal with topics you might not agree with.

Response by SFC Collin McMillion made Feb 16 at 2015 8:36 AM

SFC Collin McMillion — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 08:36:57 -0500

I believe that some on RP want to just create arguments and stir things up just in the name of religion, but to ban it just walks all over our freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. Better just to ignore the fanatics, go thumbs down, and forget them, than to get drawn into useless arguments, discussions or to start banning people's rights.

Response by SGT Robert Ishoy made Feb 16 at 2015 9:25 AM

SGT Robert Ishoy — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 09:25:21 -0500

I understand your position on this, however when we ban any topic you lose the idea of free thought and healthy debate. There are just a few topics that people in general are passionate about. They are politics, religion, family and yes sex. We have been told many times to avoid these topics. But what does that leave you with, the weather. If you ban topics of major importance in most peoples lives then your discussions become very trivial and then this site is no better than facebook. Instead of banning a topic require a standard to the discussions. No personal attacks, discussions should remain intelligent, thought provoking, and respectful. If you don't know how to be persuasive in a ethical way check out The Secret Art of Persuasion lessons at http://secretsop.com/. yes that was a plug, but my point is that instead of hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil, let's have healthy open debates for positive results. Thomas Jefferson wrote "I swear upon the alter of God any form of tyranny over the minds of men."

SOP - The Secret Art of Persuasion

Response by SGT Marvin "Dave" Bigham made Feb 16 at 2015 9:46 AM

SGT Marvin "Dave" Bigham — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 09:46:29 -0500

Nah... let'em talk about whatever they want. I get just as excited/irritated about cars and some weapons systems. Restricting an issue in RP won't stop folks from chatting. I think we all have think enough skins to know the "sticks and stones" in social media are as harmless as the "words".
I really don't think someone that enjoys RP will run away from religious discussions. Most will just "ho-hum" and continue scrolling to see what other issues are out here to share. I am glad someone suggested it so it can be considered, but personally, I see it as a non-issue for this particular network.

Response by SGT Jonathan Williams made Feb 16 at 2015 11:03 AM

SGT Jonathan Williams — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 11:03:45 -0500

Can't support broad censorship.

edit below:

I don't usually give down votes, however; where I do I need to make the reason known to a candid audience.

I don't see your suggestion adding anything to RP as a culture. It is going to be very counter intuitive to censor certain topics. Religious topics can be replied... or not. People do not have to participate. If you are asking RP to ban that type of discussion, I see it akin to asking our members of the Chaplaincy Corps to not participate here. That action would serve to disenfranchise those particular service members. This message is the disagreement. The down vote was stark... non concur and nonsupport of the idea and the post. Please reevaluate.

Response by PO1 James Frady made Feb 16 at 2015 11:51 AM

PO1 James Frady — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 11:51:35 -0500

No. I was a Protestant lay reader on board my ship and conducted church services in the Ward Room as well as numerous Bible Studies with my fellow Christians on board. I feel that was an important part of my service and if I should want to discuss that, or talk about memories of that time then I should be able to. I would say that if someone posts offensive stuff, just delete that content.

Response by Sgt Ramon Nacanaynay made Feb 16 at 2015 11:58 AM

Sgt Ramon Nacanaynay — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 11:58:46 -0500

After living in this world for fifty years we need to talk about religion. We need to talk about politics. We need to unite in what we have in common and ignoring it will not help. The ones who leave RP need time to learn and grow. Perhaps You can teach them. I can teach them or we can teach them.

Response by PO1 Steven Sheeley made Feb 16 at 2015 12:52 PM

PO1 Steven Sheeley — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 12:52:32 -0500

I'd have to agree with this. Religion is a deeply personal item and should have no bearing on your job or your performance. If if does you should be in a different job.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 16 at 2015 1:13 PM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 13:13:48 -0500

CSM, I understand where you are coming from on this topic. And here is my response.. Looking at the amount of admins we have here on RP they cant possibly keep up with all the issues that are arising, In my honest opinion we need more moderators in the forum. From talking to a few of them it seems like they are running ragged. I know I for one am going to apply for the position once I get to the requirements to be one and see what happens but In my opinion there is alot of people here (no disrespect meant to anyone) that want to complain about what is going on but dont want to do anything to fix it

V/R

SrA Zachary Wolf

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 16 at 2015 1:16 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 13:16:39 -0500

No, God bless you.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 16 at 2015 1:42 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 13:42:11 -0500

Maybe a small solution is not to ban it, but maybe avoid the votes on it. Its just a suggestion. The problem with the up or down vote is that an unpopular idea would be voted against, therefore... the fear of negative votes act as form of censorship. But as others point out, enforce that... you may have to force it across other topics. Maybe an idea is that topics that are offbeat should be organized in a certain area of Rally Point. Just suggesting an idea.

