A Question For Those on the Right by Ted Slater on 02/14/2008 at 9:09 AM

Focus on the Family holds pretty traditional beliefs about Scripture, God, government and family. As a ministry of Focus on the Family, Boundless also tends to be fairly conservative. That should surprise nobody.

I've noticed that a good number of those leaving comments on The Line hold more "progressive" beliefs about these things. Comments that are "pro-choice" and pro-Democrat, that hold much of Scripture to be myth/fable/metaphor, that are in favor of redefining marriage to include same-sex couples, that advocate global warming alarmism, that reject principles of biblical dating/courtship, that denigrate those who practice media discernment, that question the efficacy of the gospel, and so on -- these types of comments are not uncommon on The Line.

Personally, I'm fine with that. I'm happy that readers across the ideological spectrum are engaging the ideas being brought up by the Boundless team.

But I'm wondering if the consistent resistance to the ideas presented in our articles and posts is off-putting to those on the more conservative end of that spectrum. We want to serve all of our readers, but I'm concerned that we may be alienating some by allowing such disagreeable comments through.

So here's the question for our more "conservative" friends: Do you find some of the comment discouraging? Do you find yourself inclined not to visit The Line because of the argumentative nature of some of the discussions? Or are you more drawn in by the feisty tone of post-blog commentary, challenged and strengthened by the lively back-and-forth?

Please understand, dear readers -- this is really a question I have for our more conservative/traditional readers, especially those who don't comment much. I'd prefer that our more "progressive" friends sit back and observe for right now.

A Question For Those on the Right by Ted Slater on 02/14/2008 at 9:09 AM

Focus on the Family holds pretty traditional beliefs about Scripture, God, government and family. As a ministry of Focus on the Family, Boundless also tends to be fairly conservative. That should surprise nobody.

I've noticed that a good number of those leaving comments on The Line hold more "progressive" beliefs about these things. Comments that are "pro-choice" and pro-Democrat, that hold much of Scripture to be myth/fable/metaphor, that are in favor of redefining marriage to include same-sex couples, that advocate global warming alarmism, that reject principles of biblical dating/courtship, that denigrate those who practice media discernment, that question the efficacy of the gospel, and so on -- these types of comments are not uncommon on The Line.

Personally, I'm fine with that. I'm happy that readers across the ideological spectrum are engaging the ideas being brought up by the Boundless team.

But I'm wondering if the consistent resistance to the ideas presented in our articles and posts is off-putting to those on the more conservative end of that spectrum. We want to serve all of our readers, but I'm concerned that we may be alienating some by allowing such disagreeable comments through.

So here's the question for our more "conservative" friends: Do you find some of the comment discouraging? Do you find yourself inclined not to visit The Line because of the argumentative nature of some of the discussions? Or are you more drawn in by the feisty tone of post-blog commentary, challenged and strengthened by the lively back-and-forth?

Please understand, dear readers -- this is really a question I have for our more conservative/traditional readers, especially those who don't comment much. I'd prefer that our more "progressive" friends sit back and observe for right now.

Comments

[1. Beth L. said the following at 9:19 AM on Feb 14:]

1

Hi Ted-
Like you, I really enjoy engaging people with different beliefs and worldviews. And when the comments are just the exchange of ideas, I don't mind the "feisty tone of post-blog commentary". What I really don't appreciate is when either side of a debate sinks to personal attacks, or the comments become snide, and mean spirited.

[2. John said the following at 9:26 AM on Feb 14:]

2

I would say that it does get a little annoying, because the tone and purpose of many "progressive" commenters is simply argumentative and contrary simply for the sake of being contrary.

Not only that, they don't speak directly to points and questions.

They usually only pick the one thing that they are passionate about, ignoring other points, and often resort to ad hominem fallacies.

What I'd like to see is the Line help ALL visitors (left or right) be better readers and writers and logical thinkers. I personally think that you guys are well versed in these areas and could impart a great deal of knowledge to us.

There's nothing wrong with arguing, but being argumentative should be avoided.

Lastly, I would say, that it is not good to allow liberal ideas to be posted unchallenged. Some new believers could be easily swayed into wrong thinking.

[3. John D. said the following at 9:26 AM on Feb 14:]

3

I'm mostly on the conservative side, politically and religiously, though I have reservations about the war in Iraq and anti-terrorism policy, and I take "biblical" courting practices with a little grain of salt.

I say, fire away. Let it all hang out (subject to the editors' tolerant standards of decency and decorum). We may not convince each other, but the debate can be stimulating at its best, and it would be terribly boring if everybody agreed all the time.

[4. Kathryn said the following at 9:30 AM on Feb 14:]

4

progressive means being pro-Democrat?
-said the naive Australian

[5. Chris B. (VA) said the following at 9:42 AM on Feb 14:]

5

I consider my beliefs to be more traditional/conservative, and--except for the occasional disagreement about the practical application of media discernment--I find that I agree with Boundless/FOTF on virtually every issue.

When I first started reading the Line, I expected to mostly see comments from Christians who, for the most part, agree on the basics. I am still surprised to find that this is generally not the case, and I am disappointed to find people on every topic who seem to disagree merely for the sake of being disagreeable.

In my opinion the Line--and all online Christian communities--should strive for a higher level of discourse and civility that we find in the typical secular online forum; unfortunately, the individuals who comment (not the editors) on the Line usually seem to be unable to do that.

I do not have solution to these problems, but I sincerely hope that we can improve the atmosphere on the Line.

[6. Holly said the following at 9:44 AM on Feb 14:]

6

I enjoy all the comments, but it's sometimes off-putting when the attacks venture into personal territory instead of staying with the ideas.

Also, I'd encourage the Boundless staff (and readers) to remember that God-fearing, Bible-believing, Spirit-filled, whatever-else Christians can differ on things and still live in harmony and have fellowship and community. Politics, in particular, are not always black and white. Scriptural things, yes, let's make sure we're glorifying God by submitting to the authority of His written word, but in other things, let's let Grace season our thoughts and words.

Often it seems that the 'progressive' readers draw the 'conservative' readers/staff into anger and sarcasm, and I think that is at times a poor witness.

Again, let's glorify God by submitting to His Scriptural authority, but let grace shine through in all that we say and do, particularly in dealing with people who have differing viewpoints. Amen?

[7. Leann said the following at 10:03 AM on Feb 14:]

7

Yes, sometimes I don't even comment because I know that someone will inevitably disagree with me. That in itself is not a bad thing (however, I do not like confrontation but realize it's necessary at times)...it's just frustrating. We should all be about love and not fuss and fight over the details.

Titus 3:9: "But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless."

[8. David said the following at 10:03 AM on Feb 14:]

8

I find some "progressive" beliefs to be discouraging, simply because it shows the church's failure to teach.

[9. Mike Theemling said the following at 10:04 AM on Feb 14:]

9

Ted,

First off, I will say that I tend to be conservative in nature. A search of my prior postings would (I hope) certainly indicate this.

The point I'd like to get across though is that Conservative does not always = Christian.

Although I do share your concern that "progressive" culture can slowly taint non-negotiable Christian principles, I think we need to be careful where we choose are battles. Otherwise, the danger exists where we will lump all ideas from a particular source as "unChristian" even if it isn't.

Take for example global warming. I don't think this is a "Christian" issue at all. True, many who are very vocal about it tend to be against a lot of Christian ideology, but that doesn't necessarily negate the issue. Some believe it to be true, some don't, and others like myself listen to the arguments but are skeptical (the problem is that by the time we know for sure it'll be too late to do anything about it). However, even if global warming as traditionally described was completely a myth, how would that affect Christian living/theology? All the proposed solutions don't seem to be any attack on Christianity unless they insist we start tree worshiping.

However, an issue like same-sex marriage WOULD be a legitimate issue and it's right to publically be against it. The same could be said for the steady increase in pornography in mainstream media and advertising.

I will say though objectively that one thing that does disturb me is that sometimes a dissenting opinion would be met by a swift and almost insulting response by the editors. I could fish up examples if I really tried, but one that comes to mind is when Ted put words into another person's mouth. Ted's words were, "let me finish the sentence for you: killing of babies (or something like that)". No one likes having words being put into their mouth or words taken out of context. I'm not saying that editors should be totally silent, nor that they can't disagree but they should do so in a civil manner and speak to the issues and facts at hand. A big problem that conservatives have is that we are often viewed as speaking more with emotion than with reason. Sometimes the responses I've seen from conservatives just reinforce that stereotype.

I visit/post to the blog often because I want to find out what young adults are thinking and why they think that way. I also want them to think about things they haven't thought about before.

Finally, a note about being "conservative". If we look at it objectively, we all have succumbed to being less conservative over generations. Honestly, I doubt the apostle Paul would approve of our modern dating system yet many true Christians go along with it. Knee-high skirts and high heels would certaintly be frowned upon. And not to leave the men out, almost all of us would be called "radical" for shaving our beards.

Something to thnk about.

[10. Leah said the following at 10:05 AM on Feb 14:]

10

The problem I have with 'progressive' ideologies is that so often they are based on humanitarian points of view and not biblical ones.

Eg. it sounds nice and loving to include same-sex marriages, and to give women the right to abort if they think their child might be disabled, but those are not biblical perspectives.

Like Chris B, I am surprised at how often people disagree at what I thought were basics.

I do however think it was a bit unfair to assume all pro-Democrats are 'progressive' like you're describing... though I guess as an Australian I might not know, but from what i've read of comments previously it seems unfortunately like a typical Boundless stab at the Democrats.

[11. jess said the following at 10:09 AM on Feb 14:]

11

I echo Kathryn's comment about progressivism being the same as pro-Democrat. I am a registered Republican, but would change to Independent if it weren't so much paperwork and hassle. On most issues I guess I would be conservative, but I think in general we're all too quick to see someone's opposing view on, say, gay marriage, and write them off as a liberal and a Democrat. I don't think being a Christian is synonymous with being a Republican, or even a conservative. In the issue of gay marriage, isn't redefining marriage between a non-believing man and a non-believing woman still wrong? Personally I don't think marriage should really be a word that's in the Constitution at all. Indeed God is out to create believing people with strong hearts for God and His commandments...but is this really the same as creating Christian societies? I'm not so sure.

[12. Joy said the following at 10:17 AM on Feb 14:]

12

I have no issue with Christians who have different political views, etc. I believe that polite debate helps us all grow and learn. It starts to bother me when people accuse for no reason, are rude, or have an argument they can't back up. If you can find clear Scriptural support for your argument, then yes, let's discuss it. Otherwise I think the conversation needs to be taken elsewhere.

[13. DannieA said the following at 10:20 AM on Feb 14:]

13

My personal belief system is what you might call conservative...marriage between man and a woman, I don't believe in abortion, discernment in all mediums of media and entertainment, spiritual disciplines.
Politically my views fall in the moderate range and...so I'm unsure if you're looking for a post like mine or not, but I think there are some really offensive comments from the right and left that may discourage readers...or I may not comment on a particular post or whatever...
But I think in order to grow, people must be exposed to discussion, how else can one truly stand firm in their beliefs?

Ted..you've read my posts...I'm not sure where to draw the line at if I'm conservative enough or not...so you can post or not depending on who you want to post here, but those are my honest thoughts.
Thanks

[14. Nick T said the following at 10:28 AM on Feb 14:]

14

There are many times when I read a post and want to comment something simple like "I agree, thanks for posting that" but by the time I read down through the comments, I see that the author's intent has already been hi-jacked and it's now a debate about if the author should have said something and how that has bothered some people... and eventually I decide to just stay out of the quarrel.
So yes, it is off putting.
Sometimes it is because of pride in my own heart. Other times it is because it doesn't seem like much of a discussion is taking place, but more of an argument.

[15. Paul said the following at 10:30 AM on Feb 14:]

15

I personally like the fact that there's some debate on this forum. I'm for opening it up even further to debate between right and left. I'd just be happier to see both parties be more respectful of each other.

