posted
Seems to me that if you put it to him that way -- "Hey, OSC, all good Mormons think using the word 'God' casually is the worst sort of profanity. Don't you think you should ban it on your site" -- you'll make a whole lot of friends.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
E.M. I am guessing that many parts of the rules that OSC set up were out of consideration of his religious feelings and beliefs. Of course, there are other considerations as well i am sure.
TomD. I may not make a lot of friends, but it is still a question that OSC should recognize as legitimate. By the way, if OSC does say that using God outside of religious discussion is appropriate, than so be it. I may question why he allows it (as I already question why he allows a lot of things), but as long as HE doesn't use it that way than it won't be a personal question.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: E.M. I am guessing that many parts of the rules that OSC set up were out of consideration of his religious feelings and beliefs. Of course, there are other considerations as well i am sure.
Yes, I agree. But if he wants his site to be pro Mormon, then he's going to lose a lot of people in here, and I cannot see him trying to purge divergent opinion or thought based on how he seemingly values such concepts.
And if he did, I would leave.
Posts: 339 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This isn't about "purging divergent opinion or thought," but about what OSC meant by profanity. It is a procedural question based on assumptions of OSC's person.
By the way he WILL NOT allow it to become anti-Mormon; so does that automatically make it pro-Mormon?
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Exploding Monkey, is that how you see not using deity-based profanity? Are you saying that if it came down to a request to not use deity-based profanity, you would leave?
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by quidscribis: Exploding Monkey, is that how you see not using deity-based profanity? Are you saying that if it came down to a request to not use deity-based profanity, you would leave?
No, I am saying the word 'God' is not profanity in the same sense as 'cancer' and 'erection' are not. Yet there was a time in this country (the US) where both of the former words were taboo.
If I cannot say God here, then I will leave. In my opinion, using the word God is just as acceptable as using the words, erection and cancer. If the Mormon faith is against it, I am fine with that. But the Church of Latter Day Saints does not set the prescient for my choice to discuss the divine using that word.
You want GD, JC, and all the others kept out? That's cool. But I draw the line at being able to use a noun that has no offensive content to it at all. It is how you use a word that makes it offencive, not the word itself.
Posts: 339 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It is how you use a word that makes it offencive, not the word itself.
It is the HOW that we are discussing. To be fair, many Jews are more uptight about using the word at all than Mormons are about the usage. Perhaps, I am hoping, it is under that pretense that you are making your assumptions.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
EM, in this entire thread, I have never said that using the word god in religious contexts is offensive. It is offensive to me only when it is used as profanity or as emphasis. But if we're having a discussion about religion, then using the word god in that context makes complete sense.
I'm all for context-appropriate. And I completely agree that it's context that makes it offensive. I don't see how we disagree on this.
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Um, for instance, notice how many times me and quidscribis actually used God (like just now) in our disussions of the profanity issue. If I was a Jew, I might have used G-d in this case as a comparision.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
He is, considering he's typing and not talking.
Incidentally, I agree entirely with quid; the word 'God' is quite offensive, being associated with hundreds of years of oppression, evil, corruption, and thought control. I wish people would stop using it. You might as well go around shouting "Gas that!" or "Mein Fuhrer!" whenever something affronts you.
Edit : Gah, the first line is in response to Storm's "save your breath" comment, and she beat me to it herself. Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not assuming anything. It is generally accepted that GD for example is a curse against the divine no matter what your religious calling is. But it is not a universally accepted rule that G all by itself is.
Given that, I reserve the right to use it any way I see fit as long as it is not attached to the accepted curses. To be frank, I really don't care what X and Y religion thinks of me when I use the word God. It is a common word that is used millions of times a day by millions of people of all religions in all kinds of different ways; most of which are not offensive.
If I want to say: "God, I had a rough day." I will. Or, "No one knows for sure what God is," I'll do that as well.
Neither is offensive, and to be honest, I think those that believe it is are splitting hairs. Don't worry about my soul. I have made my piece with God and have a good relationship with the divine. I will keep the curses out. I will not stop using the word God. Period.