Response by SSG Trevor S. made Feb 16 at 2015 1:49 PM

SSG Trevor S. — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 13:49:44 -0500

I'm not going to vote you down, you are expressing your opinion under an amendment to the Constitution that I protected. You and I both ensured that right. But, please let me ask you to never propose to restrict one of my rights again.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 16 at 2015 3:20 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 15:20:37 -0500

I don't think we should ban the topic, I think maybe after a warning and if it continues ban the individual.

Response by SGT James Murphy made Feb 16 at 2015 4:20 PM

SGT James Murphy — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 16:20:02 -0500

Well to me this is a no brainer. This county was founded on Christian Principles. Also there's that little thing we took called the Oath of Enlistment. How does that end again? http://youtu.be/GtjQjGTEylo

U.S. Armed Forces Oath of Enlistment - Hear the Text

Listen to and read the text of the United States Armed Forces Oath of Enlistment, taken by marines, soldiers, airmen, sailors, and guardians. This oath was e...

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 16 at 2015 4:29 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 16:29:47 -0500

If you don't want to participate, don't.

We SHOULD be talking about religion, and we SHOULD be talking about politics. Losing our ability to do so is a big reason why the nation has become so paranoid and polarized. We can no longer even listen to a dissenting opinion without waving the "I'm offended" flag, and demanding that whoever has a disagreement with us must immediately be stopped from speaking.

There are other countries where all opposition viewpoints are squelched. I'm not sure that's what we want here.

Response by SFC Howard Kempf made Feb 16 at 2015 4:57 PM

SFC Howard Kempf — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 16:57:15 -0500

Disagree with you. I agree with John that censorship has never been and never will be the answer. I think a healthy discussion along any lines is appropriate provide that both parties accord themselves intelligently, respectfully and maturely. I think the onus is on us to police ourselves and if someone steps out of line, report to the admin and let them handle the situation.

Response by SPC Ken Harper made Feb 16 at 2015 5:18 PM

SPC Ken Harper — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 17:18:44 -0500

As with everything, everyone has opinions. That's what our service defended/defends. If you don't want to defend your thoughts/positions on any given subject, just don't participate in the conversation. Like the TV or radio or internet sites that you find distasteful - don't go there. There are lots of things people do or say that I don't like or care anything about, but me fuming and ranting or spewing foul comments isn't going to change them. If you started with religion, where would the ban end, homosexuality, weapons, women in the service, uniforms, which branch is the best, aircraft, etc.?

Response by SSG A Rivera made Feb 16 at 2015 6:30 PM

SSG A Rivera — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 18:30:30 -0500

Ban religious topics? Are we in Cuba?

Response by SPC Stewart Smith made Feb 16 at 2015 7:43 PM

SPC Stewart Smith — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 19:43:10 -0500

Sounds like you are trying to not just limit, but ban free speech.

I propose more religious discussions. It will be good to get everything out in the open.

Response by 2LT Scott Armstrong made Feb 16 at 2015 11:40 PM

2LT Scott Armstrong — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 23:40:30 -0500

I'd rather ban practitioners of unprofessional conduct than a basic tenant of the Constitution. As a practical matter, current conflicts are mired in religion so it is a tough topic to avoid

Response by COL Charles Williams made Feb 17 at 2015 12:00 AM

COL Charles Williams — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 00:00:35 -0500

I think no. Why would you want to ban a topic? I thought that was one of the intents of this site? People, need to realize we are all on the same team, and everybody's opinion has merit.

Response by Sgt Michael Selbach made Feb 17 at 2015 1:18 AM

Sgt Michael Selbach — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 01:18:35 -0500

QTIP Quit taking it personal. Everyone should be able to say what they believe but this acronym might help

Response by SSG Lloyd Becker BSBA-HCM, MBA made Feb 17 at 2015 1:46 AM

SSG Lloyd Becker BSBA-HCM, MBA — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 01:46:02 -0500

Let me see if I can answer this in a little more academic way.

The laws of the land, if it weren't for religion enforcing them, we would have a lawless society. Even atheism has an order.

Depends on the persons' background and/or upbringing concerning religion, some are super touchy about religion and some are not. When mixing politics with religion, one should understand you get from the conversation with what you put in.

The problem I see here is that too many seniior NCOs are too busy with being politically correct, rather than focusing on the job at hand. Our job as NCOs at all levels is to ensure the US Army functions as it should. By dispelling religion, or capitulating to one as I am seeing, causes an Army to be dysfunctional.

All of us NCOs, retired, or not, need to ensure our military stays functional. Censoring religion is not the way. Let me state what many SFCs, 1SG and CSMs have stated and these were also stated in leadership schools. "The NCO is the 'backbone' of the US Army". Without the NCO, there would be no military that has order. The question remains is this: Is your "backbone" broken? If it is, then I would question your integrity as an NCO. A soldier without his faith, is nothing but a shell of man, or a woman.

