@Zultar - I'm a big fan of freedom of speech and if you or Mujus want to start a million threads then go for it, I will either mute them or go elsewhere. What seems odd to me is that you want to curtail how people respond to such topics. You seem to think that people should be polite and respectful. Whilst I hope I would always be polite and respectful, there is sometimes a necessity to be ompolite and disrespectful.
Let me give you an example that I hope won't offend.
If someone on here said that Moscow was the best SC to hold in diplomacy, they may be right but others would disagree. A long arguement based on reason, belief and evidence may follow and people may disagree. Now if it didn't matter to the other players what the original Moscow supporter thought then that would be that. But suppose those people were affected in someway, suppose other people started believing Moscow was soooo good that it affected their gameplay, the French would make a beeline for Moscow from the getgo, for example. Now the other players would want to use everything in their powers to dissuade the original Moscow cheerleader from his viewpoint. If that means ridiculing him to such an extent that he went away, then that would be OK.
Society has evolved quite quickly by driving people who hold racist, homophobic and sexist views underground, those people may still be racist, homophobic and sexist, but they do not expose their views to scrutity so much through fear of being labled, arrested or sacked. I think that people of faith will soon start being less vocal through fear of ridicule and to that extent the anti-religious people would have won the argument. The fewer people who state their racist, religious or homophobic views, the fewer followers they atttract, and the decline spirals down.
This will not affect the hardcore religious believers, of course, but it is often those that drive moderates away anyway.
)
George Brett Lawrie
)
)
)
)