I believe there is a spiritual problem here on the CMR.

but not everyone here is a Christian..and those who are all view scripture, salvation, what is orthodox and what isnt in a different light..in other words there are many many theologys here..from conservative to liberal...

H.M. Murdock wrote:

d@v!d wrote: Why are we so afraid to discuss matters of Christian truth?

Because no matter what, somebody's going to get their underwear in a wad and throw a hissy fit because a member dared to disagree with them.

Yes, that may be true and may happen, but don't you think that it will level out after? If someone is particularly sensitive, can't we expect them to figure out after the first time that they take offense that they ought not engage in things that bother them?

Why do we have to live in safetyland preschool environment? It's like the Muslim men who can't control their sexual desires so they force all their women to completely wrap themselves from head to toe in order to stave off their natural lust instincts. Jesus taught us to battle lust in our own hearts. Likewise we ought to be self governing and charitable in our dealings with each other.

If it's not that, it's the blatant condoning of sinful behavior. If it was unsaved people trying to justify it, I wouldn't be so disturbed, but when people here who call themselves Christians call things acceptable that the Bible says are unacceptable, that's a problem.

Well, I certainly don't want to encourage a religious police state here where all professing Christians here who support something deemed sinful get lambasted, but I think we ought to have the freedom to speak of the Word of God and to be able to gently and kindly instruct one another in love with those with whom we have personal rapport.

Even if there are disputes, disagreements and arguments, this is Biblical to some extent.

Please see Acts 15, the Jerusalem Council, where "no small dissension and dispute" (NKJV) and the NIV says "sharp dispute".

H.M. Murdock wrote:

d@v!d wrote: Why are we so afraid to discuss matters of Christian truth?

Because no matter what, somebody's going to get their underwear in a wad and throw a hissy fit because a member dared to disagree with them.

If it's not that, it's the blatant condoning of sinful behavior. If it was unsaved people trying to justify it, I wouldn't be so disturbed, but when people here who call themselves Christians call things acceptable that the Bible says are unacceptable, that's a problem.

What you said here reminds me of this video about Yale.

I'm impressed with the consensus in this thread.  It seems we all agree -- the problem is somebody else!

Grindboy wrote:I'm impressed with the consensus in this thread.  It seems we all agree -- the problem is somebody else!

lol

alldatndensum wrote:Most likely that power would be used to dispose of those that didn't agree with their point of view.

That's pretty harsh. Even among the debate, I don't think any of us held ill will toward one another. I would call all of the former-TR realm regulars my friends.

Oh and, WELCOME BACK SA!  Great to have you here again!

Deepfriar wrote:

alldatndensum wrote:Most likely that power would be used to dispose of those that didn't agree with their point of view.

That's pretty harsh. Even among the debate, I don't think any of us held ill will toward one another. I would call all of the former-TR realm regulars my friends.

Oh and, WELCOME BACK SA!  Great to have you here again!

I agree. Even in my lowest moments when I got frustrated with others and wasn't nice, I never would have done something like that.

Let's go back in time to when the overly sensitive bandwagon started to pick up and annihilate it before it gains momentum. Let's see... Does 2010 sound about right?

All Protestants are heretics, so what's the big deal here?

All Protestants are heretics, so what's the big deal here?

d@v!d wrote:I believe there is a spiritual problem here on the CMR.

When you forbid Christians to talk about the Word of God on a "Christian" message board you got your priorities wrong in my opinion.

I get that some people do not like their beliefs and world views challenged as such that they wish to shut down dialog, but you'd think that they simply would just ignore threads that do and certainly not post in such thread to invite push-back.

H.M. Murdock wrote:
Because no matter what, somebody's going to get their underwear in a wad and throw a hissy fit because a member dared to disagree with them.

I've talked to Kerrick in detail as to what the problem is here.  David, I've talked to you about it via PM.