We as NCOs of each branch of Service, needs to defend our subordinates right to their religion. The US Army's Motto is, "Army Strong" Without being strong in their faith, then how can we expect the individual soldier be "Army Strong"?

Response by 1SG Dave Arpin made Feb 17 at 2015 6:22 AM

1SG Dave Arpin — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 06:22:08 -0500

I would be one of those leaving if RP banned any type of Respectful discourse. The accent is heavy on Respectful. Again, we all, everyone of us, started our careers learning about discipline, regardless of branch. The anonymity of the internet allows some; to feel the need to speak without thinking prior to posting. If the post is disrespectful in language or hostility it should be censored by the administrator but if it is just an opposite view it should be allowed to remain. I find it would be difficult, in todays world, to not allow religious discourse on this website, as the current foe is Islamic Extremists and that being a religion where several millions would argue is peaceful. Would prevent conversation by veterans and current military members. My two cents. Peace.

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made Feb 17 at 2015 6:57 AM

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 06:57:29 -0500

I disagree . . . if for no other reason then "why stop there?" Should we ban all discussions of politics too?? What else??? I submit that such restrictions would lead to the loss of many good members.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 17 at 2015 7:56 AM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 07:56:53 -0500

I reserve my down votes for those responses/comments that are aggressive or disrespectful. I don't just down vote someone if I disagree with them. I think maybe this is one way we could assist RP in pinpointing those people with a track record of being disrespectful. If a member chooses to behave immaturely they should be suspended from making comments for a month.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 17 at 2015 11:00 AM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 11:00:13 -0500

I say bring a topic to the table. Have supporting arguments and let the feed run its course. We will always have outliers on both sides, for and against. It is this very argument or discussion that teaches more rational students of life...to be more empathic, as well as more tolerant to others thoughts and opinions. Because in the end, all I have are my opinions. If we can talk about religion or politics, we don't belong in uniform or we need to
Learn to debate.

Response by SPC Christopher Shanahan made Feb 17 at 2015 11:31 AM

SPC Christopher Shanahan — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 11:31:03 -0500

CSM Private RallyPoint Member I would usually disagree with a statement like this for almost any other site, but I agree 100% this time. This site should be for professional development and mentoring. In a religious ideology war, no one is going to just drop their hands and agree with the other. It is just going to continue to fuel fights, and that is not what this should be about! Thanks

Response by SSG David Opsahl made Feb 17 at 2015 12:56 PM

SSG David Opsahl — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 12:56:06 -0500

So, kill free speech in an area dedicated to free speech for military members and veterans is what you are proposing. I propose that if it neither picks your pocket nor breaks a bone that you put on your ADULT undergarments and deal with it in your own private space.

I vote NO to a ban on freedom of speech !!!

Response by Cpl Brett Wagner made Feb 17 at 2015 2:26 PM

Cpl Brett Wagner — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 14:26:38 -0500

CSM Jim Dula - I have decided to steer clear of these discussions since you cannot convince someone to see religion differently than what they already believe. So I for one will just change the channel and not get caught up in a waste of time.

Thanks you for your service sir, I know you cannot get to be a CSM without being an outstanding soldier.

Response by CW3 Eddy Vleugels made Feb 17 at 2015 2:44 PM

CW3 Eddy Vleugels — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 14:44:51 -0500

I fully support that 100%. Let me know what I can do to contribute to this effort. It's been a sore topic for me for a long time.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 17 at 2015 2:52 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 14:52:09 -0500

I agree. I am a Christian but I never discuss religion or politics. Everyone has their right to have an opinion but I keep mine to myself. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. The End

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 17 at 2015 3:34 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 15:34:28 -0500

I am curious CSM Private RallyPoint Member, would you include all religions too include beliefs that claim to be religious (cults) or just questions and discussions relating to the Christian religion? Then we would need to eliminate all discussion centered on Islam which happens to be a very hot item on RP the last several weeks. It would seem as though under your request the only “religions” that wins are the agnostics and atheist.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 17 at 2015 3:36 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 15:36:56 -0500

I think this is a great topic for a thread. This subtly draws out pent up angst and frustration from many about not so subtle attacks on many threads. The problem I see with both the question and the very deep meaning presented in not just the aspect of religion, is that many here take their responses on topics they are passionate about to a personal level. This then changes the tenor/tone of the thread from one of development and information sharing to one of proselytize and disparagement. Healthy discourse demands that there be open "discussion" regarding differing ideas/ideals. When one side decides they are no longer willing to respect a differing idea/ideals, healthy discourse is no longer available. This is a social media site for Military professionals both past and present, primarily designed to assist those who are seeking professional development and mentorship. I do not see how proselytizing and disparaging others beliefs accomplishes that goal. Then again, we were all born with free will, we choose to engage or not engage and suffer the consequences of our decisions. I have long since decided to by-pass "those" threads (you know which they are) that have gone well past the healthy discourse phase. Those who continue to beat their heads against the same wall as their antagonist are welcome to it. I will take my free will and join a meme war or discuss why I think I am a good leader etc.