[16. Matt said the following at 10:32 AM on Feb 14:]

16

I'm a conservative and I read the articles because they're informative and I enjoy them. I have never been discouraged by the comments. I can always visit The Line without reading the comments. In fact, many times I'll read The Line because I want to take part in the comments - say what hasn't been said, stand up for what's right, challenge other's opinions, and be challenged right back. I think several commenters need a lesson in ettique, maybe I do too, but I don't think that should be forced from the top down. I like The Line just the way it is.

[17. Carrie (the original) said the following at 10:32 AM on Feb 14:]

17

They usually only pick the one thing that they are passionate about, ignoring other points, and often resort to ad hominem fallacies.
I agree with this and this is what often frustrates me with the comments that follow of good, thought provoking posts.
Now, I usually give them the benefit of the doubt: they don't have the time to sit down a carefully consider what is being put before them.
I think that it is safe to say that if you are inside of conservative Christian circles, you have heard much of what Boundless has to say and you have heard it being said in love.
Personally, I give the author's the benefit of the doubt. They are Christians and they are seeking to do things out of love for the Savior.
Some people just don't get it. They have had bad experiences inside the church and they think that people like the Boundless authors are to blame for it. So, they take it out on the Boundless authors.
It's short-sigthedness on their part. Something we are all guilty of. I'm learning that there are some blog posts that will inevitably have comments on them that I just don't need to read. I'm a a frequent enough reader to where I know what to expect.
If I think there is a chance I'll be enlightened, I'll read. If I can sense it's going to be a lot of short-sighted banter. I'll refrain.

[18. Adam T. said the following at 10:32 AM on Feb 14:]

18

Well, here's my take:

I've had a lot of experience on proper web discussion forums (as opposed to poorer formats like this one which were originally designed to accommodate comments and not debate). I also happen to live in an area without all that many conservative Christians in it.

Although I enjoy dialogue with people who hold widely differing views, I think there's a time and a place for it - and sometimes you want to get away from it.

Sometimes it grows tiresome to constantly spend your time arguing over things you consider foundational, when what you really wanted was a place where you could discuss issues in a relaxed, friendly manner with people who already share your foundational beliefs. (This is especially the case for those of us who live in more liberal parts of the world. For us, conservative Christian havens are often few and far between.)

I was initially attracted to Boundless because I thought it was one of these 'havens'. So, to answer the question:

Do you find some of the comment discouraging? Do you find yourself inclined not to visit The Line because of the argumentative nature of some of the discussions?

I'm inclined to answer 'yes'. Heated conflict is not what I come to Boundless for - I originally came because I thought it was going to have more of a 'fellowship' atmosphere.

[19. Matt said the following at 10:34 AM on Feb 14:]

19

Oh, I forgot to say something... Happy Valentines Day!

[20. Amir Larijani said the following at 10:35 AM on Feb 14:]

20

Ted: As a pro-life libertarian, I've got no problem with the lefties chiming in. To them, I say, "Bring it!"

Besides...as you can tell, even those of us on the right have been known to take you to the woodshed quite frequently.

[21. Randy said the following at 10:39 AM on Feb 14:]

21

I have found that I pretty much read every post here but I rarely come to comment for one basic reason: I can't subscribe to the comments of one particular post on the blog. I like it when blogs have the "Email replies" function so I can keep up with discussions I want to keep up with.

As for constant resistance... yes, I have found that some people are energized by the negative attention they generate. With WordPress I can flag key words to hold for moderation so those who get out of hand can be held back or even deleted. If two different commentors start going at each other I halt them both. I also try to redirect the comment flow to the purpose of the post.

La Shawn Barber says that in the end, We are responsible for everything that ends up on our blogs. People are free to speak their mind but the comments will go for the benefit of my readers. Sometimes it is an uncomfortable benefit (education and communication) but the comments that end up on my blog serve my purposes for my intended audience.

I hope that makes sense.

[22. Rachael said the following at 10:43 AM on Feb 14:]

22

Hi,

I guess I'd consider myself to be more on the conservative end because of the abortion and gay rights issues (the abortion issue is most important to me), but I comment a lot (not on the political ones), so my opinion is not representative of those who don't comment much.

I am not conservative on all issues, but I tend not to read the political comments as closely, honestly.

If people want to disagree it won't scare me away...

A lot of the other discussions, even on other topics get argumentative, though. Although that is completely unattractive to me, I think it's generally okay to allow for a free exchange of ideas (would be way too hard to moderate, and people would get mad if some comments were moderated too much), as long as things don't get too personal and nasty. I'd guess that lot of the nasty exchange on any topic might be considered off-putting to some if there is no respect, but hopefully eventually people will learn to tone down. Maybe it's part of the maturing process for some.

And for those who might be offended, I think they can just choose to read the articles and ignore the comments if they so choose...

Thanks for everything you do.

[23. Derek Wong said the following at 10:44 AM on Feb 14:]

23

I don't really read through too many of the comments on posts, but when I have, I did notice that there seemed to be an argumentative nature to the discussion. It's unfortunate, and I'll honestly say that it discourages me from joining in a little bit.

Disagreements are fairly good for promoting discussion, but I get the sense that there IS some argument just for argument's sake. That nobody is changing and we are always back where we started.

Unfortunately I don't have a whole lot of experience with the comments on your blog since I tend to be a RSS feed reader only. And I only comment on things that I'm interested in commenting on. Like this post I guess.

[24. Melody said the following at 10:44 AM on Feb 14:]

24

As a consistent conservative, I really enjoy all the opinions we see on the Line. Even though our views may not always be the same, I am challenged and encouraged to have a logical and Biblical reason for things I don't agree with. I admit that I sometimes live in a Christian bubble where most of my time is spent with people who have very similar views. I think it's healthy for all us to hear from people we would not normally get to know and hear other ideas and opinions.

[25. Josh said the following at 10:46 AM on Feb 14:]

25

I'd place myself on the moderate side of conservative, but conservative nonetheless. If I disagree with a Boundless post (as happens semi-frequently) its usually based on what I perceive to be a lack of common sense rather than political ideology.

[26. Laurie said the following at 10:47 AM on Feb 14:]

26

I am a conservative reader, and I don't comment much, but I love reading this blog. The argumentative and anti- Biblical comments do discourage me sometimes, but they don't make me stop reading this blog. I enjoy getting other perspectives. Boundless blog and articles always make me think about what I believe - I'm thankful for that!

[27. Christina said the following at 10:50 AM on Feb 14:]

27

First off, I think its important for every Christian to be faced with opposition, as it gives you the oppurtunity to question your beliefs and hopefully go to the bible to defend them. I would hope that if you find the Bible to contradict your own beliefs, than you would go about modifying them to be more consistent with scripture.

However, at times, no matter the scripture quoted and such, continued opposition becomes frustrating.

I do actually continue reading boundless simply because I don't like people agreeing with my point of view 100% of the time because I know I'm in error on some things, but the people I have available to talk to about them either don't respond most of the time, or are more inclined to agree with me either to please me or because they don't know any better.

I enjoy coming here to hear opposition and to see if my beliefs still stand in the light of another's interpretation of scripture. Of course, the bible is always my primary source of wisdom, and remaining consistent with that is really important to me.

[28. mindlab said the following at 10:57 AM on Feb 14:]

28

from a conservative Christian/constitutionalist. . .

First, I must say that ya’ll at Boundless have done a great job running this blog. You’ve created/enforced the best comment policy I’ve ever interacted with. It seems to allow all the thoughtful content and a minimal amount of vitriol; the thoughtlessness that it allows is inevitable.

I do enjoy reading and responding to thought-provoking or challenging comments from the "other side" ('progressive'/liberal/non-Christian/etc), but I've noticed that in most cases, the comment strings eventually descend into thoughtless responses (from both sides). This is discouraging to me; I wish there were some method (perhaps a comment rating system similar to slashdot's) to suppress the thoughtlessness and allow the thoughtful comments from both viewpoints to rise to the surface. Just a thought. . .

Thanks for a smashing job, keep it up, God Bless.
mindlab

[29. Ames said the following at 11:06 AM on Feb 14:]

29

I am quite conservative and traditional. For example, I feel uncomfortable about the possibility of being under the leadership of a president that could be female. So being an admitted "rightist", I am taken aback when comments posted seem very contrary to FOTF's beliefs and values. I get discouraged from leaving any comments because I am not good at debate. So yes, the comments do discourage me and I don't visit this blog very often. In fact, I only visited today because I thought there would be something about Valentine's Day. Anyway, thank you for asking about this. I appreciate that you care about these things.

[30. John said the following at 11:09 AM on Feb 14:]

30

I think the opposing views are fine, as long as there is closure to the topics where there can be closure. Instead of simply allowing liberal nonsense to have the last word.

[31. Dan Gill said the following at 11:13 AM on Feb 14:]

31

In all honesty, I just steer clear of the comments when they start to get silly.

[32. Eliza said the following at 11:15 AM on Feb 14:]

32

*WARNING*, not a conservative

Hi Ted,

I know by now you probably don't like me (even though I've tried my hardest to be nothing but respectful), because I am one of those "liberals". Even though your paragraph doesn't actually describe my beliefs or actions.

Are you curious why "lefties" come to this blog? Would you be willing to add a "Question For Those On The Left" post?

Also, what is the point of Boundless? Is it meant to be a safe place for politically like-minded individuals? I understand if this is the case and if I am not welcome. I am just curious.

[33. John said the following at 11:17 AM on Feb 14:]

33

"The point I'd like to get across though is that Conservative does not always = Christian."

True, but if you apply God's word to every area of your life, including politics, you will be a conservative.

I think this is where a lot of confusion comes in AND what a lot of the disagreements focus on.

People are very confused on the political threads because they do not even know what the different parties stand for nor that what they stand for is or isn't biblical.

There needs to be a Christian economics and politics website to educate people.

[34. NeedACatchyName said the following at 11:18 AM on Feb 14:]

34

I tend to be more moderate, so maybe I shouldn't be posting on this thread, but...

I think that the problem with refusing to post comments with dissenting opinions is it starts to defeat the whole point of allowing comments. That is, if only comments that are in agreement with the "official stance" are allowed, then comments just turn into a bunch of "I totally agree!" or "Great post" type comments which don't really contribute anything to the original article. At that point, you might as well just not have comments.

Having said that, it's not at all uncommon to disallow comments that disagree with the site's stances on issues. Most conservative political blogs will state straight up that they don't post comments that disagree with their party platform, and that the discussion is for refining ideas within the scope of conservative viewpoints, not for debating ideas with progressives. But in this case, they will clearly make this known so that people don't waste their time writing comments that don't get posted. This is why I think that if you restrict comments (and as I've said before, while I'm personally against restricting comments, I think it's entirely the prerogative of the editors to decide what type of comments to post), it's best to have a comment policy which clearly states what type of comments you'll accept and what you'll reject, so there's no angry posters who typed out a long post only to get it rejected.

Really, the best way to keep debate from getting out of hand is to close threads to new posts when the thread has gotten too contentious or off-topic. Most all internet forums do it and it seems to be the most sensible approach.

[35. cathys said the following at 11:19 AM on Feb 14:]

35

I don't post much unless the issue personally applies to me. As what most would consider a "conservative Christian", I find it hard to comment and be a part of the discussion. Many times because the discussions are so fierce and I don't oppose much of what you all say, no one responds. I would not want to attack anyone or cause a deep divide amongst believers.

But all the diverse opinions and views do make for interesting reading. And I do find encouragement amidst the comments if I read them all. :)

[36. Jacob Douvier said the following at 11:19 AM on Feb 14:]

36

I think it's worth asking ourselves (conservatives and liberals alike) if we're commenting for the sake grinding an axe or if we're honestly interested in discussing an issue. As I pointed out in a comment on the Darwin Day post, for most people, the creation/evolution debate isn't about evidence: it's about prior commitments. In this situation, it's not really that profitable to argue when you can't agree on what counts as evidence, proper method, etc.

