Issue with Online Proselytizing (Trigger Warning)

chris p wrote:

Start one and find out. 

I think a better thread would be Climbers for Emotional Support Pets. Another topic full of lies and deceit. But at least we might get some cool dogs pics.

petzl logic wrote:

 Everyone is allowed to think, feel, worship according to how they choose, and no one should feel threatened for believing one way or the other. But there is still an ocean of a difference between believing in something, and trying to sell other people on that belief.

I strongly think that because the reactions to that act of 'selling' can be hostile for various reasons ranging from having been abused at the hands of religious people, to the recent disclosure of the hundreds of indigenous kids that were murdered, Mountain Project would function better with an absence of soliciting by these groups.

This is part of what the OP of the Climbers for Christ wrote:

"if you are looking to get involved with other climbers who share a passion for Christ, feel free to reach out" 

This doesn't sound like "selling" to me. I think the mere mention of Christ, God, Jesus or Christian religion triggers people to run for their safe spaces. 

They're talking about Jesus! Run for your lives! This must be stopped!

You could just ignore it. Or you could contact them, if you're interested.

But to make it sound like they are shoving it down your throats and proselytizing is a distortion. 

Bill Lawry wrote:

Practically speaking, it is climbing for the wrong reasons. 

Practically speaking, there is no such thing as climbing for the wrong reasons. I can climb to get to the top, you can climb for a greater sense of unity with nature and someone else can climb for the glorification of Bacchus. Ultimately it’s a meaningless activity that we all participate in because we want to  

To your point, Climbers for Christ and the like are basically ways for people to justify participation. It has no impact on me or you. 

I don't get it.... Just don't click the link or climb with these people if you don't want to. 

Dan D wrote:

I don't get it.... Just don't click the link or climb with these people if you don't want to. 

They dont want to climb with anyone who doesn't share their passion for Christ so they eliminated a high percentage of people here.

Jamila W wrote:

It’s almost exactly the same (exclusionary) but I bet if it wasn’t a Christian or Mormon climber people wouldn’t be falling all over themselves finding fault with it.

And I’m not even religious but I can spot the double standards around here easily.  I guarantee I was seeking Rastafaris or if someone was looking for fellow Muslims to climb with they wouldn’t be getting all the same hate.

 Inclusionary? 

Exclusionary?

petzl logic wrote:

Every few months we see a post or two that is more about proselytizing than climbing. 

Taken from Climbers for Christ's website: "The Mission of Climbers for Christ is to encourage, equip and empower climbers to share the love of Christ with the climbing community."

I don't see how that is different than advertising or selling on the forums, and while we have a For Sale forum, there is not really a place in 'General Climbing' or 'Regional Partners' to solicit recruits for a cult or religion, if they are different. I mean, we could have a long and rational discussion about whether religion is a cult, but it would certainly not have anything to do with climbing and neither does that mission, which is why I don't think it belongs on this site. 

While there is a lot of harmless material that doesn't have to do with climbing that sneaks into the forums, is religion one of them?

This week the biggest story in Canada is that of a residential school which was found to have 200+ remains of students on the premises. These residential schools were established by The Catholic Church to destroy the indigenous culture and religion here. Children were forcibly removed from their parents, stripped of their language, dignity, and family in the hopes of westernizing them. Many of the former students testified at the rampant abuse at the hands of priests and nuns. The live testimonies about the schools revealed atrocities that are impossible to fathom. The Trudeau government gave a formal apology a few years ago but with details coming out and a national underclass suffering from the legacy of that abuse and the problems that go with it, the story is not going away.

This is not unique to The Catholic Church, there are stories of abuse in every organized religion and there is growing evidence that religious figures use organizations to groom and keep quiet young victims.

The problems in our society because of religion extend past the sexual abuse of minors. There is more vaccine hesitancy among evangelicals than in any other of people in the nation. Evangelicals have also championed the rise of mass incarceration, the death penalty, and restricted equality legislation. 

And, I don't intend to pick on just those two as religion in general has provided some great things. Quakers were instrumental in dismantling slavery. Some of the greatest architecture the world has ever seen like the Pyramids, Notre Dame, Masjid al-Haram, etc, were all created by or for the devout. But none of that has anything to do with climbing either.