Time to put the kids to bed. Posts: 339 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:By the way, if OSC does say that using God outside of religious discussion is appropriate, than so be it.
Does the fact that, in a decade, he has not made a ruling against it mean anything?
quote:Um, for instance, notice how many times me and quidscribis actually used God (like just now) in our disussions of the profanity issue. If I was a Jew, I might have used G-d in this case as a comparision.
So you recognize that you're offending Jews, but since our host isn't Jewish, it doesn't matter?
I think I'll just stay the way I am. I offend everyone equally.
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, then we don't agree. Your first example, to me, is offensive. It is a form of profanity in that use.
You can say I'm splitting hairs - that's your choice. But that doesn't negate it being offensive to me and to some others.
And since you don't care about whether or not what you post is offensive to others, well, what does it matter? You don't care. I get it.
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by quidscribis: And since you don't care about whether or not what you post is offensive to others, well, what does it matter? You don't care. I get it.
I never said I didn't care. I said I do not care what I am thought of. So it's not okay to use God as an emphasis, but it's okay to judge others even though your religion says it's a sin to do so?
Get your priorities in order my friend. Your foot is in your mouth.
posted
Why, thank you, Storm. (Takes a bow; on his way out, accidentally destroys several cities in Florida.) Oops, sorry about that.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I find it interesting that people choose to use that which their society finds holy or sacred as a profanity.
When I lived in Austria (a country that is 95% Roman Catholic), it was very common to hear people use the name of Mary "in vain." If someone hit the proverbial thumb with a hammer, they would cry out "MaREEEEYah!"
Posts: 258 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You also agree that you will not use this forum to try to convert people to your own religious beliefs, or to disparage others for their own religious beliefs.
I'll give you three guesses whom I'm thinking of here, and the first two don't count. Seriously, I can't be the only one who's had enough of his hatemongering.
Posts: 1814 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Verily, I hate the hatemongering as well, so no, you're not the only one who's had enough of it. My question is why it's allowed to continue ad nauseum.
Exploding Monkey -
quote:I never said I didn't care. I said I do not care what I am thought of. So it's not okay to use God as an emphasis, but it's okay to judge others even though your religion says it's a sin to do so?
Get you're priorities in order my friend. Your foot is in your mouth.
Fine, you care, you just don't care what you're thought of. Fine. No problem.
But the rest of that? I have not yelled, screamed, sworn at, called names, or otherwise disparaged anyone in this thread. I have, however, tried to express myself in a respectful manner.
Where, exactly, is my foot in my mouth?
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You don't like the word God used as an emphasis because it is a sin in your religion, but you judged me, which is also a sin if I remember the commandments correctly.
But even though you were projecting yourself in a hypocritical manner, I was being over harsh in my response. For that I apologize.
Honestly, I just think you need to show some tolerance for others in this situation. We all have to tolerate things we do not like; it's part of life. We all are tolerating KoM's attitude aren't we? (even though we shouldn't have too) I say if you can avoid the GDs and JCs then you're doing pretty well.
Posts: 339 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
Reminds me of being back in high school when a friend's parent was driving us back from a musical and pulled the car off the road to give me a lecture because I said "oh my god" in a response to a funny story.
My daily speech also includes "jesus christ" and "holy mother mary." But since I don't consider myself a by-the-book Christian, I don't pay much attention. Too me they're just words in my vocabulary that have been beaten into my head like "wow" or "neato" or "cool beans."
Since to Christians, saying such things is a sin under the Ten Commandments, I just have to laugh because its like the famous wood and splinter line in the bible. People sin, even Christians screw up. This is my sin which means its my problem to deal with. Be offended by it if you want, but recognize your own sin too. You can request a person to stop saying such things, but you can't control their life.
