Petition for new forum: "Religion on the Trail"

[The Weasel]

I am posting this on "Straight Forward" so that it can fit into the strict moderation rules here and not become a debate.

I have posted this Poll with one response only, since this is a Petition, rather than an opinion poll. I realize that there are people who will be opposed to it, but the purpose here is to see if there is support for this proposal and, if so, how much there is. If there is only a few, then the proposal might be disregarded. If there are many, then the Administrators here can consider if the idea has merit.

Proposal: That there be a single forum, similar in structure to the Women's Forum, for posts dealing with "Religion on the Trail."

This would not be a place to discuss whether one religion (or no religion) was good, better, best or worse than the alternatives. It would be a place where information about religion or religious things related to the AT could be expressed and exchanged.

This is an very important aspect of the AT, both in terms of the culture of Appalachia, as well as for hikers on the Appalachian Trail. Not only is Appalachia - from Georgia to Maine - heavily informed by religion, but religion and religous groups are so intertwined with the AT that the two cannot be easily separated. Thus, there are churches formally and informally associated with hostels, and other hostels and meeting places that are anywhere from openly to quietly religious in their purpose. Many hikers have religious needs, ranging from wanting to know which towns have Catholic Churches so they can attend mass, where Passover can be celebrated, or aid in observing other holidays or religious committments. Some hikers wish partners who share their faith, and that is no less (or more) of a reasonable desire than for a desire for someone of the same age, or sex, or other interest.

This forum - if allowed - would NOT be a place for debating, or even discussing, religion, and religious arrogance would not be tolerated, I would hope. Much as "political" issues are discouraged in most of the forums, even if related somehow to the Forum concept, attempts to justify or attack faith (or differences, or absence of faith) would not be allowed. In short, attempts to "witness" would not be allowed. This is very possible, since a thread last year about organizing a hike for one religious group was very successful, without being difficult for others to accept. There are other threads going on at present that are not contentious, such as the one about where Passover can be observed, showing that there is both a need for such a forum generally as well as the ability to self-police (usually) the topics.

I think WB is mature enough to accept the importance of this concept, and to manage it wisely.

Comments:This Poll Petition is simply to show numbers. I ask comments be restricted to those who support the Petition with comments that are non-confrontational and non-preaching, and that they not refer to one's own particular faith, denomination or beliefs. I am not the moderator, however, so those who do not wish to honor my request obviously can do so.

[Lugnut]

Allowing only Yes votes is not a very accurate poll.

[Lone Wolf]

NO religion or politics forums should be allowed on the website. i'm sure the majority of members agree with me

[The Weasel]

Allowing only Yes votes is not a very accurate poll.

As noted, it is not intended as a "Poll", but a Petition. Lone Wolf is correct that it is likely that a majority of users here may not want such a forum. The size of the minority may, however, indicate that it is important enough to create for those with an interest. That would be up to the Administrators, of course.

TW

[superman]

NO religion or politics forums should be allowed on the website. i'm sure the majority of members agree with me

I absolutely agree with you.

[ed bell]

This was extensively covered recently in the Donating Member's forum:
http://http://www.whiteblaze.net/for...play.php?f=410

The answer was "not going to happen". I seriously doubt any change in policy about this is going to happen.

[think0075]

i have no problem with people discussing religion. however the people who are ignorant enough to put down other peoples religion and realized that people have the right to have different views i find absurd. discussing religion and respecting religion is much different than practicing and trying to influence people who have different opinions. if you want to try to tell people right from wrong then this is the wrong place.

[max patch]

It would be a place where information about religion or religious things related to the AT could be expressed and exchanged.

Poll accomplishes nothing.

We already can talk about religion related to the trail.

This proposal changes nothing. It neither expands or limits existing policy.

[The Weasel]

As said in the opening post, this was crafted as a "petition" simply to see how many support it, in a public forum. There was also a request that it not be debated by those in favor or against and put in Straight Forward in the hopes that Forum Rules would discourage any discussion.