Leave RP as an open forum and allow everyone to exercise their free will in by-passing those threads which they do not care to frequent.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 17 at 2015 7:18 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 19:18:58 -0500

It all comes down to professionalism. I don’t believe an individual can claim to be a professional Soldier or Leader if they can’t appreciate all aspects of an idea. Especially considering the fact that not one person shares the same political, religious or idealistic view of the world. Polite disagreement which spurs insightful or meaningful conversation is essential to developing dynamic leaders. As such, no topic should ever be too taboo to discuss. If you shun it on an open forum, then you shun it in your formation. The point of order is the character displayed by someone who doesn’t know how to engage pleasantly – be it the topic on religion, gender, or sexual preference.

It is our job as NCOs, Leader and counselors to develop an understanding of our formations mentality. Doing so is essential to promoting professional behavior and tolerance.

Response by SSgt Thomas L. made Feb 17 at 2015 7:58 PM

SSgt Thomas L. — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 19:58:41 -0500

How would this work? Have moderators relentlessly police people's posts? If you don't want to discuss religion, there's a very simple solution that does not affect anyone else: Don't participate in discussions about religion.

Response by SGT Mark Sullivan made Feb 17 at 2015 8:10 PM

SGT Mark Sullivan — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 20:10:00 -0500

Discussion is the means we use to learn new things, and to appreciate out fellow man, in this case our fellow service members. Many people have not learned that there are things that are like discussing ones underwear. Religion and Politics, both are none of anyone's business, like ones underwear. But, that being said, I think if people want to ask about, or discuss such things, then they need to be aware of what some of the reactions are going to be. We are all adults here, so no matter what someones feeling are about a topic, we have to realize that being angry, or being hurt will not resolve the conflict. It's better to agree to disagree, and move on. So, let them have their discussion on religion, whether Jesus hit Joseph with a wiffle ball bat, or if Jehovah's witnesses are the anti-christ or if Wiccans are able to hex their commanders, is a matter of opinion.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 17 at 2015 9:05 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 21:05:59 -0500

No, It needs to be discussed as openly as any racist bias or religious bigoted idea. We are fighting an enemy filled with many true believing zealots. The 1% of radicals are controlling the direction and dialogue about Islam. They should not be allowed to. I look forward and enjoy hearing the opposing voices within Islam condemning the hatred, bigotry and violence.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Feb 17 at 2015 10:32 PM

SSG Robert Burns — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 22:32:39 -0500

I think that would qualify this question as well. I'm just saying.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 17 at 2015 10:44 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 22:44:29 -0500

Ok guys and gals. I think we have beat this horse to death. Let's move on to something else we ca complain about. LOL

Response by LT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 18 at 2015 1:25 AM

LT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 01:25:35 -0500

I do not believe censorship is something we should strive for, however we must all remember regardless of our belief system we need and should always be respectful towards one another. We have no real proof one religion is better than another, therefore shouldn't we keep our minds open to all possibilities? Attacking someone because they do not agree with ones perspective is out of line and childish.

Response by SGT James Murphy made Feb 18 at 2015 1:40 AM

SGT James Murphy — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 01:40:17 -0500

Banning Questions and Discussion related to Religion is nutz! This country was founded on Christian Principles I will not abandon. Also do you remember your Oath? If you forgot it please pay attention to this last bit PUH...LEEEEZ? http://youtu.be/GtjQjGTEylo

U.S. Armed Forces Oath of Enlistment - Hear the Text

Listen to and read the text of the United States Armed Forces Oath of Enlistment, taken by marines, soldiers, airmen, sailors, and guardians. This oath was e...

Response by MSG Brad Sand made Feb 18 at 2015 11:08 AM

MSG Brad Sand — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:08:34 -0500

If we do that, why not ban all questions or discussions relating to anything of a controversial nature? In short, ban discussions on anything really worth discussing. I found people making unprofessional comments on the discussion of 2LTs saluting 1LTs?

IF members are making personal attacks, it is not the question that is the problem.

Banning any question is a bad road and against everything we have fought for, especially banning questions of religion.

Response by 1LT David Moeglein made Feb 18 at 2015 1:01 PM

1LT David Moeglein — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 13:01:49 -0500

On the whole, I would rather dialogue with people regardless of their religious beliefs, or how they present themselves. Rally Point is a good place for this. In my book, the fewer holy wars, the better. Then there are groups that are not interested in dialogue. ISIS comes to mind. The King of Jordan recently demonstrated an effective approach for these types.