So, in light of this, I would say that I am put off by the heated debates and tones that I see in the comments here and am substantially less likely to leave a comment if I think the conversation has already descended into absurdity. Civility is also a concern of mine. There is a lack of charity in many comments, which tells me that the people leaving them are not very mature, and thus not worth interacting with.

Finally, I venture that these reasons are exactly why Boundless should not have a forum. I think you will only see more of the same problems. As the saying goes in the blogosphere, "don't feed the trolls."

[37. Alex C. said the following at 11:23 AM on Feb 14:]

37

I'm registered independant, and my political beliefs have been shifting ever so slightly to the right over the last few years, partly due to what I've been learning in my economics classes.

I think its great that Boundless allows comments from all sides of the issues; I personally find it very irritating when a topic is filled with nothing but comments like "I totally agree! great job!", its boring and it doesn't really add anything to the issue, its just people patting eachother on the back. I'd prefer to have no comments at all, rather than comments ONLY from one side of an issue.

[38. BDB said the following at 11:25 AM on Feb 14:]

38

Well, I became a conservative in college by debating liberal students...and watching the consequences of their (social) choices convinced me that decisions have consequences.

I believe that Ted has gotten much better about giving a measured response to the "progressives."

What a number of conservative faculty members like to point out is that many people on the left never hear a dissenting voice, so they are shocked, SHOCKED when a conservative speaks up. I saw this when James Watt came to my college to speak. He was so conservative - but he could articulate the conservative theory behind all his policy positions. After the speech, about 30 of the liberal students I regularly debated with had him cornered at the cheese table. They were completely flummoxed because he really knew why he believed what he did. It was fascinating to watch. He'd simply thought it through much better than they had, and they didn't know what to do.

I believe you do a good job of moderating the blog, and the reason you get so many comments is the conflict. It's a VERY educated base of commenters.

I hate to admit it, but I didn't really understand the subtle differences between Calvinism and Arminianism before that fight erupted on this blog...

[39. Michela said the following at 11:26 AM on Feb 14:]

39

Since I can still count the number of comments I have posted on one hand, I'm assuming this applies to me. =)

To be honest, I have been quite put-off a few times while reading Boundless. I came looking for support, encouragment, and some challenging thoughts. While these things are present, sometimes it's disappointing (thanks Adam T and Nick T, I'm seconding those posts!) to see the misunderstandings and argumentative comments that are posted. Sometimes it seems like people argue just for the sake of arguing, and that is frustrating to me. Also, I don't think it's fair to the contributors, who put a lot of thought and care into what they write, to constantly dissect and misconstrue what they are trying to say. Case in point, the drama surrounding the Adoption thread... sheesh.

That being said, I keep coming back because I do like so much of what is going on here. And I certainly don't mind hearing different views and intelligent discussion. I just think that we should express our views carefully and lovingly. We single folk get enough crap from the world around us and the lies that we are fed, so it would be nice to have a bit more of an uplifting atmosphere here...

[40. Christina said the following at 11:27 AM on Feb 14:]

40

I am interested in "progressive" comments only if they are written with respect. Unfortunately, a lot of times they aren't and it discourages me from reading the rest of the comments. I would even say some comments are belittling. It surprises me that Christ believers can be so rude; please, guys, be more respectful to other people's opinions!

[41. Jo said the following at 11:30 AM on Feb 14:]

41

Well, as an English gal I don't come at things from a "Conservative v Democrat" or "Left v Right" perspective, however from my perceptions of Boundless I lean more towards conservative than liberal. Abortion and homosexuality are wrong; gun control and government healthcare and education are not. (Although my opinion of the NHS has gone down since I last posted on that topic.)

Anyway, my response to the post...

I would be greatly discouraged if Boundless didn't allow 'dissenting' views. That kind of censorship is always damaging. I would have absolutely no interest in commenting on a blog where everyone agreed with me. Questioning our faith is good. Having our beliefs ('religious' and otherwise) challenged is good. The above is a good example: I never questioned the UK's health system until I started reading Boundless, because I had nothing with which to compare it. Now I'm not saying I've actually swapped sides, but my mind has been opened by the conversations that happen here and I think that's a really positive thing.

Here's where I differ from John and others: I think someone who agrees with homosexuality CAN be a Christian. I think someone who agrees with abortion CAN be a Christian. I think they're completely and seriously wrong on these issues, and I think we should be very proactive in aiming to correct those beliefs, BUT all of us have areas where we're blind. None of us has the monopoly on truth, and we have the responsibility to value, listen to, teach and learn from each other. Even though the politically conservative tone here sometimes frustrates me as a non-American, I appreciate the range of views represented in the comments.

Debate is fine; I do however, wholly agree with this:
"I enjoy all the comments, but it's sometimes off-putting when the attacks venture into personal territory instead of staying with the ideas."

[42. Katie P. said the following at 11:34 AM on Feb 14:]

42

First of all, I really enjoy reading Boundless. The articles are thought-provoking and well-written, and I am so thankful to the staff for their dedication!

I am pro-life, pro-marriage, and generally conservative, although I would probably be described as a moderate by many who post here. And to be honest, although I read the Line frequently, I do not post often. I feel like no matter what I write, I will be attacked by someone for being either too conservative or too liberal. It really doesn't feel like a safe place to share my views, mainly because it seems like some people are far more concerned with being right than with finding the truth (not everyone, though). However, I know that its a personal concern, and that because I tend to be a fairly non-confrontational, can't-we-all-just-get-along kind of person, it is my own choice not to post much. I would not in any way want Boundless to stifle others opinions just because I am uncomfortable with the nature of their response!

[43. Elizabeth said the following at 11:40 AM on Feb 14:]

43

I would say I'm more inclined to read an article that I feel would ruffle some feathers in the comment section. I find in interesting to see the different perspectives that people in the church body can have.

[44. sarah said the following at 11:56 AM on Feb 14:]

44

Knowing that Focus (and Boundless) take a conservative/literal Biblical interpretation stance, I often wonder why people who so blatantly disagree with the theology read and comment so much on here.

Are you/they truly seeking to better understand the Bible, Christianity and your own faith? Or are you seeking to argue your point?

I personally agree with Focus' stance on the Bible and related issues. I don't mind comments that question or seek to understand/debate. It pushes me to study the Bible more and work through why I believe what I believe.

As others have commented, I don't appreciate comments that seem to argue for the sake of arguing - particularly when those arguments are not accompanied by Biblical backup.

If you are arguing your point based on an interpretation of Scripture - include that Scripture! Don't just say "as the Bible says" or have no backup.

[45. Bethany said the following at 12:09 PM on Feb 14:]

45

I am most probably not one of those people you want to comment here, so I understand if you don’t post this. I am usually to the left of Boundless, though I still consider myself moderate in the grand scheme of things. I certainly do not “hold much of Scripture to be myth/fable/metaphor,” and I intensely hope none of my comments ever came across as questioning the efficacy of the gospel. I love Jesus. And to boot, my husband and I don’t own a television (so I don’t think I’m one to “denigrate those who practice media discernment,” either).

I wanted to respond to your post because I have also been surprised at the opinions of many commenters. Perhaps people who disagree with a post are more likely to comment. Perhaps your demographic (young Christians) is more diverse than anybody supposed. Whatever the explanation, it seems I am far from being alone among your readers on many issues. I remember occasions when this caused me relief. It did not occur to me that this phenomenon may be alienating your [intended?] readership.

My observation is that reading Boundless for years (long before the Line) has indeed made me think through and defend my beliefs – if I disagree with you, then I must have a good reason. I would hope that continuing to read has also helped keep “religious conservatives” human in my mind --- not a mass of stereotypes, not ill-intentioned crazies, but people, people who love the same God I serve. I may not agree with you on a lot of things, but I will defend you against accusations of stupidity and hatred. Just read the responses to NYT’s op-ed by Nicholas D. Kristof, “Evangelicals a Liberal Could Love,” to remind yourself of the kind of anti-evangelical feelings that exist out there; or rather, don’t, and save yourself the stress.

Of course, I don’t believe that “liberals” are made of evil, either.

I believe it is good to listen to people with whom you disagree, all the more so if we are brothers and sisters in Christ. I will keep trying to listen closely and fairly. I appreciate being included in the conversation.

[46. Raj Sharma said the following at 12:26 PM on Feb 14:]

46

Question: When did calling an idiot an idiot become a personal attack?

I am one of those people who will question your salvation if you tell me that you are a pro-abortion (yes, pro-abortion as there is no such thing as pro-choice) democrat.

And yes, I find the comments quite distressing and thus have spent less and less time on the line.

[47. Jenny said the following at 12:30 PM on Feb 14:]

47

Hi, I'm one of your conservative readers that doesn't comment as frequently.

I would say I do like the debate aspect of the Line, except when it turns into personal attacks. I think it's good to hear opposing views because it challenges me to think about why I believe what I believe. Do my opinions line up with what Scripture says, or have I just believed what I've heard other people say? If I had a friend with these same thoughts/questions, would I be prepared to answer biblically?

Usually the reason I won't comment is either because I'm not particularly interested in the topic or because my view has already been represented in the responses. But occasionally I won't comment because there is such an overwhelming percentage of the commentors who don't believe what the Bible says about a certain topic. It feels like it would be useless to add my thoughts. However, I've been convicted that that is the very place a biblical perspective is most needed.

The sermon at church last night was about how teaching others what we know from the Bible is a very important part of growing in Christ ourselves. The Christian body isn't designed for absorbing information and keeping it to ourselves. As we interact with others and build each other up, the body as a whole becomes stronger and better able to work as a unit. "As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another." (Proverb 27:17) Teaching others is one of the best ways for me to really learn and understand something myself.

So as long as I'm still reading the Line, I'm going to try to do better in making sure the truth of Scripture is represented in the comments. The word of God is powerful. (See Hebrews 4:12) If the Holy Spirit brings to mind a verse that my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ--and those who aren't yet--need to hear, I need to be obedient and bring it to the discussion, and let God work from there.

Although, as my posts tend to be lengthy, others of you who know the truth might speak up to keep me from posting a really long comment! :oD

[48. erin said the following at 12:46 PM on Feb 14:]

48

I have to admit that if I do comment on Boundless, it's usually on those posts that are less likely to lead to conflict and debate. I get frustrated with the way some people appear to comment just to get a rise out of people, so I feel the best way to handle that is to ignore them.

I do think that all sides of the political spectrum should remember that all viewpoints should be treated with respect; even if you don't agree with the person, there's a way to express your viewpoint without resorting to personal attacks or immature insults.

[49. Bethany said the following at 1:04 PM on Feb 14:]

49

I have no issues with good healthy debate and think we all have things to learn from each other. But it seems that oftentimes the "liberal-leaning" commenters overwhelm the spirit of the original blog and clog up the comments section with not kind or well-thought out comments. Debate as defined by "wikipedia" is:

"a formal method of interactive and position representational argument. Debate is a broader form of argument than logical argument, since it includes persuasion which appeals to the emotional responses of an audience, and rules enabling people to discuss and decide on differences, within a framework defining how they will interact.

Informal debate is a common occurrence, but the quality and depth of a debate improves with knowledge and skill of its participants as debaters."

It would seem that comments could be monitored a little closer so as to get rid of those that are mean-spirited and attack the other commenters, instead of debating their ideas so that as this definition says, the debate would improve with the knowledge and skill of the participants.

Simple answer: Anytime anyone is being agressive and hostile, I won't post and I cringe to even read responses, because any further posts are not usually thought-out, beneficial, loving, or of intelligent matter.

[50. Matthew said the following at 1:12 PM on Feb 14:]

50

I'd describe myself as strongly conservative on a lot of things (though not all, and probably I tend to express my more liberal opinions when I comment.) Honestly, if anything puts me off it's people who say (or insinuate) that if we are liberal on issue X, Y, or Z we must not be discerning Christians. The liberal comments get nasty sometimes, but I feel like some of the conservative ones (especially those from John) tend to be the nastiest. If there is any more editing or protection of the comments, I would like to see it less based on ideology and more based on the level of venom, bitterness, or mean-spiritedness of the posts.