[ColdFire]

As said in the opening post, this was crafted as a "petition" simply to see how many support it, in a public forum. There was also a request that it not be debated by those in favor or against and put in Straight Forward in the hopes that Forum Rules would discourage any discussion.

If you don't want people to make any comments about your "petition" then why make such a long winded post? (which I didn't bother to read anyway) Just make the poll since the name of it says enough.

[Cookerhiker]

Some questions:

1. If this forum is approved, does this mean religion/faith may only be discussed on this forum and no others? Any references whatsoever to religion anywhere else is banned?
2. Does the "no witnessing" rule apply to both religious and secular participants, i.e. no one may push their beliefs/nonbeliefs on others nor scorn those who don't think like them?
3. I know you said this is a petition but do you interpret a majority of "Nos" to mean that religion shouldn't be discussed at all (as some respondents have already indicated) or does the status quo prevail whereby some discussion and references to religion occurs and is generally tolerated (notwithstanding some recent noteworthy exceptions)?

[Summit]

Sorry Weasey but I voted no. It will never work the way it would be good for it to work here on WB. Too many detractors who would hijack any attempt at seriousness. Are you volunteering to moderate it!

I never have and do not want to hold religious discussions at WB. The times I've been accused of preachin' was when someone attacked me because of my signature or tag line, OR introduced a false statement about the faith that I hold dear. When that happens (past and future), I will wade in to challenge false statements/views. I welcome PMs anytime if someone wants to discuss or question what I put my faith in. People do that fairly often and I hope they would agree I have been very accomodating, straightforward, and factual. I don't 'preach.' I just tell folks what the scriptures tell us about what they ask.

What I have spoken out for and Sgt. Rock mentioned it in a post yesterday as being OK, is that people should be able to use 'faith language' in their responses without being jumped. Example: Someone shares something really good that happened to them. If I feel like responding "Praise the Lord," or "I pray to God it will work out the way you're hoping," non-believers should refrain from telling the world what they think about my beliefs - hijacking the thread. While I'm sure there are some who will refuse to believe it because they don't understand the source of my passion, I don't flaunt my faith, I just live it.

[OldStormcrow]

Shhheeeeesh! Look at the "poll/petition" numbers and figure it out for yourself. No need to dig up a big ol' can of worms, no matter what your personal convictions may be. The 'net is a big ol' place with plenty of room for this stuff, but I'm here to read and talk about the outdoors, not religion!

[The Weasel]

Some questions:

1. If this forum is approved, does this mean religion/faith may only be discussed on this forum and no others? Any references whatsoever to religion anywhere else is banned?
2. Does the "no witnessing" rule apply to both religious and secular participants, i.e. no one may push their beliefs/nonbeliefs on others nor scorn those who don't think like them?
3. I know you said this is a petition but do you interpret a majority of "Nos" to mean that religion shouldn't be discussed at all (as some respondents have already indicated) or does the status quo prevail whereby some discussion and references to religion occurs and is generally tolerated (notwithstanding some recent noteworthy exceptions)?

1) That wouldn't be up to me, but I would think people could post anywhere, must as topics that affect women don't "have" to go in the Females Forum. But I think there is some inhibition by many people to "raising religion" in other topics.
2) That would be my hope: No preaching, no scorn.
3) How it's interpreted would be up the Admins. My feeling is that if a significant number of people want something, it doesn't have to be a majority. There are topics here on WB now that don't get majority support (the Pacific Crest Trail forum, for instance, much as I love it, is probably not something a majority wants).

Sorry Weasey but I voted no. It will never work the way it would be good for it to work here on WB. Too many detractors who would hijack any attempt at seriousness. Are you volunteering to moderate it!

I never have and do not want to hold religious discussions at WB. The times I've been accused of preachin' was when someone attacked me because of my signature or tag line, OR introduced a false statement about the faith that I hold dear. When that happens (past and future), I will wade in to challenge false statements/views. I welcome PMs anytime if someone wants to discuss or question what I put my faith in. People do that fairly often and I hope they would agree I have been very accomodating, straightforward, and factual. I don't 'preach.' I just tell folks what the scriptures tell us about what they ask.