Response by PO3 David Miller made Feb 18 at 2015 1:36 PM

PO3 David Miller — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 13:36:18 -0500

I fully disagree with this. Putting a ban in place is not the answer; and leads to possible religious discrimination and freedom of speech problems.

Response by SGT Kevin Flynn made Feb 18 at 2015 2:13 PM

SGT Kevin Flynn — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:13:39 -0500

Religious and Political conversations are usually removed from forums like this not for dislike of the topic but for respect for an ambiguous community and how it may develop into a one sided community shunning everyone while it needs to remain welcoming for all.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 18 at 2015 3:20 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 15:20:03 -0500

If you ban religious discussion, you should also ban all discussion that could be controversial in nature... Politics... Sports... etc...

I have a different proposal... Avoid topics that make your blood boil... You'll live longer and you'll retain more hair.

Response by Sgt Zachary Johnson made Feb 18 at 2015 3:30 PM

Sgt Zachary Johnson — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 15:30:21 -0500

Part to being American and what I served for is keeping our freedoms free. This includes the freedom of speech. I do agree that we need to be more respectful and less attacking of each other, but also believe there are consequences for our words.

I say don't ban certain discussions or questions, just don't engage/follow those discussions threads.

Response by Cpl Tony Ramaeker made Feb 18 at 2015 3:37 PM

Cpl Tony Ramaeker — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 15:37:52 -0500

We want to ban one of our basic freedoms? Why not simply ban the idiots that are making issues?

Response by SSG Cory Bacon made Feb 18 at 2015 4:06 PM

SSG Cory Bacon — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:06:58 -0500

I think as long as it's kept respectful, then there's nothing wrong with discussing religion. People just need to learn how to accept the fact that not everyone agrees on faith and still respect each other.

Censorship of people who took an oath to defend freedom is an insult, personally. We just need to learn to respect each other as humans first and foremost.

Response by Sgt Evan Proctor made Feb 18 at 2015 4:12 PM

Sgt Evan Proctor — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:12:12 -0500

More regulations!!! I love more Government!! :)

/end sarcasm.

Don't regulate what people want to talk about. If you don't like it ignore it. I didn't fight for free speech to have someone take it away in the very group that fought for it.

Response by CPL George Mann Jr made Feb 18 at 2015 4:13 PM

CPL George Mann Jr — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:13:47 -0500

I can agree with that. unfortunately religion is like a short fuse on a high explosive. I personally don't judge a person by their religion.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 18 at 2015 4:37 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:37:04 -0500

I wouldn't mind banning the topic sans Chaplain or their Religious support team's official business or related convos. Even the Chapy and their assistants need places to connect.

Response by SGT Kristin Wiley made Feb 18 at 2015 5:05 PM

SGT Kristin Wiley — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:05:15 -0500

These are the topics that are in the need of the most discussion. The biggest divide in our society and our military. If we don't discuss them then we will never mend this gap.

Response by SSG Eric Eck made Feb 18 at 2015 5:51 PM

SSG Eric Eck — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:51:40 -0500

If you don't like those types of discussions you don't have to look at them. To ban anything after fighting for the rights of the people is hypocritical.

Response by MSG Greg Kelly made Feb 18 at 2015 6:07 PM

MSG Greg Kelly — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 18:07:58 -0500

I think if we go down the slippery slope of this topic what will be next. We do not have read or comment on issues if we do not want to. Just leave things the way they are.

Response by SSgt Lucas Dyer M.S. made Feb 18 at 2015 7:03 PM

SSgt Lucas Dyer M.S. — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 19:03:55 -0500

Shall we also ban anything that could potential hurt ones feelings? Let us be grown men and discuss our beliefs in whichever, whomever, and at the end of the day, we still have your back. Semper Fi

Response by MSG Kirt Highberger made Feb 18 at 2015 8:34 PM

MSG Kirt Highberger — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 20:34:00 -0500

I have developed a tolerance of most peoples views regardless of their religious background.
However I still have a bitter disdain for ignorance and stupidity. So I see no problem with religious slants to discussions or questions on RP.

Response by SMSgt Eric Danley made Feb 18 at 2015 8:59 PM

SMSgt Eric Danley — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 20:59:50 -0500

Proper moderation would be a better fix for disrespectful or obscene posts than banning a subject all together. No reason religion should be a taboo subject.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 18 at 2015 9:08 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:08:51 -0500

Damn, I thought this issue was settled. Whatever it takes to move on. I'm tired of beating this horse to death. Move out troops. Lol

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 18 at 2015 10:35 PM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 22:35:17 -0500

So... let's ban all comments/discussions/questions about religion rather than deal with the tomfoolery that exists? No, thank you. I'd rather deal with intolerant people rather than be restricted on what I can say.

