4 ms·

I do appreciate you looking out for the community. It's a strange rule for you to say a person's worldview can't be included in comments about how to live, effe

I do appreciate you looking out for the community. It's a strange rule for you to say a person's worldview can't be included in comments about how to live, effects of worldview's on society, and so on. Especially when the topic is community's effect on health with the parent comment exploring how our worldview drives our prioritization: "Car-centric lifestyle, few third places, low work-life balance, high and increasing inequality, underdeveloped social safety net, employer-tied social benefits, etc all tied together with American individualism. If we want prosocial, community-oriented behavior, we have to actually prioritize it." Either supporting a connected, loving society or responding to that comment requires a foundational justification for it. I noted that popular philosophies encourage selfishness, disconnects, anxiety, depression, and hate. Whereas, the older worldview, the Bible, produced individuals with more peace, work ethic, stable families with decades-long marriages, Western democracy (eg the Constitution), and so on. Solving the problem requires building on the right foundation (eg Christ & the truth). You mention you respect all's religious convictions with some censorship apparently but all claims shouldn't be treated the same. Jesus lives perfectly, works miracles, raises from the dead, and has biographical evidence approaching Julius Caeser. Then, His Gospel impacts 4,000 people groups with all of them reporting life transformations and miracles. Countries founded on Judeo-Christian principles turn out to be the best ones to live in with the most freedoms while the atheist, Buddhist, and Hindu countries still jail or kill those disagreeing with them. Scientific discoveries actually confirmed the Bible more, too. Whatever has strong evidence with high, global impact should always be allowed: https://www.gethisword.com/evidence.html https://www.gethisword.com/evidence.html The biggest issues, though, is we will all face the Lord Jesus Christ during Judgement Day. He promised every knee will bow, some willingly and others fearfully. He will render to each for their works, from day to day life up to moderation or lawmaking decisions. Our whole life might be replayed second by second with Him asking if each decision prioritized our God, His character, His truths, and love for others. So, we have to answer questions like "why have a lifetime of social ties? with God both designed us for and commanded us to love others as ourselves. Also, to bring them into fellowship with Jesus Christ for forgiveness of their sins, into the Church which is like a family, help with their earthly needs, and God uses them to do the same. It multiplies starting with hearing the Gospel and His truths. Jesus said "blessed are those who are not offended by me" so please don't be and please allow God's truths on Hacker News.

dredmorbius 1y ago
I suspect that HN's rationale is far less the basis of a worldview than that citing a (mainstream, contemporary) religious foundation is a red flag to the HN commentaritat's bull, and will shift the discussion from the site's prime aims of "intellectual curiosity and thoughtful conversation": <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13108404 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13108404> Dang's post cites politics, which though worthy of (some) discussion also tends the same way. Mind too that the result need not be intentional, it's just how a public-discussion site, even a comparatively well-mannered and well-behaved one such as HN, works.
tomhow 1y ago
> Countries founded on Judeo-Christian principles turn out to be the best ones to live in with the most freedoms while the atheist, Buddhist, and Hindu countries still jail or kill those disagreeing with them. Scientific discoveries actually confirmed the Bible more, too. This is exactly the kind of rhetoric that's unacceptable on HN. It breaks these guidelines: Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. Eschew flamebait. Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity. It's a long-established norm on HN that it's not acceptable to wage battle or engage in debate on the grounds of nationality or religion: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20nationalistic%20&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20religio&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... It's just HN's form of the age-old dinner-party principle. When we're trying to have an interesting discussion and someone makes an argument on the basis of the superiority of a nation or religion (or race or any other identity), it causes offence in people who don't belong to the identities that are asserted to be superior, which can lead to heated arguments, or at least discomfort, and makes everyone want to quickly leave the dinner and go home. I was raised in a Christian family, and I have respect for Christian teachings and those who have faith. We need you to show the same respect for this community that you would expect people to extend towards your faith, by respecting the guidelines and the community's norms. On HN we're just trying to have a healthy discussion, and the introduction of arguments based in the superiority of any religion's teachings are well known to take discussions in an unhealthy direction, so we need you to stop doing it please. The same principle applies to any religious belief, ideology or other worldview, including atheism. This is not a place for evangelism or activism, it's a place for curious conversation.

dredmorbius 1y ago

I suspect that HN's rationale is far less the basis of a worldview than that citing a (mainstream, contemporary) religious foundation is a red flag to the HN commentaritat's bull, and will shift the discussion from the site's prime aims of "intellectual curiosity and thoughtful conversation": <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13108404 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13108404> Dang's post cites politics, which though worthy of (some) discussion also tends the same way. Mind too that the result need not be intentional, it's just how a public-discussion site, even a comparatively well-mannered and well-behaved one such as HN, works.

tomhow 1y ago

> Countries founded on Judeo-Christian principles turn out to be the best ones to live in with the most freedoms while the atheist, Buddhist, and Hindu countries still jail or kill those disagreeing with them. Scientific discoveries actually confirmed the Bible more, too. This is exactly the kind of rhetoric that's unacceptable on HN. It breaks these guidelines: Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. Eschew flamebait. Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity. It's a long-established norm on HN that it's not acceptable to wage battle or engage in debate on the grounds of nationality or religion: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20nationalistic%20&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20religio&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... It's just HN's form of the age-old dinner-party principle. When we're trying to have an interesting discussion and someone makes an argument on the basis of the superiority of a nation or religion (or race or any other identity), it causes offence in people who don't belong to the identities that are asserted to be superior, which can lead to heated arguments, or at least discomfort, and makes everyone want to quickly leave the dinner and go home. I was raised in a Christian family, and I have respect for Christian teachings and those who have faith. We need you to show the same respect for this community that you would expect people to extend towards your faith, by respecting the guidelines and the community's norms. On HN we're just trying to have a healthy discussion, and the introduction of arguments based in the superiority of any religion's teachings are well known to take discussions in an unhealthy direction, so we need you to stop doing it please. The same principle applies to any religious belief, ideology or other worldview, including atheism. This is not a place for evangelism or activism, it's a place for curious conversation.