I don't believe its a spiritual problem, because of the 50 people that come here, there's 50 different opinions...  and while we do fight with each other way above a group of people who have the same system belief in common, I don't think we argue at all because of difference of opinion.

The problem is, insult by proxy.

Someone starts a thread, member13 says X idea is absurd, and member47 says Y idea is dense.
...if I’m “guilty” of X and Y.  By proxy, I was being called absurd and dense.  
I then respond like I've already been flamed.  ...which I have.

To me, I think the line in the sand is clear and simple.

If someone says "Iron Maiden's songwriting has really declined in the past few years" – that to me is perfectly acceptable.  Its presented in a factual manner, it’s an opinion someone has, there’s nothing directed at anyone else and they have every right to not like Iron Maiden as much as you.  You have every right to follow up why you disagree, if they don’t like the fact that someone disagrees, tough – that’s life.   Everything stays civil.

If someone says "The songwriting from Iron Maiden’s last few albums sounds like they’ve been hanging around stoned high school kids with palsy" – that’s not factual, it’s pejorative.  It’s insulting even if you're trying to work on your stand-up comedy.  That remark, even though it’s not directed at a member of the board, elevates emotion.  If they’re someone like me, they’re either going to say something about the remark or they’re there’s going to be anger in the response.  Its life, but that remark is unnecessary and seeds chaos.

This forum is RIDDLED with insults by proxy.  RIDDLED.
There’s a condition on the forum that you’re not supposed to flame/insult/degrade members, right?
It makes no sense that the CMR ALLOWS someone to trash a person/place/thing/idea that someone is emotionally/spiritually/mentally invested in.

If someone is emotionally/spiritually/mentally invested in Joyce Meyers, and you call Joyce Meyers a pagan - with or without evidence to back that up, you're going to offend.  Now the topic isn't about what Joyce Meyers said that isn't biblical, its NOW that you're calling ME a pagan because I hold Joyce Meyers in high regard.  
Preventing talk of Joyce Meyers isn't the answer.

If an addendum was made to the rules that no flaming/insults/degradation of including (but not limited to) persons in the media, organizations, ways of thinking, beliefs different from their own, music preference, genres of music, etc. is allowed.  “Everyone is welcome to disagree, but don’t speak in negative connotations to something/someone that another forum member may be emotionally/mentally/spiritually involved in.”

Something like that.  I think the fighting would reduce dramatically.

ThomasEversole wrote:If an addendum was made to the rules that no flaming/insults/degradation of including (but not limited to) persons in the media, organizations, ways of thinking, beliefs different from their own, music preference, genres of music, etc. is allowed.  “Everyone is welcome to disagree, but don’t speak in negative connotations to something/someone that another forum member may be emotionally/mentally/spiritually involved in.

But this is an unBiblical approach. Calling people names is perfectly acceptable by Christ's standards if they deserve it. Please see the following:

Matthew 23:27, Jesus called out the Pharisees and said they were like "whitewashed tombs"
Matthew 23:33, Jesus called the Pharisees "Serpents, brood of vipers!"
Luke 13:32, Jesus called Herod a "fox"
Matthew 15:26, Jesus called the Canaanite woman a "little dog"

I respectfully disagree with ya ThomasEversole...what you are suggesting imo is a "pc censorship on speech" idea.. that is an idea I just can't back. I instead suggest that people need to use their free will and control themselves and their anger and just choose not to take offense no matter what anyone else says...
Getting angry and taking offense at someone elses words is a choice and how one responds is a choice...To me that is the problem..both on the cmr and in the USA today..everyone needs to quit being so sensitive and pc! If you dont like what someone else says then just say "whatever" and move on..its really that simple..

ThomasEversole wrote:

d@v!d wrote:I believe there is a spiritual problem here on the CMR.

When you forbid Christians to talk about the Word of God on a "Christian" message board you got your priorities wrong in my opinion.