There were comments about 'Loud Atheists' in the last thread, but I make no comment about the existence of God or my own religious feelings. Everyone is allowed to think, feel, worship according to how they choose, and no one should feel threatened for believing one way or the other. But there is still an ocean of a difference between believing in something, and trying to sell other people on that belief.

I strongly think that because the reactions to that act of 'selling' can be hostile for various reasons ranging from having been abused at the hands of religious people, to the recent disclosure of the hundreds of indigenous kids that were murdered, Mountain Project would function better with an absence of soliciting by these groups.

Your elaborate post seems to indicate that you're the triggered one.

Dustin B wrote:

Your elaborate post seems to indicate that you're the triggered one.

Deep thoughts with millennials!

An outright exclusion seems heavy handed.

Even so, users already have several filters at their fingertips:

• Redacting offensive route names
• Ignoring specific users - even disallowing them to post on one’s threads
• Hiding threads about the sale of gear

Why not a filter for threads promoting an ideology? 

The Climbers for Christ thread isn't proselytizing, and I quote: "if you are looking to get involved with other climbers who share a passion for Christ...". Emphasis mine.

The ones who need to stop proselytizing are climbers, about climbing, we have enough followers already.

I think that is within the definitions of proselytize.

Relevant

jack uhberg wrote:

Relevant

Mormons aren't allowed to solo. Got it.

cliff notes version of the OP's post:  "Some people did some bad things. These people claim to worship the same god as the climbers for christ group. Ergo, MP would be a better place without climbers for christ members making "let's go climb" posts.

Got it, thanks. I read the post in reference and I didn't exactly get the proselytizing vibe from the poster. She literally wrote who she was, made an invite for other climbers who shared an affinity for a certain thing, and put in a couple links. I climbed a full day with a dude from climbers for christ and he never once tried to push religion, let alone coerce me into anything. Sample size of 1, sure... but I can only take the OP of this thread seriously if, when I make a post about "hey liberal MtB'ers who *only* ride 26" hardtails, let's all ride our similar bikes!", he writes a ten paragraph diatribe about how a liberal 26" wheel riding MtB'er once killed someone, so all liberal people who like 26" MtB's are bad and should be banned. 

Fuggin A dude, listen to yourself and try replacing your chosen group with another group, and see how well it holds up. Holding person B responsible for the unrelated sins of person A - just b/c they share some random similarity - is one of the biggest reasons this country is a bit of a sh**-show right now.

(analogy edited (twice) to satisfy Bill's nitpicking)

The mountain bike analogy is misguided.  This is not about technical choices / preferences. Though, yeah, there are some pretty hard core absolutes some want to apply regarding belay devices.  

Bill Lawry wrote:

The mountain bike analogy is misguided.  This is not about technical choices.  

Lol, way to focus on the wrong part of that post 

Dan D wrote:

Lol, way to focus on the wrong part of that post 

Offer something else. Edit - not sure what you changed. Consider using strike through and italic font to show what you changed?

Group A and Group B does not mean very much.

And, yeah, there are some pretty chill evangelicals out there - though the current political sh*t show was very much supported by white evangélicas.  Queue the “prosperity gospel” brought up in the last (?) C4C thread. 

fixed it for ya Bill... :) 

Yeah - I think I see you brought the word  “liberal” into the technical discussion; quoted below. Personally, if it were an actual post, It violates rule #1.  No need there for a proselytizing filter. An admin worth their weight in salt would just remove it.

Regardless, hard to imagine a liberal taking such a hard-over stance about equipment.   Try again?

Once again, am at my post limit for this thread.

Christian Hesch wrote:

... but I can only take the OP of this thread seriously if, when I make a post about "hey liberal MtB'ers who *only* ride 26" hardtails, let's all ride our similar bikes!", he writes a ten paragraph diatribe about how a liberal 26" wheel riding MtB'er once killed someone, so all liberal people who like 26" MtB's are bad and should be banned. 

Christian Hesch wrote:

Fuggin A dude, listen to yourself and try replacing your chosen group with another group, and see how well it holds up.

Pretty sure we already did this in the thread. 

KD, correct, and it served to show how silly the OP's rant was. Bill fixed it for you again, you are right, since the CFC gal didn't explicitly say "only christians are welcome," I shouldn't have said "only"