Response by CSM Mark Gerecht made Feb 18 at 2015 11:14 PM

CSM Mark Gerecht — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 23:14:25 -0500

Would have to respectfully disagree. Soldiers have a right to voice concerns and share their point of view. If we ban religious discussions what subject should we ban next? Discussions on politics, same sex marriage, transgender? There will always be hot botton issues in our ranks. While I personally do not usually discuss religion or politics in an enviroent like RP I find questions in the areas stimulate discussion and solution generation. Many subjects are hot buttons for both Soldiers and Leaders. The key is RP provides individuals the ability to discuss issues and recieve feedback. If an individual cannot provide professional feedback or becomes abusive then ban them from RP do not ban the topic. Depending on the severity of their comments legal action and even UCMJ is
possible as social media can be used in these proceedings. As senior leaders we must listen to our Soldiers concerns and perceptions. That does not mean we have to agree but we can disagree in a professional and factual manner

Response by SFC Michael Jackson, MBA made Feb 19 at 2015 3:35 AM

SFC Michael Jackson, MBA — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 03:35:16 -0500

No, I live in a free speech zone. You can choose not participate if you want.

Response by MSgt Norman Chaney made Feb 19 at 2015 7:58 AM

MSgt Norman Chaney — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 07:58:24 -0500

I would support such a ban. I am tired of being told what I should believe. I do not come here to be preached at !! Do you ??

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 8:32 AM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 08:32:10 -0500

I concur completely CSM.

Response by SGT Bryon Sergent made Feb 19 at 2015 9:04 AM

SGT Bryon Sergent — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 09:04:47 -0500

CENSORSHIP! it is really easy, don't like the question or topic, don't click on it! I don't push my religion here but will comment on other post or questions that someone else has posted. I like this site, and if it banned that I WOULD LEAVE! Your opinion isn't the only opinion here SGM. it is the diversity of the page that I like and the comrades here. This is the reason I down voted.

Response by SPC Randy Stotler made Feb 19 at 2015 9:15 AM

SPC Randy Stotler — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 09:15:13 -0500

I'm lost! Maybe I missed something here? There are many open discussions in progress on R P and one individual speaks out against s rational discussion against religion? I must inform those that are offended by the "RELIGIOUS" topic that you simply do not have to take part or even read the comments being left. Simply for once in your life choose not to be offended! Otherwise I may have to start being offended by your intolerance and lodge complaints against you and those like you that think the first amendment only pertains to you and the topics you deem appropriate. Please have a glorious day and GOD BLESS!

Response by SGT James Hastings made Feb 19 at 2015 9:27 AM

SGT James Hastings — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 09:27:05 -0500

Discussions about Religion and Politics create way too much heat and have lost me some friends over the years. I agree that this probably isn't the place to discuss those topics. Then, the question becomes: where?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 1:26 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 13:26:36 -0500

I disagree. Allow open conversation, as long as it is related to the military/current events and people are mature about their comments. I do, however, concede that achieving this may be a pipe-dream, but in the end I am still against regulating people's thoughts and opinions on a forum where it is too easy to ignore certain discussions and threads.

Response by LCDR Jeffery Dixon made Feb 19 at 2015 2:39 PM

LCDR Jeffery Dixon — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 14:39:43 -0500

Just another form of censorship. I do not know about your oath of office, but mine included God.

Response by SSgt Randy Saulsberry made Feb 19 at 2015 3:32 PM

SSgt Randy Saulsberry — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 15:32:05 -0500

That is a horrible idea. This country loves to just ban anything that causes problems from the public square. You don't fix problems by banning them you fix problems by talking about them. "Not talking about" hasn't work for race relations it didn't work for sexism and it won't work for religious belief either. I'm an atheist and sometimes get annoyed by constant references to god but I would never wanna ban the ability to be able to discuss it because idiots leave stupid comments

Response by 2LT David Phillips made Feb 19 at 2015 7:41 PM

2LT David Phillips — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 19:41:26 -0500

Honestly, I think religion is like any other aspect of the human experience. Sure people feel passionate about their notion of what is and isn't the truth. What is the harm is talking about it? And the "keep it real" policy of this website means that you aren't disrespectful, whether you are talking about pigs on your farm or pigs as an unclean animal. Its like ISIS, right? It would be unwise for an unarmed Christian to speak openly about Jesus when he could be carted off and force fit into an orange jump suit. But no one is going to do that here, right? This isn't North Korea, right? No one is writing down names and giving them to a central list of people not to hire or promote, right? Because of what color their skin is, or what they think about God? Only if they are willing to cut a man's head off because of how he prays, right? No one's going to do that here. So why be afraid of a topic? As long as its respectful, who cares?

Response by SGT Tyler G. made Feb 19 at 2015 8:20 PM

SGT Tyler G. — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 20:20:42 -0500

There is never an excuse for censorship, no matter how offensive someone might be. Discussion facilitates understanding (well, at least when both sides make an effort), and being such a diverse country with regards to political and religious beliefs, understanding is far more important. Especially when we have people who truly believe that just because someone doesn't hold the same belief as them they are either malicious or stupid and/or don't have the countries best interests at heart.