I get that some people do not like their beliefs and world views challenged as such that they wish to shut down dialog, but you'd think that they simply would just ignore threads that do and certainly not post in such thread to invite push-back.

H.M. Murdock wrote:
Because no matter what, somebody's going to get their underwear in a wad and throw a hissy fit because a member dared to disagree with them.

I've talked to Kerrick in detail as to what the problem is here.  David, I've talked to you about it via PM.

I don't believe its a spiritual problem, because of the 50 people that come here, there's 50 different opinions...  and while we do fight with each other way above a group of people who have the same system belief in common, I don't think we argue at all because of difference of opinion.

The problem is, insult by proxy.

Someone starts a thread, member13 says X idea is absurd, and member47 says Y idea is dense.
...if I’m “guilty” of X and Y.  By proxy, I was being called absurd and dense.  
I then respond like I've already been flamed.  ...which I have.

To me, I think the line in the sand is clear and simple.

If someone says "Iron Maiden's songwriting has really declined in the past few years" – that to me is perfectly acceptable.  Its presented in a factual manner, it’s an opinion someone has, there’s nothing directed at anyone else and they have every right to not like Iron Maiden as much as you.  You have every right to follow up why you disagree, if they don’t like the fact that someone disagrees, tough – that’s life.   Everything stays civil.

If someone says "The songwriting from Iron Maiden’s last few albums sounds like they’ve been hanging around stoned high school kids with palsy" – that’s not factual, it’s pejorative.  It’s insulting even if you're trying to work on your stand-up comedy.  That remark, even though it’s not directed at a member of the board, elevates emotion.  If they’re someone like me, they’re either going to say something about the remark or they’re there’s going to be anger in the response.  Its life, but that remark is unnecessary and seeds chaos.

This forum is RIDDLED with insults by proxy.  RIDDLED.
There’s a condition on the forum that you’re not supposed to flame/insult/degrade members, right?
It makes no sense that the CMR ALLOWS someone to trash a person/place/thing/idea that someone is emotionally/spiritually/mentally invested in.

If someone is emotionally/spiritually/mentally invested in Joyce Meyers, and you call Joyce Meyers a pagan - with or without evidence to back that up, you're going to offend.  Now the topic isn't about what Joyce Meyers said that isn't biblical, its NOW that you're calling ME a pagan because I hold Joyce Meyers in high regard.  
Preventing talk of Joyce Meyers isn't the answer.

If an addendum was made to the rules that no flaming/insults/degradation of including (but not limited to) persons in the media, organizations, ways of thinking, beliefs different from their own, music preference, genres of music, etc. is allowed.  “Everyone is welcome to disagree, but don’t speak in negative connotations to something/someone that another forum member may be emotionally/mentally/spiritually involved in.”

Something like that.  I think the fighting would reduce dramatically.

Insult by proxy exists like you say (btw, well illustrated), but I disagree that it has the lion's share stake in the problem.

The closing of the last thread partly inspired me to start this one. Where is it there? I don't see it. It seems more like the mods noticed that the conversation was getting too 'religious' for this 'Christian' board and shut it down 'because that's the rules.'

Furthermore, lets go to your illustration of insult by proxy. You framed it in the context of music, which has nothing to do with theology, the Word of God, or religion. Yet, it shows how we can hate on and hurt each other without a religious discussion, right? And that does happen here at times. So, should we ban music discussion too?

These immaturities of insult by proxy do exist and come up from time to time, but I don't think the board is as 'riddled' with them as you think. In any case, they aren't a reason to stifle religious discussion. No, there is something else that is holding that back. I reiterate that there is a spiritual problem here.

I'm not a guy who gets involved in most of the "arguments" (some people wish to call them that; others don't) that happen here, but I'll still weigh in on this.