Posts: 1733 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Obviously it will have to be tolerated because some people are not considerate enough to do a simple thing like stop using a word in their posts that is not even necessary (when it's used in 'vain'). I cannot believe how immature some of these posts sound. When I know that something is sacred (such as the use of God's name) to someone I absolutely do my best not to make lightly of that, especially when it takes such little effort to be considerate. Come on and grow up....
Posts: 137 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
Get off your high horse chic. You yourself are not considerate in the fact that you require me to conform to your opinions on what is a curse and what is not. I am highly offended at such a notion, but you don't see me starting a thread about it do you?
But since I'm agnostic I don't deserve the same considerations you do, so please, continue to preach to me.
As was suggested earlier, I'm done wasting my breath.
Posts: 339 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This reminds me of a comment someone made in HS to a friend of mine during history class. She said something about gods and then turned to my friend (who's a pretty devout Christian) and said, as if to explain, little g, not capital g so she wouldn't offend my friend. Little g, big G, difference? just maybe.
Posts: 2867 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You also agree that you will not use this forum to try to convert people to your own religious beliefs, or to disparage others for their own religious beliefs.
By my understandings of this, when someone is using God in a term to express emphasis or some other form other than religious meanings, it is not against any of these.
To the person who uses it, it is probably not profane, nor is it meant to be hateful or abusive. Of course there are other times when they are using it for something hateful, and for those times, a moderator should work with it.
I understand that you dislike the usage of the word, or person to you, God in these ways. That is why I try not to use any of the generally accepted forms of profanity. I'd much rather not offend someone, if I can help it.
But, here is my question. You want us to be accepting of your opinions on the usage of your diety's name, right? But, are you, in asking for this, being unaccepting to the opinions of others?
The people who are using the word God, think of it probably as just that in the sense they're saying it. Just as a word. But to ask them not to is a fine thing... but to use the reasoning that it goes against your beliefs and opinions probably isn't the best. It could go against someone else's feelings on the matter. And if you're asking that, in my mind, it's no different from them using God in that way.
I'm open for you to prove me wrong, heck, I'm pretty much ready to scrap this post because I don't feel it conveys my true meaning quite right.
So then, off that note.
What amazes me though, is how people can assign so many meanings to the same word. I have seen people put the F Word in the form of a noun, verb, and adjective all in the same sentence. Their grammar is so horrible with it, that that is what makes me more peeved off. Posts: 1831 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Since to Christians, saying such things is a sin under the Ten Commandments...
You know, this has been accepted on this thread as a given; Occasional has argued that it is in fact the position of all good Mormons, who take the whole "taking the Lord's name in vain" thing "seriously."
But, again, I'm pretty sure that most of the textual analysis I've done on the Bible has argued that this is not what "taking the Lord's name in vain" means at all. Are we all universally in agreement here that taking someone's name in vain means using it in a casual exclamation?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Would you please explain (or send me a link to an explanation) about how using 'the Lord's name in vain' isn't a sin? Not being a Christian, I have a fair amount of ignorance with this issue.
I've done a little searching on google - but I haven't found any discussion about it (I've found a lot of other weird stuff though!)
Posts: 367 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
This started out as "people use these words like so and it bothers me" to "is this person right to be offended and should I be offended by her offendedness."
Get a grip, people. All QS did was express a desire for people around her to not use words she found offensive. She didn't call for mods to enforce it. She has no way of stopping you if you choose to continue. She just let us know it bothers her. You may now continue with your lives, already in progress, and know that if youi do choose to use such terms she probably won't read your posts any more. Simple as that.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:We have had discussions on this site about our favorite coffees, without even a moment's thought spent worrying about whether Orson Scott Card would approve of our having a favorite coffee. Automatically assuming that your particular brand of Mormon cultural taboo is shared by our host simply because he happens to belong to the same religion -- and that he would want us to observe that particular cultural taboo, despite no instructions in that vein -- seems a bit precocious.
Tom said what I feel right there. You're my hero.