Response by SFC Jeff L. made Feb 20 at 2015 8:43 AM

SFC Jeff L. — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 08:43:17 -0500

Free speech is free for everyone, even the highly offensive. The internet, for the moment, is an open delivery system for the good, the bad, and the ugly. And thank God for it. Just like with television, there are many channels to choose from. If you turn to a religious channel you can choose to engage or skip to ESPN. There will always be people with poor interpersonal communication skills or who are genuinely crude and cruel.

I personally enjoy the opportunity to engage in religious, political, and social topics because it makes me think about what I truly believe, and to be able to articulate that belief. That said I recognize that because the internet tends to give people the feeling they can be as rude as they want to be. Once the conversation takes a turn toward personal attacks I tend to call it out, and if it persists, then I disengage. If there are already ways to report violators then I guess the best recourse it to use them.

Response by 1stSgt Robert Keown made Feb 20 at 2015 12:38 PM

1stSgt Robert Keown — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 12:38:46 -0500

I owned and operated one of the two largest internet chat sites back when that was the thing. Because I wanted a clean environment, unlike everything else that was out there, one of our rules was no discussions of religion or politics, my reasoning was that it rarely ended good. That was a wide open chat network where people were not EXPECTED to have some sort of discipline and respect as you would think anyone with an honorable discharge would. I would not ban topics of discussion from a site such as this.

However, I would, as everyone of us SHOULD be accustomed to, enforce standards and remove the problem. It is not a topic problem, it is an internet problem, people are under the impression that you cannot reach out and touch them on the internet so they say whatever the hell they want, nothing to do with free speech, just straight up bad discipline.

Freedom of expression has never meant that a person could use language however she or he saw fit. Freedom of expression was defended on the grounds that rational discourse paid off immensely with respect to education, politics, and personal growth. However language as a tool can serve more than just this purpose. Language can be used in many ways, including as a tool to hurt others.

Traditionally even the most liberal societies have not supported the freedom of expression in this form. Note, for example the long history of legislation forbidding slander and libel. Language can also be used to harm by means of threats, epithets and harassment. Again, such uses of language and expression have traditionally been proscribed and with good reason: None of the benefits of rational discourse accrue in such cases and many harms are generated.

There is, however, recognition that speech has to be protected from government censorship or control, etc. That for a democracy to work people must be allowed to express themselves. And that if we respect individuals as human beings people must be allowed to say what they mean. This is not a license to say anything anywhere, however.

NO suggestion is made that there is such a concept as absolute freedom of speech. Life would be quite unlivable if everyone were to be encouraged or for that matter permitted to speak their mind without second thought for the consequences. Absolute freedom of speech would constitute an infringement on freedom to live.

There appears to be a fairly common mis-perception that freedom equals license; that being free to do something means you possess an irrevocable license to do it. What seems to be lacking is an understanding that our "rights" also confer an irrevocable responsibility to exercise our freedoms intelligently and responsibly.

Response by SFC(P) Tobias M. made Feb 20 at 2015 2:06 PM

SFC(P) Tobias M. — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 14:06:26 -0500

Everyone is more worried about being PC then they are telling people how they feel. My feelings on this would be, If you don't like the topic do not respond. If you are not able to keep your composure do not respond. If you are not able to keep tack to not respond. If you are going to be a down right A$$ DO NOT RESPOND. If you can keep all of the above things going then by all means respond. I am not here to offend someone. I am here to do a job. If I offend you I am sorry but that is my Opinion. Like it or not that will never change.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 21 at 2015 2:48 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 02:48:01 -0500

We live in a free country Sargent Major. We all signed the dotted line to support and defend the constitution. I think the last thing a military forum needs is censorship on freedom of speech, religion or any of the freedoms protected by the constitution.

Response by MSgt Norman Van Tuyl made Feb 21 at 2015 10:54 AM

MSgt Norman Van Tuyl — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 10:54:31 -0500

I see this type of person everyday and usually ignore what I term as ignorant comments. Saying that, there is a point were calling these kinds of disrespectful comments out and hopefully get the disapproving message to these socially unaware personalities. I agree with your point but am dubious if just calling them out will help.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 21 at 2015 11:27 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 11:27:29 -0500

This is a poor method to achieve your purported goals. Creating an antagonistic discussion to try to guide people to a point of view never works and usually offends while missing the original point. Think things through a little more next time before your next attempt at this.