I agree with David in the fact that I think we should be able to talk about spiritual things on a Christian forum, but there should be more mutual respect among the members. Over at The Blackest Light (a Christian black metal forum that Thomas owns), which is a much smaller forum than here, most of the members are familiar with each other, and thus treat each other with respect. We've managed to have intelligent, polite conversations about homosexuality, abortion, and all sorts of controversial things without having to lock the threads. Of course there was disagreement, but there was also respect. That's what the CMR needs.

d@v!d wrote:
Furthermore, lets go to your illustration of insult by proxy. You framed it in the context of music, which has nothing to do with theology, the Word of God, or religion. Yet, it shows how we can hate on and hurt each other without a religious discussion, right? And that does happen here at times. So, should we ban music discussion too?

These immaturities of insult by proxy do exist and come up from time to time, but I don't think the board is as 'riddled' with them as you think. In any case, they aren't a reason to stifle religious discussion. No, there is something else that is holding that back. I reiterate that there is a spiritual problem here.

Ok, I'll concede that not EVERY CMR problem is because of by-proxy insults.  ...but its still an obvious problem and enforcing this would help tremendously.  Its at least a great place to start.

Have you sifted through posts to see if you can spot insults by proxy?  You might not use the word riddled like myself, but I'm confident it happens more than you think.

Whether its music or religion/theology, the approach used in discussing the said topic makes all the difference.
If someone says "I disagree with once-saved-always-saved because of X, Y and Z.".  Totally cool.
If someone says "Anyone who believes once-saved-always-saved has obviously never read X and doesn't know what Y is." - while kinda subtle, is calling the person ignorant/stupid/uneducated.  ...which will just bring on more flames.

I agree that stifling religious discussion on a religious board is bizarre.  
That's like a lawncare forum forbidding the discussion of grass because there's too many disagreements about which seed to use.

...even more bizarre is that someone saying "Thomas, you're stupid." isn't allowed per forum rules,
but "Orationem is stupid" and "believing everyone eventually goes to heaven is stupid" is completely allowed....  

Hello?  Calling those things stupid (where I work hard on and where my heart is) will fire me up more than someone straight up calling ME stupid!

CrimsonWarrior wrote:We've managed to have intelligent, polite conversations about homosexuality, abortion, and all sorts of controversial things without having to lock the threads. Of course there was disagreement, but there was also respect. That's what the CMR needs.

Word.  It made my day when the 16th post in a thread was "A civil, respectful and intelligent discussion about abortion online, now this is really something "
Yep, there was a difference of opinion, but ultimately, love and peace trump any of the details that don't match up.

...even more bizarre is that someone saying "Thomas, you're stupid." isn't allowed per forum rules,
but "Orationem is stupid" and "believing everyone eventually goes to heaven is stupid" is completely allowed....  

Hello?  Calling those things stupid (where I work hard on and where my heart is) will fire me up more than someone straight up calling ME stupid!

But calling 'Orationem" stupid isnt calling you stupid if you are a fan (you just take it that way)...I am a huge fan of Saxon but if someone told me "Saxon Sucks" I would just chalk it up to their opinion and wouldn't take it personally...its just their opinion..and they are entitled to it. If you get all fired up and hurt by someone saying your band is stupid or it sucks thats kinda on you and is a personal problem...again just smile and choose not to take offense.. Again the problem here is people need to quit taking offense and choose to walk away from that thread..like David already said "ignore the thread and dont post there"...why is that so hard for some of you?

d@v!d wrote:I believe there is a spiritual problem here on the CMR.
 
When you forbid Christians to talk about the Word of God on a "Christian" message board you got your priorities wrong in my opinion.
 
 I get that some people do not like their beliefs and world views challenged as such that they wish to shut down dialog, but you'd think that they simply would just ignore threads that do and certainly not post in such thread to invite push-back.
 
The Word of God divides and that’s why you are seeing denominations split over stuff like homosexuality. A lot of us here are already divided, but we should never be afraid of a free-flow of ideas around here.
 
What shouldn’t be allowed to divide us is name calling, trolling, and pestering each other. I think that we all have attained maturity that we can keep each other in check if one of us falters in one of the areas.
 