[51. TN1 said the following at 1:21 PM on Feb 14:]

51

The Line is just a blog. People are free to comment and say whatever; it doesn't mean all of it should be taken seriously. I don't see the comments here as being any different from news websites that allow for comments at the end of articles.

[52. Louise said the following at 1:23 PM on Feb 14:]

52

Okay, Eliza weighed in before me so I'm not the first non-conservative to comment on here.

Mr. Slater, could you be so kind as to point out the discussion containing the comments which "denigrate those who practice media discernment?"

I found my way to the "I am a bratwurst" discussion of Nov. 2007. The comments addressed the issues of how to practice such discernment and why to do so, but I did not see any comments that denigrated the concept in any fashion.

Are you perhaps referring to a different discussion? If so, which one?

Thank you,

Louise

[53. Natasha said the following at 2:04 PM on Feb 14:]

53

Yeah, I do find that the negative comments sometimes hinder my desire to add my own (comment). Often, it seems as though those who comment (for example, in the evolution/creation debates) don't really want to seek out the truth, but just air their opinions. In situations like these, I tend to refrain from adding my own comments because I figure that they've already heard the facts/truth (from multiple other posters) and now it's God's job to speak to their hearts. I'm not intending to be rude, but the verse "pearls before swine" is what I think of.

I also agree with some of the previous posters on this topic that all of us who post on Boundless should try to be more civil and focus on seeking out God's truth, instead of scoring points off your opponent in the debate.

:)
With love in Christ.

[54. Elizabeth said the following at 2:27 PM on Feb 14:]

54

As a conservative Canadian (not a member of the Conservative Party, mind you. I prefer the Christian Heritage Party.), I must say I don't mind reading comments that are opposed to my beliefs. I myself don't comment too much because I find that I often engage in debate merely for the sake of proving someone wrong, rather than for the sake of showing that person, in love, that what he believes is contrary to Scripture and is hurting his Christian walk.
As for other people's opinions... The intentions are much more important to me than the actual beliefs in this case. I will respect (though not agree with) a liberal who has thought through his position clearly and tells it respectfully much more than a conservative who is disrespectful, rude, and says things without any evidence to back up his beliefs. So I think that it is fine for Boundless to post differing opinions, but I think that all who comment should do so with respect, love, and clarity.

[55. Bethany D. said the following at 2:31 PM on Feb 14:]

55

It's very interesting and informative to have a broad range of opinions represented, but the manner in which they are presented is crucial to whether or not I'm willing to comment. For me to feel like it's worth making a contribution, I need to be confident that A) people will consider the whole of my comment rather than quoting one snippet out of context, B) that good reasoning and logic will be our weapons of debate, not strawmen armies and emotional attacks, and C) that I'm actually addressing the main topic at hand. For comparison, I like the way that livejournal blog comments are laid out in threads, so that you can have several mini-debates to split out different points in the discussion, rather than trying to go four ways at once as occasionally happens here on The Line. It's frustrating when the original blog is on one topic, a discussion started around a related topic or two, and then it got hijacked off in some other direction completely; I wind up not being sure which to respond to - so I don't respond to any.

[56. Anne said the following at 2:32 PM on Feb 14:]

56

I don't have a problem with hearing from "liberals".

I do get frustrated with the length and lack of thoughtfulness of many comments. Less is more.

Many folks would do well to be "quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry."

[57. Jo said the following at 2:34 PM on Feb 14:]

57

First, I consider myself a conservative. I do not agree with abortion or homosexual marriage, but at the same time, I agree with more of the liberal ideas about foreign politics.

I agree with everyone who has made the point that a political conservative does not necessarily equal Christian. There are many Christians who disagree with the war in Iraq.

Also, people are more likely to post when they disagree with something than when they do agree.

[58. MarkB said the following at 2:40 PM on Feb 14:]

58

Ted,

I would be one of those more conservative types but my world view would be too difficult to describe given the broad arenas of life and just how I perceive or value them. Let's just say I'm a Christ-follower to the end, but could easily wish much of the "religious church structure" to crumble. I'm all for a relevant church but just don't leave His word compromised.

I also believe the lines of scripture draw lines in our politics and both Parties are sorely lacking in supporting my faith. But as one that then measures the weights on a balance, who is disheartened by the corporate powers and oil on one side and godless social policies of the other, immorality in both, my dark glasses keep me strongly leaning to the right.

But does that effect my desire to engage other thoughts? No, not in the least. Do I get discouraged with professing Christ followers that seem to have a signficantly different outlook? Yes, yes I do. But hopefully it's brilliant windows on the internet, like Boundless.org, that help to reform and reshape those views, causing us to rethink our beliefs and our actions often and repeatedly.

You, brilliant boundless brethren, are on the frontlines of the battle. Stay the course. Persevere by asking intelligently, seeking diligently, knocking persistently. If influences more that it seems, and it will effect changed minds!

[59. Jonathan from Canada said the following at 2:41 PM on Feb 14:]

59

Everywhere we go, we're bombarded with left-wing anti-Christian propaganda. The schools have been taken over, the government is complicit, progressive billionaires are throwing money at shadow groups, the media is about 90% liberal, judges have bought into their law making power trips... so Boundless being hijacked by lefties doesn't really surprise me.

The end times will be filled persecution. There will be false prophets with sweet tongues. They will claim the power to remake the world a better place, to change the very nature of man. "Yes we can" they will say, when only God can do those things.

So, I've basically sat out on the comments section for a good half year now. I don't need to read liberal propaganda any more than I already get from EVERYWHERE around me. Don't worry editors, I still love you.

[60. Kellie said the following at 2:46 PM on Feb 14:]

60

I seem to comment more on the posts I disagree with, so it may seem that I'm liberal leaning, but I'm actually fairly conservative. Many of the posts on the line seem to be more of the writers opinions rather than biblical principles....and even conservative Christians don't agree on everything.

[61. Alyene said the following at 3:45 PM on Feb 14:]

61

I agree with Adam T. in the idea of Boundless as a haven. It has helped build and rebuild biblical applications which the rest of the world seems to constantly attempt to tear down. I also support John's recommendation to "not allow liberal ideas to be posted unchallenged."

[62. kaarina said the following at 4:59 PM on Feb 14:]

62

I find the term "progressive" misleading. One must be going somewhere clearly defined to make progress. I find most people don't have a clearly defined political worldview.

That said, I, a "right-leaning moderate" (leave my constitutional rights, my firearms, and the economy alone), think Boundless Line places much too much emphasis on "left" and "right" ideology. I think this attitude galvanizes people on both sides of the fence into a them-us attitude when in many cases we essentially agree on the problem, but not on the solution.

That said, I think if Boundless spent more time exhorting gentleness of reproach and humility and discernment, and less time making politically contentious posts which use sarcasm to tear down "the other party", you might find posters more kindly to each other as they feel less need to defend themselves. At times I feel myself on the defensive for being a moderate independent (presumably not "right" enough for Boundless though I'm against infanticide, not an advocate of gay marriage, and want to avoid socialist principles and programs from eating the budget), as if somehow wishing to avoid being blinded by party loyalties to see the truth most clearly in all circumstances is a flaw.

[63. bob said the following at 5:09 PM on Feb 14:]

63

In many ways, I'm rather conservative (particularly regarding scripture), though I suppose I have a few "progressive" ideas as well.

So now that my basic ideology is clearly established, here's my opinion. I believe that the moderators should not censor posts based on the ideas contained in them. While the concern about new believers being misled is valid, I believe that they will encounter false ideas elsewhere regardless of whether they are posted here or not.

Another concern may be that people will see the ideas put forth in comments as endorsed by this site. However, the comments are user-generated, and I believe that users will make that distinction and understand that the comments reflect the views of the readers of this site.

One of the things I value most about this site is the open conversation that allows everyone to present their own view. I believe that without this open discussion, this site will not be as valuable to its readers.

In conclusion, I believe that posts should not be censored based on the ideology presented. However, I think it is perfectly reasonable to censor comments that attack others rather than making a clear case for the poster's point of view.

[64. KES said the following at 5:11 PM on Feb 14:]

64

I'm definitely on the right, and I just wish that the commenters on here would grow up a little, apply some critical thinking skills, and write with sincerity. I'm tired of the snide comments, the blatant misinterpretation, the assumptions of what people are "really" saying, and just plain bad arguing skills.
"Logic! Why don't they teach logic in the schools today?"

[65. Marc said the following at 5:24 PM on Feb 14:]

65

I am a conservative Republican who occasionally has "third-party" tendencies, if that makes any sense...

Anyways, there are a few regulars who comment on the blog-posts and I wonder, "If you seemingly hate most everything The Line posts, why do you keep coming back?!"

There are also certain attacks on denominations that do not impress me. For example, I remember reading someone proclaiming that they were a Presbyterian and that Baptists need a lot of grace. And I just thought to myserlf, "Excuse me?!"

I, personally, am a Baptist, but you'll never see me slam a Prebyterian, Luthern, Methodist, or any denomination.

[66. Jeff L. said the following at 5:33 PM on Feb 14:]

66

I think I belong in the moderate camp of readers who do not post often(if ever). I love coming to Boundless for the advice on relationships, developing God-loving families, and for the encouragement to dig deeper in my faith. Much more often than not I agree with the writers' interpretation of scripture, but there are times I disagree. If I agree, I will often not bother to comment; if I don't agree, there is a greater chance that I will want to weigh in on the topic.

I wholeheartedly agree that when posters begin to lose their tempers and stop treating each other with love and respect, something needs to happen. We must hold each other accountable to Christ's standards of love.

Honestly, I think politics can hamper us in our call to bear fruit. Drawing lines between Christians on either side of the aisle does not bring us closer to Christ or to each other. I loved it when Leann quoted Titus 3:9: "But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless."

In 2Timothy 3:16-17, we read that "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." We are commanded by God to use his word to hold each other accountable. It is great when we do this for each other as brothers and sisters in Christ.

But we should feel free to disagree with each other when discussing topics which are not explicitly covered in God's Word. He doesn't explicitly tell us in scripture if we're allowed to kiss before marriage, or if Jackie Chan movies are too violent, or if we should allow our kids to say "Dangit" or if the world is facing an environmental crisis. Here, writers can expect to have healthy opposition to their views from people who love Christ just as much as they do.

Wow. What a rambling post. "Yes" to healthy debate. "No" to mean-spirited remarks. "Yes" to mutual love and respect. Finally, Ted, a question: why write "Personally, I am fine with [comments that disagree with Boundless' position]", but in the next paragraph, question if Boundless should allow "such disagreeable comments through"?

[67. Ellie Biswell said the following at 5:49 PM on Feb 14:]

67

Because I agree with Boundless on most issues, I don't feel like there's much to discuss. If I disagreed I would probably post, but as it is, I just appreciate the wit and wisdom Boundless provides every week.

[68. farmer Tom said the following at 5:54 PM on Feb 14:]

68

First my vitae. I am a born again Christian fundamentalist, separatist, Constitutionalist, husband, father of four, leader in my church, Jr. High Sr High Sunday School teacher, youth leader, mechanic, gun owner, hunter and when I'm not doing that I work for a family farm operation. Oh, and in the evening I also interact with the a small segment of the public by blogging here and at other blogs with a Biblical or Constitutionalist/libertarian worldview.

My use of the farmer tag is intentional attempt to play on the prejudices of the educated and intelligent who tend to look down on those who make their living doing manual labor. I like farming because I am a results oriented type person. There is nothing more satisfying than planting a field in the spring and seeing that field yield immense returns in the fall. Nothing is more satisfying than helping a cow give birth to a new calf. Yet people here and at most other blogs I visit assume that because I'm a farmer I am an ignorant, knuckle dragging, stupid, mouth breathing, hick. Only some of that is true. I have a college education, I am by far the most well read person in all of my circle of friends, scattered over several states.

Why all the drivel?

