brighid

1. Is it morally permissible to exclude a theist from the iidb moderation staff based solely on his/her belief in a God(s)?

2. Does ALL theistic belief (and thereby the summary dismissal of theists from consideration) make one incapable of performing the duties of moderator at iidb? If so, how does ones theism make one incapable of performing the following requirements (besides #1)? Here are the present criteria for being a moderator:

a. The person must be a nontheist. For our purposes, a nontheist is defined as someone who does not believe in a personal deity or deities. That definition should not exclude pantheists, nice pagans or nontheist Buddhists
b. An above average level of maturity and levelheadedness.
c. The ability to take criticism without taking it too personally.
d. The ability to use good judgment regarding specific posts and how those posts relate to the forum rules.
e. The ability and willingness to strive to be a cohesive force in our community.
f. A concern for the reputation and well-being of IIDB and the Secular Web.
g. The ability and willingness to check the forum every day h. Responsive to email and a willingness to publicly display an email address* in the profile

3. If not, what sort of theists/theism would you suggest is compatible with a secular vision (Unitarian Universalist or religious humanist come to mind) if any at all?


Brighid

Edited to add: for the purposes of this discussion I am operating in a user capacity only. Any editing will be done by the other moderators of this forum. If at any point you feel I am acting inappropriately either send me a PM, or contact one of the other moderators.

auto-da-fe

Brighid,

While it may not be morally permisible to disallow theist to become moderators here, it does seem logical. This is, after all, the Internet Infidels. I can forsee a great many problems with a thiest moderator reading some of the anti-religion rhetoric around here (some of it admitadly from me). Logic would dictate (and logic is more a theme around here than morals are) that we would want someone who seems to believe at least along the same lines as us, to be the moderator.

So no, I don't think it is moral, but logic (at least on these boards) are more important than morals.

Bree

I would have to ask the question "what purpose would this serve II?" What would be the reason behind such a decision, especially when we have so many non-theists that are capable and indeed willing to perform moderation duties? Are we looking at image-enhancement? A desire to be more even-handed? More fair? To be less like tyrannical fora like CF?

The Other Michael

For those who haven't seen it before, you may wish to read Richard Carrier's Defining Our Mission document before commenting upon this thread, as it will allow you to make a more informed statement.

cheers,
Michael

brighid

Right now I would really like to restrict the discussion to the moral questions of the OP and keep on track with that. However I would say if such an action can be determined to be immoral then the answer to your question "what purpose would this serve ii" I would say we (as an organization) should seek to do what is right for no other reason then for the sake of rightness. We should not do something solely to enhance our image, but I think it a worthy desire to be more even-handed, fair, less tyrannical and as well as eradicating any hypocrisy we might find in our policies and procedures.

Brighid

brighid

Can something be logical and immoral simutaneously? If it can should one favor moral consistency or logic?

Yes, this is the Internet Infidels but there is no present requirement of uniformity of thought in order to be a moderator. Again, I would really like to stick to the questions I asked because this conversation has many directions it can go in. I am, for the moment, solely interested in the morality of this decision based upon our mission and the moderator requirments as stated. Please restrict your comments in this way and after more discussion on the moral aspect of this I think it would be appropriate to examine the other logical avenues of this discussion.

Edited to add: Specifically how does theism affects ones ability to possesses above average level of maturity and levelheadedness, et al.

Brighid

Bree

Sorry brighid; feel free to delete my off-topicness.

auto-da-fe

Well, that would be a short debate. No, I don't think it is moral, but I do support it.

brighid

There is no need to delete anything and no apologies necessary, but I would really like things to stay focused. I do think your questions are valid and should be answered, but perhaps best after we have come to some forumlated conclusions on my questions.

Brighid

brighid

Do you think you would have the time to answers my other questions either yes, or no? (not meant in any sort of condescending manner, but with all sincerity.) I am looking for a consensus on all the questions at this time. It is important to where I would like this conversation to lead, although your answer alludes to that.

Thank you.

Brighid

Oppps ... hit the button to soon ... perhaps you mean to say that all of your answers are no?