It’s been over a year since the ‘theology’ forum was closed and it’s beginning to seem like it’s more than just a peace keeping measure. Why are we so afraid to discuss matters of Christian truth?

I'd like to go back to D@vid's original post.

I'm not sure I'd call the problem spiritual at its root, but it definitely has spiritual implications.  It is not a problem limited to this board, it is a problem that is rampant in society.  Someone on up the comments already made that point.  I believe it is rooted in fear.  We live in a time when there is so much uncertainty that we tend to cling to those things we hold as Truth and feel threatened when those things come under fire.  Whether it is a theology, an ideology, or a particular leader, we have come to identify with those things we hold dear and consider them an extension of ourselves because they provide security and comfort.  So I understand what Thomas is saying about Joyce Meyer (and in retrospect what Aaron had said previously about Joel Osteen).  I want to say something about this that I have said before, but this time more rationally and less emotionally.  We can never control what other people think or say or do, the only thing we can control is how we react to it.  D@vid talked about maturity, and that reminds me of what Paul said:  "When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, and I reasoned like a child.  But when I became a man, I put those childish ways behind me."  As a society (and this board as a subset of that society), I think the problem is that we are carrying those childish ways into adulthood.  I see it when people want to control what college professors teach in their classes because God forbid they are ever exposed to a new or different idea.  I see it when groups of people demand that images and icons of the past be removed or covered up because it makes them uncomfortable rather than using those images as a reminder of what has been and to strengthen our resolve to not return to that.  I see it when people who have different political ideas would rather resort to namecalling and character attacks than actually discussing those differences.  I see it when people default to using violence to solve their problems rather than trying to work things out in other ways.  I see it people who can't just let things go, but have to respond to every slight--real or perceived.  We are scared, and when we are afraid, we seek safety and security and try to shut out anything that makes us feel otherwise.  I get that and I feel that.  I guess what I'm beating around the bush saying is that I disagree that "we all have attained maturity that we can keep each other in check".  If that was true, then it would be easy to be a moderator.  Some of you may be feeling singled out by what I'm writing, and I promise you I am not pointing fingers at anyone.  I am speaking as much to myself as I am any other person.

Here's the other thing about fear:  God's love casts out fear.  Yes, we have a lot of divisions on this board, but that is because we have a lot of different people.  Politically we have people who are super conservative and people who are pretty daggone liberal and middle of the roaders like myself.  Theologically we have Reformed folks, free grace folks, Evangelicals, Progressives, Catholics, Pentecostals, Holiness, Wesleyans, and people who just say screw it all I just love Jesus.  Not to mention the people who aren't even Christian.  We've got people in all walks of life.  The Word of God divides, but it isn't divisive.  That's on us.  What we need is a whole lot more of God's love in this joint.  I'll be honest:  I hate when people come here and start talking all kinds of trash about Obama as a person.  Not because I support him--he wasn't my 1st, 2nd, or 854th choice for President--but because God's love isn't in it.  And surely saying "I'm not going to buy the new Tourniquet album because because I don't like all of the animal rights lyrics" is enough and we don't need to berate Ted because he believes so deeply in this.  We seem too forgetful that our call isn't to speak the truth, it is to speak the truth IN LOVE.  I'm not talking the hippie-dippie "it's all cool because we have love" kinda thing, I'm talking about the attitude of our hearts.  I believe there are some who feel passionately that WoF/prosperity/whatever teachers are fleecing the flock and are doing the work of Satan and they speak out against them because they genuinely do not want anyone to fall prey to them.  There are others who feel that they have been ministered to greatly by those same ministers.  Instead of duking it out, how about we just leave it at stating your thoughts and allowing the Holy Spirit to do its work?  Just a thought.