Getting to Ted's question. As a Christian, it drives me to the point of pulling my hair out, to come to a blog with a Christian worldview, and see people who claim the name of Christ post things that are overtly, blatantly, irrefutably, contrary to the written Word of God. I did not spend those years in Bible college, and accumulate a library of several hundred volumes to let some poser claim things from Scripture which are patently untrue. When I see false theology, it's like waving a red flag in front of a bull. I can't stop myself.

The disheartening thing is how often I see "christians" posting things here which are clearly WRONG. Jesus Christ is truth. In Him and through Him we find truth. To let comments or ideas full of untruths go unchallenged is contrary to the very principles that Jesus Christ represents.

If you do not know the Word, you can not know truth. The Word is Truth. And the place which helps us find Truth is in God's revealed Truth, His Son Jesus Christ. What Jesus Christ has to say about anything then is of ultimate importance because, Jesus Christ is Truth.

Another thing that trips my trigger is seeing young people in college or just out of college spouting the propaganda that some college professor or teaching assistant told them in some lecture hall. Many of the posters here have done little actual thinking about the issues, instead they are parrots, repeating whatever someone else they liked has said. Or even more infuriating is seeing "christian" quote or cite atheist or liberal sources as evidence. If your using the arguments of those opposed to the God of the Bible, and His Authority, you need to reevaluate your relationship to the Creator God.

And all of these things fit, together. If you reject God as the Creator, you cannot logically believe that "We hold these truths to be Self-Evident, that all men were endowed by their Creator, with certain unalienable right, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness(Property)." So then you also reject the foundational document for our system of Government. You are a materialist, you believe that government power comes from survival of the fittest, from superiority of race? intellect? power?

Am I "put off" by the liberal, godless, christians who post here, ....yes. However, that also makes it a tremendous challenge. If I can help one person here, come to a more complete knowledge of the Truth, Jesus Christ, then it is worth the aggravation. Is it discouraging.....yes. Because the evidence is that the Church of Jesus Christ is failing to teach its young people the Truth. The Church is raising up a generation that does not truly know the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

And one more thing. I find the constant discussion of tone to be especially grating. First it is difficult to establish tone on the written page anyway. But, when someone says something stupid, ignorant, unBiblical, to not react with some passion, righteous anger, or zeal would be an act of acceptance of that idea. I correct my children when they are in error. Depending on the urgency of the situation or error, my tone will change. If they are crossing a busy street without looking, I might yell to get their attention. Jesus literally threw the money changes out of the temple in His righteous anger at their actions. Showing a reaction is sometimes necessary to stress the importance of the issue being discussed.

A long post to say, you'll are doing a good job, keep it up. I'll keep coming around as long as it is OK to discuss issues and ideas in a open and Biblical manner.

[69. A.M.C. said the following at 5:58 PM on Feb 14:]

69

Ted, I have a question about your definition of "conservative" here. Are you assuming the "U.S. definition," i.e. favoring more restrictions on moral/social issues but favoring fewer restrictions on fiscal/economic issues? I'm raising this question because I've noticed that most of the "liberal stances" that you've mentioned are happen to be moral and social issues, or at least theological stances (e.g. "pro-choice," opposition to Biblical authority, supporting same-sex marriages, anti-Biblical dating/courtship, anti-media discernment, anti-efficacy of gospel).

Well, you might have already noticed from my previous posts, such as the one in unChristian, that I would consider myself myself to be "leaning liberal on economic issues, but leaning conservative on social/moral issues." Does that mean I risk being considered an "enemy" of Boundless Line just because I happen to favor more governmental intervention on economic issues (which would be "liberal" per the U.S. definition), even though I'm pro-life, pro-Biblical authority, against same-sex marriages, pro-Biblical dating/courtship, pro-media discernment, and pro-efficacy of gospel, etc. (i.e. generally conservative on moral and social issues, and perhaps most important, non-negotiable theological stances)?

==> In case you're wondering why I'm currently leaning "liberal" on economic issues... here's some background information in my own defense.

* Since I started taking my Christian faith seriously while in college, I noticed a major internal change in myself over the past two years-- namely, I became more "polarized" in my stances of issues. On social, moral, and theological issues, I became noticeably more conservative, mostly due to taking the Scripture more seriously and thus, applying my faith to those real-world situations. I could even tell that the PCUSA church that I attended back during high school was teaching things that are nice to hear but aren't necessarily true to the Gospel. In fact, after attending a PCA church close to my college campus for the last two years, I liked it enough to be willing to become an official member (this happened on 2/10/2008, actually)-- and I must say that one of the reason why I joined is that I deemed its theology to be more conservative (should I say more accurate?)

* At the same time, though, I also found myself becoming more liberal on economic and "social justice" issues. Curiously, that might also be the direct result of taking the Scripture seriously (take Isaiah 58 for example). And since about a year ago, I actually started sensing that I might be called to settle in an inner-city neighborhood after college to "serve the city and its people" if this is really what God's calling me to do, even (to my parents' dismay, who admittedly have sacrificed quite a bit financially to allow me to emigrate to the U.S. back then) to the point of being willing to give up financial security and social prestige in the process. [Translation: I'm taking literally the Biblical idea of following Jesus at all costs.]

* Sure, I do agree with fiscal conservatives that charities work better than government aid, and that faith-based rehabilitation programs are often far more effective than "secular" programs (I know that this is true from experience, i.e. volunteering with Christian service organizations). But I would personally be okay with (at least in principle) taxing the rich more, implementing universal healthcare (if there's ever a way for that to work in the U.S.), or perhaps funding schools with more than just local property taxes, for example.

==> I won't elaborate on the arguments for these stances for now, because that's not my main intention. My point is that I might sometimes take a more "liberal" stance on a certain issue that I don't consider to be non-negotiable for a Christian (such as the ones listed above), if I believe that doing so will actually better reflect God's will. But unlike the "stereotypical liberal," I'm open to the possibility that my interpretation can be dead wrong at times and would be willing to change my stances afterwards.

The problem, however, is that it seems to me that the notion that "liberal comments, although allowed here due to free speech, are frowned upon" is telling me to shut up. Now it seems as if I'm being persecuted by both liberals and conservatives at the same time. Is it only me, or are there people out there who also feel this way? :-(

[70. Katie said the following at 6:24 PM on Feb 14:]

70

I like the back-and-forth--it sharpens me. BUT it does make me less likely to chip in...I like to keep my head intact upon my shoulders....not snapped off in a fit of misunderstanding. :) (Maybe I should learn to be more thick-skinned anyway, eh?)

[71. Matt said the following at 6:40 PM on Feb 14:]

71

"Do you find some of the comment discouraging? Do you find yourself inclined not to visit The Line because of the argumentative nature of some of the discussions?"

Absolutely. What I find most discouraging is that the conservatives are often just as argumentative if not more so.

I would like to be able to think of Boundless a haven. A haven where people are above acting like jerks and launching personal attacks at others who don't hold their views.

[72. Drew said the following at 7:10 PM on Feb 14:]

72

I find the articles on the line to be encouraging. I often skip the comment section because it tends to always argue with the traditional position. It is discouraging to see so many people that just do not believe the Bible, and are unwilling to listen to it. Then wander why they have so many problems. However it is helpful to know were others that call them selves Christians are coming from. Even if they are wrong.

[73. Melissa S. said the following at 7:49 PM on Feb 14:]

73

Yeah, I admit that it was disappointing and off-putting to discover that most of the blog comments were seemingly anti-everything this website stands for. Like finding out that the "Furry Feline Club" consists mostly of cat haters and a few dog lovers.

That's just my overall impression...maybe if all comments were tallied the "anti" comments wouldn't actually be so overwhelming.

Maybe most people here are more logical and Christian than they seem, or maybe this is the place they will learn to integrate their Christian worldview with everyday life. But for the most part, comments seem to struggle against nearly everything that is said. Sometimes I don't know why people read this blog since they don't really like much that is posted on it.

I would prefer to see comments that provide more actual contribution to and expansion on blogs. And comments that oppose a Christian worldview should be answered.

And it is especially irritating to see comments that say Boundless has no business to post on this or that topic. The purpose of Boundless, according to "About Us" is to integrate a Christian worldview with all of life. That covers everything! Not to mention that a non-subscription blog like this can post on anything they want to!

Also, there is a difference between "conservative politically" and "conservative Biblically". It's really mystifying to see so many comments make everything about strictly politics and not the underlying principles and issues(like all the global warming drama).

To go with the global warming example: it's not about the politics of global warming. It's about finding out what is true or false and being responsible with that information. Positions on global warming or anything else aren't taken because they are politically conservative. They are taken because of a Christian worldview, such as faithfulness to truth. The point isn't to automatically reject all aspects of global warming that comes out of a Democrat's mouth and to automatically accept whatever comes out of a Republican's mouth. The point is to examine everything that comes out of both sides for the sake of finding out what is true and consistent with a Christian worldview.

I enjoy the back and forth. But I stop enjoying the back and forth when it doesn't seem that people are trying to integrate Christianity with everyday life but only want to resist everything the Line says.

On the other hand, maybe those people aren't the point. Maybe the comments exist for the people who are trying to live a Christian life...to get practice with even more media discernment? lol

I know this comment is agonizingly long but it was kind of a relief to be able to say some honest thoughts from the dark side in a "protected" area. I hope it's not too inflamatory or anything. If so, then it's just for the Line writers! Thanks!

[74. Kelly said the following at 8:03 PM on Feb 14:]

74

Is it just me, or has The Line become more and more political? I find terrifying the implication that supporting one party over another means you're 'less-Christian' or 'wrong'. There's been quite a bit of outright hatred on this blog directed towards certain groups. "Hate the sin, not the sinner," but some of the posts cross this fine line.

Additionally, a lot of the readers here are non-Americans. You do manage to alienate quite a lot of us with rants about Democrats or Republicans. One country's internal politics is hardly the 'entire world' that God is interested in. I've lived in several countries and may return to the US, but what about those who will never live there? (Focus on the Family defines its mission as "worldwide".)

Finally, I agree that some threads can get particularly nasty. Particularly when ONE LINE of a person's comment is quoted out of context, or people are told flat-out that they're terrible. What happened to politeness? It's not hard to say, "I appreciate your point of view but disagree for these Biblical reasons (exact verses would be nice for those of us who are still learning more about the Bible).

[75. Becky said the following at 8:24 PM on Feb 14:]

75

*first time commenter*
As someone who leans slightly left of center, my comment probably isn't welcome here.

Jesus was the only perfect human being, and it stands to reason that the rest of us will be wrong sometime. How are we supposed to figure out when we're wrong if we shut out those who disagree?
There seem to be quite a few things the Bible doesn't explicitly dictate (eg dispensationalism vs. Covenant theology), and it seems that it would be most Christ-honoring to seek to show His love during disagreements than to bash the opinions of others.

I can't speak for everyone center and further left, but I personally spent four years at a very conservative Christian college constantly being criticized and shunned by students who believed me worse than a pagan , because my faith led me to believe differently about my responsibilities as a woman, the importance of public education, and how Christians should steward God's creation. Over the course of four years I suffered deep wounds that made me struggle to see the Church as more than just her biting, vicious parts. I believe many Boundless readers on both the left and right ends of the spectrum have been treated with such disrespect from those who disagree that they have a very difficult time listening to others' positions.
I enjoy seeing the different opinions voiced on the Line, however, I ache for the body of Christ when disagreement dissolves into savage attacks.

[76. Becky said the following at 8:27 PM on Feb 14:]

76

--as an aside, I think God is big enough to make Scripture *both* metaphorical and factual. One doesn't necessarily preclude the other.

[77. John said the following at 8:36 PM on Feb 14:]

77

Exibit A: People just don't know what constitutes liberal/left thinking nor that liberal/left is not biblical.

“Abortion and homosexuality are wrong; gun control and government healthcare and education are not."

You're 2/5ths of the way there. Or maybe half way. It's hard to say. Who would argue that education is bad? :)

It would not be censorship if the Line decided to prevent ANY post whether left or right.

His word requires we have an answer (defense) for the hope we have AND that we tear down vein philosophies.