Response by LCpl Charles Roseberry made Feb 21 at 2015 10:12 PM

LCpl Charles Roseberry — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 22:12:12 -0500

CSM Dula, with all due respect; Banning a Religious discussion is contra-intuitive and the free discussion is the exact reason the site exists. Banning Religious discussions, is akin to taking away rights of members to have free discussions. If the site moderators and administrators cant allow free discussions, then there is no reason to have an existing membership and/or site. Your suggestion is ill-conceived.

Response by SrA Matt Shuman made Feb 26 at 2015 9:07 AM

SrA Matt Shuman — Thu, 26 Feb 2015 09:07:19 -0500

You can't rule one question out from another. That for us who do like religious questions but don't want to hear about gay rights would not be fair to either. Free speech is what it is and all just need to be adult and professional or we ask RP to remove them if they are a problem. Just my thoughts!

Response by SFC(P) Tobias M. made Feb 26 at 2015 3:20 PM

SFC(P) Tobias M. — Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:20:19 -0500

I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under GOD, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

I put the work GOD in all caps because that is what our nation is founded on.

Each and every one of us here as said these words at least ONCE.......... What is the last word?

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; 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. So help me God."

Response by Cpl Samantha Purucker made Apr 6 at 2015 9:50 PM

Cpl Samantha Purucker — Mon, 06 Apr 2015 21:50:11 -0400

Once upon a time a group of around a dozen Marines, myself included, were able to sit around a picnic table in the smoke pit and converse for hours on the various religions that were present. We had a couple catholics, a jew, a diest, two wiccans, a few baptists, a few athiests, a methodist, and a couple others that would come and go throughout our conversation. Somehow the clusterfuck that was our group managed to maintain civilized thought transfers about our various religions and a lot was learned and discussed.

My point is...a group of drunk Marines figured out how to have civilized discussions about various religious beliefs without anyone feeling like we insulted them. We had one cat get out of line and it was dealt with by the group by simply ignoring their disrespectful comments, they got the message and eventually settled into our conversation.

Response by SGT John Rauch made May 22 at 2015 6:26 PM

SGT John Rauch — Fri, 22 May 2015 18:26:41 -0400

Absolutely absurd, if you don't want to see it, don't read it, if it offends you, don't read it, if you cant stop reading it, don't log on to RP. religion is everywhere, along with politics, whining, complaining, and moaning about your unit, LT bashing, non infantry bashing, USAF bashing, Navy bashing, Marine bashing, Army bashing. the point is, if you look long enough, you will always find something that offends you on RP. Nobody forces anybody to log on.

Response by SGT Anthony Bussing made May 22 at 2015 6:59 PM

SGT Anthony Bussing — Fri, 22 May 2015 18:59:46 -0400

as much as I hate discussing religion...Id have to say "NO"

inasmuch as RP is a fertile proving ground of exactly how decisive religion can be....it is, unfortunately woven into the very fabric of our society....I think more members would leave if they started putting "topic ban"s in place....

Response by SFC Christopher Perry made May 22 at 2015 7:04 PM

SFC Christopher Perry — Fri, 22 May 2015 19:04:25 -0400

Considering the fact that then they might feel inclined to ban all post of a political nature well, I vote no. I don't involve myself with the posts of a religious nature. I am not a religious man and therefore feel I have nothing to add. But I do occasionally stir the pot a bit on those of covering politics. Instead I vote that those who choose to be blatantly disrespectful simply get the boot.

Response by 1SG Eric Rice made May 23 at 2015 12:23 AM

1SG Eric Rice — Sat, 23 May 2015 00:23:14 -0400

I agree with several other members in that censorship is not an option in the way ahead. What we need is to evaluate the root cause of why some feel the need to disrespect or personally attack other RP members. In my opinion the individuals that are disrespecting others are doing so out of ignorance and not having any self-respect. Many people that choose to chastize others are only doing so becuase they are lacking in their personal lives and making other people mad or attacking ones beliefs and getting a response makes them feel better about themselves. This is just my opinion...

Response by SGT Christen Newell made May 28 at 2015 2:00 PM

SGT Christen Newell — Thu, 28 May 2015 14:00:42 -0400

So lets ban anything that is offensive to anybody CSM Dula. Homosexuality, Drinking, Adultery, Religion. Last I looked we were in a country that promoted free thinking, free will as long as it was not against the law of the land, not banned it because it bothered a few. If you do not like religious topics stay away from them. No disrespect CSM I dislike religion as well because it was man made, I would never force what I believe on anyone and respect what you believe. I am a Christian it is a relationship not a religion, I can only show you what I believe by the way I live. It is never ok to attack someone what so ever. We are all brother and sister in a common relationship of the country we have or presently serve

Response by Sgt Jay Jones made Jun 5 at 2015 3:18 PM

Sgt Jay Jones — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 15:18:39 -0400

I'm against your proposal. It boils down to censorship. If we cannot exercise our 1st Amendment Rights here, where can we?

Common sense and courtesy should prevail in post. Those that fail should be called out for it!