There was a man named J. Golden Kimball that was a member of the first Quorum of the Seventies. Now, Golden was most famous for his mouth. One of his most memorable quotes was this: "Some people say a person receives a position in this church through revelation, and others say they get it through inspiration, but I say they get it through relation. If I hadn't been related to Heber C. Kimball I wouldn't have been a damn thing in this church." Notice, he said DAMN! He must be in Hell as we speak! I would highly recommend reading some stories on this man.
Some of my childhood was spent in a rural area. It was absolutely hillarious to hear some of the old farmers get up and bear their testimonies. You see, on a farm there isn't really anyone to talk to while you go about your chores. So the farmers would start picking up swears to fill in some of the blanks when talking to the animals or when talking to themselves (don't tell me you don't do this). It would become so much a part of their vocabulary that they wouldn't notice that they were cursing in church during Fast and Testimony Meeting. This doesn't make them bad people. It makes them human. And frankly, if swearing is the only problem they have to worry about, let them swear.
The attitude that "you swore, I don't like it, so don't do it" is kind of infuriating. This mentality focuses on one problem (as you see it) and shuts you out from hearing what they have to say.
Chocolate is bitter, bitter is not a pleasant taste. But when combined with all the other flavors in a chocolate bar. It's delicious.
Profanity is not appropriate at Hatrack -- most would agree that's fairly clear -- and just because it happens sometimes doesn't mean it's ok. Using the name of deity in the manner described in the first post of this thread does indeed fall into the category of profanity. I would appreciate it if people here would refrain from using it in such a context.
It has never been my desire to be heavy-handed here (nor, do I believe, has it been the Cards' desire that their moderator would need to be heavy-handed). I would simply ask that people here try to be considerate of others in this regard. I'm not arguing whether or not it's a sin, or it's anyone's right to say anything, or anyone's right not to be offended, because those arguments (the latter two, anyway) rather quickly become people talking past each other.
Not asking for perfection, but consideration. To reference Dead Poets Society -- try exercising the right not to walk.
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: The best thing I do when someone uses a diety's name in vain is to respond, "Yes, you called." in my best James Earl Jones voice. Its a non-confrontational way to make them realize what they are actually saying.
One of the (I thought) clever things in the original Matrix (I don't know about the sequels) is that nearly every time Neo says "God" or "Jesus", Trinity answers him, "What?"
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some here have equated being offended at using deity casually as being similar to being offended at someone breaking other sorts of commandments. For Mormons, drinking coffee, premarital sex, and whatnot have been given as examples.
But it seems pretty clear to me that most Mormons are *not* offended by those things, that most do not require other people to live according to their commandments.
The difference is that when they hear someone else profane, it causes them pain. Just as when someone says something rude or unkind it quite often causes pain.
The effect is different. And to the person to whom the name is sacred, who is sensitive to it, it will always hurt unless they give up their beleifs. So, you see, this isn't a matter of judging another's sinfulness. It is a matter of being hurt by words. (Something Jebus, for example, denies the reality of.)
So, for a Mormon, it would be the difference between talking about pre-marital sex and showing a Mormon pictures of nude people engaging in various sex-acts.
So you can be sensitive to that, or you can decide that isn't important to you. How important it is to you may depend on how difficult it is for you to alter your speech.
It was brought to my attention this year that using the word "Oriental" to describe people is offensive, and that "Asian" is not offensive to those people. Well, since it isn't such a big deal to use "Asian" (hey, it's even shorter!) I haven't used the word "Oriental" in that context since. I don't understand why on earth it would be offensive, but I do it out of respect for their feelings.
Now, if they were to tell me that both "Asian" and "Oriental" were offensive, and there was not a good replacement word to refer to people from that area (since I can't tell by looking at someone if they are Japanese, Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, etc." that might be too much to ask. I might simply choose the less offensive and continue using it where practical.
So for some of you, like Teshi (thank you, Teshi) it isn't so big a deal to alter your speech. For others (Exploding Monkey) maybe it is just too much to ask. But I certainly do appreciate the effort of those who try.