We should know what we know well and why. Having the enemy's lies infront of you and countering them should increase your understanding of your own faith.

Is this the place for that? Hm.

The sad thing is that the libs posting here don't want to consider the biblical perspective.

And supposed conservatives are more concerned with misperceived tone than truth.

Seriously, it gets tiresome having to point this out. Several individuals keep making the assertion that I do this or that, yet not one example to back up the assertions.

Stop bringing me up and focus on the OP.

[78. Leah said the following at 9:25 PM on Feb 14:]

78

Eliza,

At an attempt to answer your question, I think Ted was simply thinking that conservatives probably expect to find a relatively friendly, welcoming and fostering environment on a conservative blog like The Line, and when they don't, he's wondering how that affects them. So I don't think it's a matter of liberals not being welcome, just a matter of how much opposition the staff allow to conservative beliefs. (That applies to NeedACatchyName too- I don't believe Ted is looking at banning opposition!)

I think it was explained by Michela when she said I came looking for support, encouragment, and some challenging thoughts. While these things are present, sometimes it's disappointing to see the misunderstandings and argumentative comments that are posted.

That was my impression anyway :)

[79. DT said the following at 10:08 PM on Feb 14:]

79

It absolutely makes me uncomfortable. People have argued with me in the comments over conservative things I've said. I expect more from Focus on the Family readers, frankly. So many places I visit on the Internet are full of people completely unlike me who like to pick fights with those of us who are religious conservatives. It gets tiresome.

[80. Rachael said the following at 10:38 PM on Feb 14:]

80

Hmmm. This is an interesting question! I think that Boundless articles do a wonderful job of addressing issues relevant to Christians who desire to live according to God's will as revealed in the Bible. It is very encouraging to have a forum available to hash out the details pertaining to this "quest,"if you will. Personally, I think it is healthy and biblical to be open to thinking through our faith and obedience with fellow believers. In a certain sense, it is imperative to continue exhorting one another, and this a valid way to do so. In that sense, anyone who claims to be a Christian deserves to be treated as one, i.e. to be challenged by fellow believers to obey God and submit to His Word. There is a danger in thinking that a politically "conservative" affiliation somehow safeguards Christians from having to be diligent in studying the scriptures and seeking God's guidance to show themselves approved. Let's not grow complacent in our affiliations! So long as we as individual Christians take care to submit our own comments and conclusions to God, we have nothing to fear and much to gain from communicating with even the most "liberal" of Christians...And should any non-Christians stumble upon our conversations, what a blessed opportunity for each of us to act as an ambassador for Christ with all meekness and gentleness!

[81. Brandon said the following at 11:40 PM on Feb 14:]

81

I don't mind the debates as long as they are civil. Some of the things that are said are definitely not bibically based. Even from those saying they go to and are actively involved in what they call a church.
My only wish is that good Bible believing Christians who know and can handle the truth would speak up. The discouraging thing to me is when I read a bunch of lies that are spoken as truth and no one responds to it.

[82. Ariana said the following at 12:22 AM on Feb 15:]

82

Perhaps some of the negative comments from the "liberals," are due to the tone of the original post? An idea can be stated in a way that is itself divisive, or topics can be chosen that everyone knows people disagree on. For instance, even if I don't believe in human-caused global warming, I might just feel the need to play devil's advocate if Boundless publishes a post talking about how plainly obvious it is that all of the global warming talk is just a bunch of hype. It really isn't that black and white, and to write as if it is is, I think, somewhat presumptuous.

I think that it helps conversations like these to posit ideas in a way that does not inherently judge the hearts of those who disagree. In real conversations, you have to suspend judgment until you have listened to the other person long enough to make sure you understand just where they are coming from. I think we too often make conclusions when we probably should spend much more time asking follow up questions.

[83. Ellie said the following at 12:39 AM on Feb 15:]

83

I like the fact that the opposing points of view on this blog, if nothing else because it makes it look more credible than "just another Focus propaganda tool." But it does cause me not to post because I don't have enough time or energy to defend my arguments (on basic issues) against often ridiculous attacks. I do agree with Eliza, I would like to see a thread on why lefties follow this blog (and to a lesser extent the trueu coffee shop).

[84. James said the following at 1:08 AM on Feb 15:]

84

Ted, in short, yes. I do find it discouraging. However, I am not discouraged to read the blog posts, but rather discouraged to post comments.

There are some things I sometimes would like to say something about that, when I read the comments said, I choose not to. I simply see no benefit then in commenting and simply stirring up the hornet's nest. So, I keep quiet and keep my thoughts to myself.

I still read the blog posts themselves. I am more wary of reading the comments simply b/c I know on the more controversial issues, some of the comments will get my blood boiling.

[85. Theo K said the following at 3:14 AM on Feb 15:]

85

"However, at times, no matter the scripture quoted and such, continued opposition becomes frustrating."

So true... I think that the problem with people of liberal ideas (e.g. about same-sex marriage and abortion) is that they haven't yet acquired a biblical worldview. And the only way to obtain such a worldview is to immerse yourself in the scriptures.
So I would encourage liberal readers to actually check their beliefs and opinions against scripture. I know it is hard to realise that something that you held for so long as correct is actually sinful. But it is better to live in the light than living in darkness, no matter what this costs you.
Of course there are other issues that are not so clean-cut in the bible (e.g. global warming). I think that on these issues we could all happily agree to disagree.

I guess what I am trying to say to the liberals of the group is to re-evaluate the authority of the Bible over their beliefs and practices. Those that stubbornly reject the authority of the Bible as the only rule of life and faith should seriously question their “faith”. Those that are actually Christians but their minds haven’t being renewed yet, I hope that God will work with you in such a mighty way that in a couple of years you will be remembering about your same-sex marriage and abortion supporting comments with shame.

However, I have to say (and perhaps I have also been guilty of the same) that there are times that comments from a conservative point of view are mean spirited, containing personal attacks. I should hope that we all strive to speak the truth in love.

To the editors, I would suggest that you don’t moderate excessively, since as other posters have already commented, perhaps God is using these debates and arguments in order to shape His children. After all the Bible is indeed sharper than any double-edged sword. I would think however that it would be good to actually follow through the discussions and make sure that no unbiblical arguments are left unchallenged.

[86. S said the following at 4:02 AM on Feb 15:]

86

I am "conservative" on some issues and "liberal" on others. Like some of the earlier posts expressed, I don't think that Republican = Christian. I enjoy a healthy debate. (Although, I agree that the super long posts are really tedious to read, I usually skip those.) The debates that are discouraging to me, however, are the married v. single ones. Those are the ones that have caused me to stop reading this blog for a few days. The headline of this blog reads "Bringing Focus to the Single Years", yet some out there don't seem to realize some of us have more single years than others.

[87. Grays said the following at 6:02 AM on Feb 15:]

87

This is the internet. Nobody comes here except to fight. =p

Honestly, I am tired either way (with the whole internet, not just here). Tired of people pointlessly railing against each other, tired of people talking but not listening. The disagreeable comments get dreary, sure. So do the agreeable comments. ;)

On another note, another complaint against the world ^_^ I object to the word "Liberal" being used for ideas that tie people down, lock them into little rooms and take away everything they need to really live.

But I do not share all this discouragement to discourage you =)

[88. Eva said the following at 6:06 AM on Feb 15:]

88

as a moderate, i'm not put off by either extremes.

the fact is that while conservative republicans tend to hold to certain biblical principles (the sanctity of life, for example), "liberal" democrats tend to hold to other biblical principles (compassion and concern for the less fortunate, for example).

i try to hold to all of what jesus taught. all of what the bible teaches. i'm pro-life all the way; not just for the unborn.

i think it's mindless, to be frank, to equate christianity with republicanism and bad environmental stewardship and americanism.

jesus wasn't an american. he wasn't a republican. and i think it grieves Him that many of us get on republican agendas (as if they're inherently christian) and ride these agendas all the way.

many of their policies are definitely anti-christian.

we need to be christian first, and only ascribe to political policies (whether they be democrat or republican) where they serve biblical aims.

[89. Grays said the following at 6:09 AM on Feb 15:]

89

I should say though:

Comments should be almost wholly unmoderated (in other words, print everything printable) or else they should be HEAVILY moderated (that is, picking the most original, thoughtful, best-of-the-best...see lifehacker.com for a fine example).

Hahahaha! Did I just tell you to avoid "moderation in moderation"? Yesss, yes I did. ^_^

And the reason is this: every site I've ever seen that tries it, ends up stupid.

Let the comments be of highest accessibility, or of highest quality. Just let them be of highest *something* -- I haven't got the answer as to highest *what*, but think about it. =)

[90. Grays said the following at 6:15 AM on Feb 15:]

90

Another problem (for me), and I don't know how to fix this one either, and I'm part of the problem with my three consecutive posts =P

is that there are so many comments I know I will never have time to read them all.

See, when a site gets big (and big means, f'r instance, over twenty comments per post) the comments become decreasingly useful because...people don't have time to read them all, but they still want to chime in.

That's what I'm doing right now, LOL! And that's where all the repetition comes from, and people get so worried that no one will hear them, they just start shouting their thoughts over and over, and stop listening. Instead of a thoughtful polylogue you end up with nothing but noise. (With nuggets of thoughtfulness hidden through and through, for those more diligent than myself to find).

[91. Jade said the following at 6:32 AM on Feb 15:]

91

I lean towards the right side of the spectrum and rarely comment on this blog unless I take a personal interest in the topic. I usually agree with the posters and see no reason to comment. I've been reading this blog and the Boundless website in general from pretty much the very beginning and I can say that it has strengthened and deepened my Christian walk. I don't participate much on the blog comments because I don't see the point of getting in an argument with an online persona who may or may not represent them self honestly. I think that a lot of the very liberal posters just come here to stir the pot and not to edify and build up other Christians, although true Christians can certainly fall at any place of the liberal-conservative spectrum. Also, I think that young Christians today are much more "liberal" than their elders when it comes to tolerance and social issues.

Finally, unless Boundless line wants to limit this forum to only comments and not debate, the mods absolutely ***must*** figure out a more efficient way to run the conversation. As an earlier poster said, the livejournal method would work much better, or really almost any other method other than the present one! I do truly appreciate all the hard work and effort Ted, Mott, Denise, Candace, and all the other put into this forum.

[92. Laura said the following at 6:45 AM on Feb 15:]

92

Ted & staff,

I've been reading Boundless regularly for 9 years (since my freshman year of college) and the Line since it's been up. This is my first post. I'm pretty much a traditionalist and a conservative Christian.

I'm sure a large portion of your readers have roughly similar views to you; we may just not feel the need to constantly comment on articles that we tend to agree with. If Candice wrote an article that I thought was coming way out of left field, I may have written and said "what's going on with Candice?" Other than that, I, for the most part, just enjoy reading the articles and blogs and glance with agreement, amusement and, sometimes, concern at people's comments.

Honestly, it seems like some of the people who are constantly commenting on some of the more "conservative" blogs and articles on here with vitriol and malice are just looking to pick a fight, tick off those conservative, Christian wackos. That's really sad. Maybe they just need to vent their anger. It reminds me a little of the Hate Hannity Hotline on Sean Hannity’s radio show that my husband listens to sometimes.

Readers should be free to post whatever they want, but if their ONLY aim is to vent at the “Right” then maybe they might consider starting their own blog.

Just my thoughts. . .

[93. Lis said the following at 7:06 AM on Feb 15:]

93

Ted, since you asked: It's a hard call, because I want to make everyone feel welcome, but I do often avoid the comments and find at least some of them discouraging.

Now I'm asking myself how I behave when I visit very liberal sites (which I sometimes do). Certainly I get upset with some of the perspectives I find there, but I generally voice that frustration to friends who understand that I don't have a personal vendetta against liberals. I might make a comment if I happen to have a piece of information that those on the site don't have, but feel that it's generally disrespectful and a waste of time to try to <> a person over to my perspective, especially when I'm their guest.