Savage Amusement wrote:But calling 'Orationem" stupid isnt calling you stupid if you are a fan (you just take it that way)...I am a huge fan of Saxon but if someone told me "Saxon Sucks" I would just chalk it up to their opinion and wouldn't take it personally...its just their opinion..and they are entitled to it. If you get all fired up and hurt by someone saying your band is stupid or it sucks thats kinda on you and is a personal problem...again just smile and choose not to take offense.. Again the problem here is people need to quit taking offense and choose to walk away from that thread..like David already said "ignore the thread and dont post there"...why is that so hard for some of you?

Regarding Orationem, I'm not a fan - its my music that I wrote and recorded.
If someone doesn't like it, fine - I wouldn't think twice about that.
If its just a random troll, that's easy to ignore...

Its harder to ignore people I've been around for years. Not only that, for me, there's no one local that shares my passion for God and metal. NO ONE. So that leaves places like this and when its all you have, you fight for it.

Telling someone "just don't reply to it, its that simple" is like telling an alcoholic, "Just don't drink, its that simple."
It doesn't work that way.

If you don't stand up for yourself, you
1) don't have anything to stand up for
2) don't have a high enough pride or priority to make the stand
3) enjoy being a doormat that crawls before people

Adam wrote:

ThomasEversole wrote:If an addendum was made to the rules that no flaming/insults/degradation of including (but not limited to) persons in the media, organizations, ways of thinking, beliefs different from their own, music preference, genres of music, etc. is allowed.  “Everyone is welcome to disagree, but don’t speak in negative connotations to something/someone that another forum member may be emotionally/mentally/spiritually involved in.

But this is an unBiblical approach. Calling people names is perfectly acceptable by Christ's standards if they deserve it. Please see the following:

Matthew 23:27, Jesus called out the Pharisees and said they were like "whitewashed tombs"
Matthew 23:33, Jesus called the Pharisees "Serpents, brood of vipers!"
Luke 13:32, Jesus called Herod a "fox"
Matthew 15:26, Jesus called the Canaanite woman a "little dog"

And it is more or less already in there.  #3

Savage Amusement wrote:

...even more bizarre is that someone saying "Thomas, you're stupid." isn't allowed per forum rules,
but "Orationem is stupid" and "believing everyone eventually goes to heaven is stupid" is completely allowed....  

Hello?  Calling those things stupid (where I work hard on and where my heart is) will fire me up more than someone straight up calling ME stupid!

But calling 'Orationem" stupid isnt calling you stupid if you are a fan (you just take it that way)...I am a huge fan of Saxon but if someone told me "Saxon Sucks" I would just chalk it up to their opinion and wouldn't take it personally...its just their opinion..and they are entitled to it. If you get all fired up and hurt by someone saying your band is stupid or it sucks thats kinda on you and is a personal problem...again just smile and choose not to take offense.. Again the problem here is people need to quit taking offense and choose to walk away from that thread..like David already said "ignore the thread and dont post there"...why is that so hard for some of you?

Point of clarification:  Orationem is Thomas' band, not a band he's just a fan of.  So it makes sense he would equate Orationem with himself.

ThomasEversole wrote:
Telling someone "just don't reply to it, its that simple" is like telling an alcoholic, "Just don't drink, its that simple."
It doesn't work that way.

If you don't stand up for yourself, you
1) don't have anything to stand up for
2) don't have a high enough pride or priority to make the stand
3) enjoy being a doormat that crawls before people

No, but you do tell an alcoholic not to go around places where they will be tempted to drink.  I have a number of topics that I won't even read because I know it will set me off.  I respect your views on what it means if you don't stand up for yourself, but I disagree.  An eye for an eye just leads to a whole lot of eyeless people.  If I refuse to fire back at someone, I

1) am standing for my values and principles and not allowing someone else to dictate my character
2) am choosing to be "the bigger person"
3) am actually taking control of the situation by defusing it.