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, I'm really interested in what others think this commandment means. If it needs to be another thread, then that's fine, but I'd love for mack to expound on what she learned.
Myself, I believe there is much, much more to it than just not saying swear words that include God's name or variations of it. And for the record, "for G-d's sake" doesn't really bother me. I appreciate and respect that it does bother others, like quid, and so I'll try to refrain from using such phrases myself.
But I'm curious as to how other believers interpret that commandment.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Using the name of deity in the manner described in the first post of this thread does indeed fall into the category of profanity.
So lets be clear here, its only using "God" as your word to show emphasis that is profane?
Here's a list of some possible "profanity". Please forgive these examples, as they are for discussion use only. I guess I am wondering if any or all of them are okay to say...
Praise the lord! Praise be to Allah! Praise Zeus! Praise be to the Seven! Praise the Yankees!
Good God! Good lord! Good grief! Good pickle! Goodness Gracious!
I can't quite articulate what's bothering me about this thread, but the "official" asking not to do this rubs me the wrong way. I was completely fine with quid asking us to stop, but now that it is an official hatrack policy not to do it, I don't like it one bit.
If an orthodox jew (of which we have at least a couple) asked that people use G-d instead, would we get an official decree to try not to use the full written out version?
What about if I asked people not to use "geek" on here, because I find it offensive? Would people need to stop using it?
Are we going to have a list of words/expressions we can't use?
Yuck, yuck, and more yuck.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll try to explain my own view of the ten commandments.
I think that though many are phrased in the negative, we should look beyond that and not only refrain from sin, but look to fulfill the positive side of the commandment as well. In other words - "Thou shalt not murder" is a negative commandment. But it's not enough to just refrain from killing people who make us mad. That doesn't, in my mind, go far enough to fulfilling the commandment. To me, it's also a requirement to revere life and respect life, and honor those that God created.
So, just refraining from swearing with God's name is not, to me, the sum of that commandment.
It's also a command to honor and revere his name, and that means to honor and revere HIM. I think the negative aspect of the commandment is not just talking against frivolous use of the word "God" but against ascribing the name of God to beliefs and works that have nothing to do with the teaching of God. It's a warning against heretical teachings and spreading of false doctrine. Remember it's preceded by commandments that specifically warn against idolatry and worshipping false gods.
That doesn't mean that I think I have free license to swear with the name of God. It just means that I think the commandment goes much, much deeper than what it appears to be on the surface.
I guess I see this differently than I quid does. I don't get upset necessarily when other people misuse the name of God. Sure,I don't like hearing it because it makes me uncomfortable, but I don't take what they're saying as personal offense. Yes, it would be cool if they refrained from it out of respect for other people's feelings, but if what they are doing is a sin, it's not a sin against me, it's a sin against God. And honestly, why should I expect a non-believer to uphold standards they don't think applies to them?
The commandments are there for me to follow, and for me to interpret and for me to take to heart as I consider my relationship with God. There are much more serious to me, than something used as a yardstick to judge other's behavior when deciding if theyre offending me or not. They are there for me to use as a yardstick to judge my OWN behavior.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
When one calls themself a Christian, or a child of God, they are taking upon themselves God's name as their own. If then you act in a way that disprespects that name, or would cause disrespect to come upon that name, you have taken the name in vain.
If you say, "I am a Christian," and then live a life, or commit actions to others or in the view of others that are decidedly un-Christlike, you have taken the name in vain.
Posts: 2689 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I can't stand seeing my deity's name (title - whatever - I'm not getting caught up in semantics, here) used with the disrespect that I've seen here lately. Granted, it hasn't been every thread, or even many threads, only some threads and only some posts. But I really don't want to see it at all.
Seems to me this is pretty open-ended. QS's threshold for disrespect with regards to using the name of the deity is obviously different from many. Does disrespect lie in intent, or perception?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
I offend everyone equally.
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
I have not yelled, screamed, sworn at, called names, or otherwise disparaged anyone in this thread. I have, however, tried to express myself in a respectful manner. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