This sounds like I'm against all liberal/conservative debates. I'm not: I think it's important to understand what others believe, to practice expressing what I believe, and to keep open to learning new things. I just don't think that learning is as likely to go on in an atmosphere that's high on emotion and low on respect for others.

If (and I only mean if) some people really hate everything Boundless authors say, maybe they'd be more comfortable with inviting us to c'mon over to their site to read about their perspective there.

[94. Louise said the following at 7:48 AM on Feb 15:]

94

One more point I would like to add here: The Jan. 2008 article "Myths about Living Together" does not support what Boundless considers to be the "biblical dating/courtship" model.

I don't know if it goes so far to reject the concept, but it does not support it.

[95. Michele Samuelson said the following at 8:26 AM on Feb 15:]

95

Saw this yesterday and couldn't stop to post, but I really wanted to chime in.

I work for a political non-profit, my husband and I met at a Republican convention, all that jazz. When I was in college, I was part of a conservative student organization that took a pretty radical approach to getting our message out on campus, and I've been called every name under the sun - "Nazi," "fascist," "self-loather," "John Bircher," other less creative names. All for either my politics or my Christianity, depending on the day! In 2004, the day after the election, I woke up to swastikas drawn on the whiteboard I kept on my dorm room door, and my "W Stands for Women" sticker disfigured.

All of that to say, I've had my fill of ridicule and name-calling, and I'm sometimes hesitant to post on The Line because that feeling of being judged for my beliefs overrules desire when I read what people have been posting.

I work for an economic issues non-profit - which has resulted in being called a "jihadist" when lodging complaints about the outrageous spending in Texas cities, but never in someone claiming I must wish to see all women raped because I object to the "Vagina Monologues." (that really happened, in my college paper, when I spoke out against that play) I can handle ridicule because of my politics, though I find it annoying and juvenile (and sometimes insulting), but for my religious beliefs? No thanks. I'm a pretty conservative Christian, and that's all I really want to get into when I'm responding to a blog post.

I love the way these things are handled on Boundless, but a lot of times, I won't even bother to read the comments, because I don't want to know what the other side thinks - I just want to take in what I've read on my own.

[96. Jesse said the following at 8:39 AM on Feb 15:]

96

It sometimes discourages me to find that sound doctrine and good hermeneutics are out of fashion. I'm wary of the progressive church that sometimes leaves God's Word behind.

[97. Christy said the following at 9:08 AM on Feb 15:]

97

I used to check The Line multiple times each day. Due in part to discussions in the comments, I no longer visit Boundless or its blog on a weekly basis.

The discursive process is wonderful, and inherently involves some disagreement between people. At times, though, the comments sections do not seem to build toward the unity and strength of Christ's body.

[98. Bene said the following at 10:13 AM on Feb 15:]

98

Ah, I thought that perhaps I could not comment on this because I get the feeling that Boundless considers people such as myself "liberal" but then I re-read your description. I am actually none of the things that you described, so I guess that means that I can comment. :-)

Two thoughts:

1. I am concerned with the conflation of liberal/"non-traditional" with disrespectful and unnecessarily insulting comments. I realize that this may frequently be correct simply because those who are liberal are more inclined to agree with the Boundless consensus and thus fight. But still, I think that if Boundless chooses to sensor more comments, it should set it's target against animosity rather than "liberalism".

2. The point may not be so much about readers as the Boundless staff. I hope that most of your readers are mature enough to simply not click on the link for comments if they are bothered. But, if your staff finds encountering disagreement too draining, then perhaps you must eliminate the opposition. I am thinking here of the adoption thread which finally got me to comment after years of reading Boundless and then enjoying the blog and reading others comments.

[99. Jo said the following at 10:23 AM on Feb 15:]

99

John (sigh), you said...

"Exibit A: People just don't know what constitutes liberal/left thinking nor that liberal/left is not biblical.

“Abortion and homosexuality are wrong; gun control and government healthcare and education are not."

You're 2/5ths of the way there. Or maybe half way. It's hard to say. Who would argue that education is bad? :)"

I didn't make that comment to start yet another debate. I was merely explaining my personal position, which is neither completely conservative or completely liberal because I am BRITISH. There is in my political spectrum no "left/liberal" or "right/conservative", and I couldn't care less which American party espouses which ideas since I won't be voting for either of them.

I base my beliefs on the Bible first, and my experience second. As I said in the second half of that comment, I enjoy Boundless because my experience is not everyone's and it broadens my mind to hear other people's views and challenge my own. However, my opinions remain valid and I remain entitled to them, and I'd appreciate you not jumping on me every single time I express one.

[100. Jill said the following at 10:26 AM on Feb 15:]

100

I am a regular reader of The Line, but I don't comment much for a few reasons--the first being that I live in Hawaii and by the time I am awake, most of what I would say is already reflected in the comments. Many of the comments tend to get repetitive, so there is really not much to add.

I am politically and culturally conservative, but I sometimes put off by the banter on both sides. I believe very strongly that my faith has implications for politics, and the way I vote reflects that. However, I believe that there are many political topics on which reasonable people (and Christians!) can disagree (e.g. fiscal policy, foreign policy, global warming, health care, etc.). I guess that's why it is sometimes shocking to me that the original posts are so political. I know that the editors in many cases come from very political backgrounds, but I don't really come to Boundless to hear the Republican party-line. It doesn’t bother me if these things are genuinely posted to prompt discussion and debate—I welcome hearing other viewpoints. I just cringe at the thought of arguing for the sake of arguing, or playing "gotcha" with the other side.

That being said, I sometimes don't even look at the comments for particular posts because I can predict almost exactly what comments will be there--there will be 15 comments on a thread that begin “I can’t believe a Christian would say…” That kind of discussion is unproductive. It's really not a good use of my time, and I leave feeling depressed or frustrated.

And as my husband likes to say--comments tend to reflect the extremes anyway, which is probably why there isn't a whole lot of moderation. If you don't care either way--you don't post.

[1. Beth L. said the following at 9:19 AM on Feb 14:]

1

Hi Ted-
Like you, I really enjoy engaging people with different beliefs and worldviews. And when the comments are just the exchange of ideas, I don't mind the "feisty tone of post-blog commentary". What I really don't appreciate is when either side of a debate sinks to personal attacks, or the comments become snide, and mean spirited.

[2. John said the following at 9:26 AM on Feb 14:]

2

I would say that it does get a little annoying, because the tone and purpose of many "progressive" commenters is simply argumentative and contrary simply for the sake of being contrary.

Not only that, they don't speak directly to points and questions.

They usually only pick the one thing that they are passionate about, ignoring other points, and often resort to ad hominem fallacies.

What I'd like to see is the Line help ALL visitors (left or right) be better readers and writers and logical thinkers. I personally think that you guys are well versed in these areas and could impart a great deal of knowledge to us.

There's nothing wrong with arguing, but being argumentative should be avoided.

Lastly, I would say, that it is not good to allow liberal ideas to be posted unchallenged. Some new believers could be easily swayed into wrong thinking.

[3. John D. said the following at 9:26 AM on Feb 14:]

3

I'm mostly on the conservative side, politically and religiously, though I have reservations about the war in Iraq and anti-terrorism policy, and I take "biblical" courting practices with a little grain of salt.

I say, fire away. Let it all hang out (subject to the editors' tolerant standards of decency and decorum). We may not convince each other, but the debate can be stimulating at its best, and it would be terribly boring if everybody agreed all the time.

[4. Kathryn said the following at 9:30 AM on Feb 14:]

4

progressive means being pro-Democrat?
-said the naive Australian

[5. Chris B. (VA) said the following at 9:42 AM on Feb 14:]

5

I consider my beliefs to be more traditional/conservative, and--except for the occasional disagreement about the practical application of media discernment--I find that I agree with Boundless/FOTF on virtually every issue.

When I first started reading the Line, I expected to mostly see comments from Christians who, for the most part, agree on the basics. I am still surprised to find that this is generally not the case, and I am disappointed to find people on every topic who seem to disagree merely for the sake of being disagreeable.

In my opinion the Line--and all online Christian communities--should strive for a higher level of discourse and civility that we find in the typical secular online forum; unfortunately, the individuals who comment (not the editors) on the Line usually seem to be unable to do that.

I do not have solution to these problems, but I sincerely hope that we can improve the atmosphere on the Line.

[6. Holly said the following at 9:44 AM on Feb 14:]

6

I enjoy all the comments, but it's sometimes off-putting when the attacks venture into personal territory instead of staying with the ideas.

Also, I'd encourage the Boundless staff (and readers) to remember that God-fearing, Bible-believing, Spirit-filled, whatever-else Christians can differ on things and still live in harmony and have fellowship and community. Politics, in particular, are not always black and white. Scriptural things, yes, let's make sure we're glorifying God by submitting to the authority of His written word, but in other things, let's let Grace season our thoughts and words.

Often it seems that the 'progressive' readers draw the 'conservative' readers/staff into anger and sarcasm, and I think that is at times a poor witness.

Again, let's glorify God by submitting to His Scriptural authority, but let grace shine through in all that we say and do, particularly in dealing with people who have differing viewpoints. Amen?

[7. Leann said the following at 10:03 AM on Feb 14:]

7

Yes, sometimes I don't even comment because I know that someone will inevitably disagree with me. That in itself is not a bad thing (however, I do not like confrontation but realize it's necessary at times)...it's just frustrating. We should all be about love and not fuss and fight over the details.

Titus 3:9: "But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless."

[8. David said the following at 10:03 AM on Feb 14:]

8

I find some "progressive" beliefs to be discouraging, simply because it shows the church's failure to teach.

[9. Mike Theemling said the following at 10:04 AM on Feb 14:]

9

Ted,

First off, I will say that I tend to be conservative in nature. A search of my prior postings would (I hope) certainly indicate this.

The point I'd like to get across though is that Conservative does not always = Christian.

Although I do share your concern that "progressive" culture can slowly taint non-negotiable Christian principles, I think we need to be careful where we choose are battles. Otherwise, the danger exists where we will lump all ideas from a particular source as "unChristian" even if it isn't.

Take for example global warming. I don't think this is a "Christian" issue at all. True, many who are very vocal about it tend to be against a lot of Christian ideology, but that doesn't necessarily negate the issue. Some believe it to be true, some don't, and others like myself listen to the arguments but are skeptical (the problem is that by the time we know for sure it'll be too late to do anything about it). However, even if global warming as traditionally described was completely a myth, how would that affect Christian living/theology? All the proposed solutions don't seem to be any attack on Christianity unless they insist we start tree worshiping.

However, an issue like same-sex marriage WOULD be a legitimate issue and it's right to publically be against it. The same could be said for the steady increase in pornography in mainstream media and advertising.

I will say though objectively that one thing that does disturb me is that sometimes a dissenting opinion would be met by a swift and almost insulting response by the editors. I could fish up examples if I really tried, but one that comes to mind is when Ted put words into another person's mouth. Ted's words were, "let me finish the sentence for you: killing of babies (or something like that)". No one likes having words being put into their mouth or words taken out of context. I'm not saying that editors should be totally silent, nor that they can't disagree but they should do so in a civil manner and speak to the issues and facts at hand. A big problem that conservatives have is that we are often viewed as speaking more with emotion than with reason. Sometimes the responses I've seen from conservatives just reinforce that stereotype.

I visit/post to the blog often because I want to find out what young adults are thinking and why they think that way. I also want them to think about things they haven't thought about before.

Finally, a note about being "conservative". If we look at it objectively, we all have succumbed to being less conservative over generations. Honestly, I doubt the apostle Paul would approve of our modern dating system yet many true Christians go along with it. Knee-high skirts and high heels would certaintly be frowned upon. And not to leave the men out, almost all of us would be called "radical" for shaving our beards.

Something to thnk about.

[10. Leah said the following at 10:05 AM on Feb 14:]

10

The problem I have with 'progressive' ideologies is that so often they are based on humanitarian points of view and not biblical ones.