My pastor did a sermon a few weeks ago about the whole turning the other turning the other cheek thing.  In cultural context, it was unacceptable to strike someone with an open hand or with your left hand.  So a strike to the right cheek would be done with the back of the right hand.  If you turn your left cheek toward him, you aren't opening yourself up to being struck on that cheek, you are taking control of the situation by refusing the other person a chance to hit you again.  So by turning the other cheek, you aren't making yourself a punching bag, you are making yourself the person in control.

Adam wrote:

ThomasEversole wrote:If an addendum was made to the rules that no flaming/insults/degradation of including (but not limited to) persons in the media, organizations, ways of thinking, beliefs different from their own, music preference, genres of music, etc. is allowed.  “Everyone is welcome to disagree, but don’t speak in negative connotations to something/someone that another forum member may be emotionally/mentally/spiritually involved in.

But this is an unBiblical approach. Calling people names is perfectly acceptable by Christ's standards if they deserve it. Please see the following:

Matthew 23:27, Jesus called out the Pharisees and said they were like "whitewashed tombs"
Matthew 23:33, Jesus called the Pharisees "Serpents, brood of vipers!"
Luke 13:32, Jesus called Herod a "fox"
Matthew 15:26, Jesus called the Canaanite woman a "little dog"

Wooooooooooooow.  We've been doing it right all along.  Mods, change the forum rules now.
Anyone who disagrees with me abusing "righteous namecalling" is a dick.

Seriously, I think there's a HUGE difference in Christ (who commands authority) calling a PHRARISEE a serpent...
...and Joe calling Tim names here.

messiaen77 wrote:
No, but you do tell an alcoholic not to go around places where they will be tempted to drink.

Many alcoholics are tempted to drink in their home environment.
Alcohol is everywhere as well. I'm over 8 years recovered, and when the supply ran out and the money was gone, well, Pam Cooking spray has alcohol in it.

Staying away from people places things events situations does not solve the problem.
...just like staying away from here, or being here but not talking to anyone is not a viable solution.

messiaen77 wrote:I have a number of topics that I won't even read because I know it will set me off.  I respect your views on what it means if you don't stand up for yourself, but I disagree.  An eye for an eye just leads to a whole lot of eyeless people.  If I refuse to fire back at someone, I

1) am standing for my values and principles and not allowing someone else to dictate my character
2) am choosing to be "the bigger person"
3) am actually taking control of the situation by defusing it.

My pastor did a sermon a few weeks ago about the whole turning the other turning the other cheek thing.  In cultural context, it was unacceptable to strike someone with an open hand or with your left hand.  So a strike to the right cheek would be done with the back of the right hand.  If you turn your left cheek toward him, you aren't opening yourself up to being struck on that cheek, you are taking control of the situation by refusing the other person a chance to hit you again.  So by turning the other cheek, you aren't making yourself a punching bag, you are making yourself the person in control.

There's topics I stay away from as well, but again - it doesn't always work that way.
Here you're talking about refusing to "fire back" - but you're standing up and firing back.
Why isn't this an instance of just leaving the situation alone to be a bigger person instead of telling me I'm wrong?

You're absolutely respectful about it, and I really do see your point... this sort of thing is the heart of discussion.
...and your rebuttal to my points is MY point as to why just staying away and saying nothing is again, not an option.

Just the fact that we can't agree and the thread feels like a powder keg about to ignite tells me that we are not ready for that which is being asked.

As a 14 year veteran and someone who spent time for a number of years as staff, just putting more rules won't keep the drama down.  A public forum attracts people from all walks of life and the internet gives people a forum where they don't have to hide.  They feel safe behind the keyboard.  That creates drama and even monsters.  It has happened here over and over and over.  I've lost a lot of friends.  I've even been the cause of some problems.  I can admit that.  However, people will not police themselves and it will get out of hand.  AGAIN.  We don't learn from our mistakes as humans and we will walk that ground again.

Start it back up again if you want, mods and admins.  I won't be going in there.  It is just a fight waiting to happen, and it will.