What I have spoken out for and Sgt. Rock mentioned it in a post yesterday as being OK, is that people should be able to use 'faith language' in their responses without being jumped. Example: Someone shares something really good that happened to them. If I feel like responding "Praise the Lord," or "I pray to God it will work out the way you're hoping," non-believers should refrain from telling the world what they think about my beliefs - hijacking the thread.

]

1) My petition and accompanying explanation makes it clear that this forum would NOT be for "religious discussions." Moderation can make that work.
2) I would be willing to moderate it. I think it can be done in a fair way to all that both prevents "preaching," "attacking" and "highjacking.
3) This would not be a place to support OR attack "statements about your faith you hold dear." Such discussions can occur at other websites. As my Explanation tries to state, the purpose of this would be to deal with specific aspects of religion that affect someone hiking the trail, not whether any aspect of religion is good or bad.

I am not trying to "discuss" whether this is a good or bad idea or convince anyone that this should happen. That is up to the reader. I am trying to guage how much support there is for what I have proposed. Nothing more.

TW

[The Weasel]

Shhheeeeesh! Look at the "poll/petition" numbers and figure it out for yourself. No need to dig up a big ol' can of worms, no matter what your personal convictions may be. The 'net is a big ol' place with plenty of room for this stuff, but I'm here to read and talk about the outdoors, not religion!

This proposal is not to "talk about religion." Examples of threads that I would view as possible/likely:

- Religious relationships of hostels. (Example: The Place in Damascus or Elmer's in Hot Springs)
- Hiker Friendly Churches/Facilities in Trail Towns
- Group hike of particular religious affinity
- Wearing religious clothing/headcoverings while hiking
- Observing religious holidays while hiking
- Religious dietary requirements and trail cooking/eating

TW

[dixicritter]

This proposal is not to "talk about religion." Examples of threads that I would view as possible/likely:

- Religious relationships of hostels. (Example: The Place in Damascus or Elmer's in Hot Springs)
- Hiker Friendly Churches/Facilities in Trail Towns
- Group hike of particular religious affinity
- Wearing religious clothing/headcoverings while hiking
- Observing religious holidays while hiking
- Religious dietary requirements and trail cooking/eating

TW

That can already be done right here in the Straight Forward forum TW. There's really no point in adding another forum for them to have to find moderators for is there?

[WritinginCT]

I didn't vote because I think my preference falls somewhere in between the two options. And as an atheist this only affects me peripherally. But for many people hiking is as much a spiritual quest as a physical trek and I think that should be recognized and people should be able to share their personal experiences without fear of ridicule.

As far as a separate forum area, technically there is a Trail Town forum where threads/information about churches, religious services, events, et cetera could be shared (just an example). I'm sure most topics would fit somewhere within the existing forum structure.

I think like the Women's forum issue this boils down to respect. Respect of the thread topic, and respect for the other posters. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and should be allowed express them - but not in a disrespectful manner.

There really is no easy answer for any of this unfortunately.

[hoz]

Only if there is also a "Pagans on the AT" forum.

[The Weasel]

Dixi:

To answer your question:

Almost every topic on WB can be done on SF. But that's not WB's style, either. Most of those can also involve a lot of "how/when/where/why" discussion that isn't suited for SF, and that doesn't have to involve good/bad/preach/attack, either. Can't most of the topics on the Females On The Trail (forget correct name, sorry) be done as "Straight Forward"? But the purpose of that was, as I recall, to allow women to discuss, somewhat more freely, issues and ideas that are more unique to them which, when not set up separately, ended up getting very out of hand. And having a separate "area" is a way of saying, "these things are legitimate things to talk about, as long as handled in a civil fashion."

TW

[emerald]

I'm neither strongly for or against a religion forum, but I am pleased to see The Weasel indicate his willingness to moderate it.

More than once, I've desired to post a carefully chosen article about certain religious groups active in Pennsylvania which may be little known to many our readers. I can't say I was encouraged to post another by a non-AT article I once started.