Eg. it sounds nice and loving to include same-sex marriages, and to give women the right to abort if they think their child might be disabled, but those are not biblical perspectives.

Like Chris B, I am surprised at how often people disagree at what I thought were basics.

I do however think it was a bit unfair to assume all pro-Democrats are 'progressive' like you're describing... though I guess as an Australian I might not know, but from what i've read of comments previously it seems unfortunately like a typical Boundless stab at the Democrats.

[11. jess said the following at 10:09 AM on Feb 14:]

11

I echo Kathryn's comment about progressivism being the same as pro-Democrat. I am a registered Republican, but would change to Independent if it weren't so much paperwork and hassle. On most issues I guess I would be conservative, but I think in general we're all too quick to see someone's opposing view on, say, gay marriage, and write them off as a liberal and a Democrat. I don't think being a Christian is synonymous with being a Republican, or even a conservative. In the issue of gay marriage, isn't redefining marriage between a non-believing man and a non-believing woman still wrong? Personally I don't think marriage should really be a word that's in the Constitution at all. Indeed God is out to create believing people with strong hearts for God and His commandments...but is this really the same as creating Christian societies? I'm not so sure.

[12. Joy said the following at 10:17 AM on Feb 14:]

12

I have no issue with Christians who have different political views, etc. I believe that polite debate helps us all grow and learn. It starts to bother me when people accuse for no reason, are rude, or have an argument they can't back up. If you can find clear Scriptural support for your argument, then yes, let's discuss it. Otherwise I think the conversation needs to be taken elsewhere.

[13. DannieA said the following at 10:20 AM on Feb 14:]

13

My personal belief system is what you might call conservative...marriage between man and a woman, I don't believe in abortion, discernment in all mediums of media and entertainment, spiritual disciplines.
Politically my views fall in the moderate range and...so I'm unsure if you're looking for a post like mine or not, but I think there are some really offensive comments from the right and left that may discourage readers...or I may not comment on a particular post or whatever...
But I think in order to grow, people must be exposed to discussion, how else can one truly stand firm in their beliefs?

Ted..you've read my posts...I'm not sure where to draw the line at if I'm conservative enough or not...so you can post or not depending on who you want to post here, but those are my honest thoughts.
Thanks

[14. Nick T said the following at 10:28 AM on Feb 14:]

14

There are many times when I read a post and want to comment something simple like "I agree, thanks for posting that" but by the time I read down through the comments, I see that the author's intent has already been hi-jacked and it's now a debate about if the author should have said something and how that has bothered some people... and eventually I decide to just stay out of the quarrel.
So yes, it is off putting.
Sometimes it is because of pride in my own heart. Other times it is because it doesn't seem like much of a discussion is taking place, but more of an argument.

[15. Paul said the following at 10:30 AM on Feb 14:]

15

I personally like the fact that there's some debate on this forum. I'm for opening it up even further to debate between right and left. I'd just be happier to see both parties be more respectful of each other.

[16. Matt said the following at 10:32 AM on Feb 14:]

16

I'm a conservative and I read the articles because they're informative and I enjoy them. I have never been discouraged by the comments. I can always visit The Line without reading the comments. In fact, many times I'll read The Line because I want to take part in the comments - say what hasn't been said, stand up for what's right, challenge other's opinions, and be challenged right back. I think several commenters need a lesson in ettique, maybe I do too, but I don't think that should be forced from the top down. I like The Line just the way it is.

[17. Carrie (the original) said the following at 10:32 AM on Feb 14:]

17

They usually only pick the one thing that they are passionate about, ignoring other points, and often resort to ad hominem fallacies.
I agree with this and this is what often frustrates me with the comments that follow of good, thought provoking posts.
Now, I usually give them the benefit of the doubt: they don't have the time to sit down a carefully consider what is being put before them.
I think that it is safe to say that if you are inside of conservative Christian circles, you have heard much of what Boundless has to say and you have heard it being said in love.
Personally, I give the author's the benefit of the doubt. They are Christians and they are seeking to do things out of love for the Savior.
Some people just don't get it. They have had bad experiences inside the church and they think that people like the Boundless authors are to blame for it. So, they take it out on the Boundless authors.
It's short-sigthedness on their part. Something we are all guilty of. I'm learning that there are some blog posts that will inevitably have comments on them that I just don't need to read. I'm a a frequent enough reader to where I know what to expect.
If I think there is a chance I'll be enlightened, I'll read. If I can sense it's going to be a lot of short-sighted banter. I'll refrain.

[18. Adam T. said the following at 10:32 AM on Feb 14:]

18

Well, here's my take:

I've had a lot of experience on proper web discussion forums (as opposed to poorer formats like this one which were originally designed to accommodate comments and not debate). I also happen to live in an area without all that many conservative Christians in it.

Although I enjoy dialogue with people who hold widely differing views, I think there's a time and a place for it - and sometimes you want to get away from it.

Sometimes it grows tiresome to constantly spend your time arguing over things you consider foundational, when what you really wanted was a place where you could discuss issues in a relaxed, friendly manner with people who already share your foundational beliefs. (This is especially the case for those of us who live in more liberal parts of the world. For us, conservative Christian havens are often few and far between.)

I was initially attracted to Boundless because I thought it was one of these 'havens'. So, to answer the question:

Do you find some of the comment discouraging? Do you find yourself inclined not to visit The Line because of the argumentative nature of some of the discussions?

I'm inclined to answer 'yes'. Heated conflict is not what I come to Boundless for - I originally came because I thought it was going to have more of a 'fellowship' atmosphere.

[19. Matt said the following at 10:34 AM on Feb 14:]

19

Oh, I forgot to say something... Happy Valentines Day!

[20. Amir Larijani said the following at 10:35 AM on Feb 14:]

20

Ted: As a pro-life libertarian, I've got no problem with the lefties chiming in. To them, I say, "Bring it!"

Besides...as you can tell, even those of us on the right have been known to take you to the woodshed quite frequently.

[21. Randy said the following at 10:39 AM on Feb 14:]

21

I have found that I pretty much read every post here but I rarely come to comment for one basic reason: I can't subscribe to the comments of one particular post on the blog. I like it when blogs have the "Email replies" function so I can keep up with discussions I want to keep up with.

As for constant resistance... yes, I have found that some people are energized by the negative attention they generate. With WordPress I can flag key words to hold for moderation so those who get out of hand can be held back or even deleted. If two different commentors start going at each other I halt them both. I also try to redirect the comment flow to the purpose of the post.

La Shawn Barber says that in the end, We are responsible for everything that ends up on our blogs. People are free to speak their mind but the comments will go for the benefit of my readers. Sometimes it is an uncomfortable benefit (education and communication) but the comments that end up on my blog serve my purposes for my intended audience.

I hope that makes sense.

[22. Rachael said the following at 10:43 AM on Feb 14:]

22

Hi,

I guess I'd consider myself to be more on the conservative end because of the abortion and gay rights issues (the abortion issue is most important to me), but I comment a lot (not on the political ones), so my opinion is not representative of those who don't comment much.

I am not conservative on all issues, but I tend not to read the political comments as closely, honestly.

If people want to disagree it won't scare me away...

A lot of the other discussions, even on other topics get argumentative, though. Although that is completely unattractive to me, I think it's generally okay to allow for a free exchange of ideas (would be way too hard to moderate, and people would get mad if some comments were moderated too much), as long as things don't get too personal and nasty. I'd guess that lot of the nasty exchange on any topic might be considered off-putting to some if there is no respect, but hopefully eventually people will learn to tone down. Maybe it's part of the maturing process for some.

And for those who might be offended, I think they can just choose to read the articles and ignore the comments if they so choose...

Thanks for everything you do.

[23. Derek Wong said the following at 10:44 AM on Feb 14:]

23

I don't really read through too many of the comments on posts, but when I have, I did notice that there seemed to be an argumentative nature to the discussion. It's unfortunate, and I'll honestly say that it discourages me from joining in a little bit.

Disagreements are fairly good for promoting discussion, but I get the sense that there IS some argument just for argument's sake. That nobody is changing and we are always back where we started.

Unfortunately I don't have a whole lot of experience with the comments on your blog since I tend to be a RSS feed reader only. And I only comment on things that I'm interested in commenting on. Like this post I guess.

[24. Melody said the following at 10:44 AM on Feb 14:]

24

As a consistent conservative, I really enjoy all the opinions we see on the Line. Even though our views may not always be the same, I am challenged and encouraged to have a logical and Biblical reason for things I don't agree with. I admit that I sometimes live in a Christian bubble where most of my time is spent with people who have very similar views. I think it's healthy for all us to hear from people we would not normally get to know and hear other ideas and opinions.

[25. Josh said the following at 10:46 AM on Feb 14:]

25

I'd place myself on the moderate side of conservative, but conservative nonetheless. If I disagree with a Boundless post (as happens semi-frequently) its usually based on what I perceive to be a lack of common sense rather than political ideology.

[26. Laurie said the following at 10:47 AM on Feb 14:]

26

I am a conservative reader, and I don't comment much, but I love reading this blog. The argumentative and anti- Biblical comments do discourage me sometimes, but they don't make me stop reading this blog. I enjoy getting other perspectives. Boundless blog and articles always make me think about what I believe - I'm thankful for that!

[27. Christina said the following at 10:50 AM on Feb 14:]

27

First off, I think its important for every Christian to be faced with opposition, as it gives you the oppurtunity to question your beliefs and hopefully go to the bible to defend them. I would hope that if you find the Bible to contradict your own beliefs, than you would go about modifying them to be more consistent with scripture.

However, at times, no matter the scripture quoted and such, continued opposition becomes frustrating.

I do actually continue reading boundless simply because I don't like people agreeing with my point of view 100% of the time because I know I'm in error on some things, but the people I have available to talk to about them either don't respond most of the time, or are more inclined to agree with me either to please me or because they don't know any better.

I enjoy coming here to hear opposition and to see if my beliefs still stand in the light of another's interpretation of scripture. Of course, the bible is always my primary source of wisdom, and remaining consistent with that is really important to me.

[28. mindlab said the following at 10:57 AM on Feb 14:]

28

from a conservative Christian/constitutionalist. . .

First, I must say that ya’ll at Boundless have done a great job running this blog. You’ve created/enforced the best comment policy I’ve ever interacted with. It seems to allow all the thoughtful content and a minimal amount of vitriol; the thoughtlessness that it allows is inevitable.

I do enjoy reading and responding to thought-provoking or challenging comments from the "other side" ('progressive'/liberal/non-Christian/etc), but I've noticed that in most cases, the comment strings eventually descend into thoughtless responses (from both sides). This is discouraging to me; I wish there were some method (perhaps a comment rating system similar to slashdot's) to suppress the thoughtlessness and allow the thoughtful comments from both viewpoints to rise to the surface. Just a thought. . .

Thanks for a smashing job, keep it up, God Bless.
mindlab

[29. Ames said the following at 11:06 AM on Feb 14:]

29

I am quite conservative and traditional. For example, I feel uncomfortable about the possibility of being under the leadership of a president that could be female. So being an admitted "rightist", I am taken aback when comments posted seem very contrary to FOTF's beliefs and values. I get discouraged from leaving any comments because I am not good at debate. So yes, the comments do discourage me and I don't visit this blog very often. In fact, I only visited today because I thought there would be something about Valentine's Day. Anyway, thank you for asking about this. I appreciate that you care about these things.

[30. John said the following at 11:09 AM on Feb 14:]

30

I think the opposing views are fine, as long as there is closure to the topics where there can be closure. Instead of simply allowing liberal nonsense to have the last word.

[31. Dan Gill said the following at 11:13 AM on Feb 14:]

31

In all honesty, I just steer clear of the comments when they start to get silly.

[32. Eliza said the following at 11:15 AM on Feb 14:]

32

*WARNING*, not a conservative

Hi Ted,

I know by now you probably don't like me (even though I've tried my hardest to be nothing but respectful), because I am one of those "liberals". Even though your paragraph doesn't actually describe my beliefs or actions.

Are you curious why "lefties" come to this blog? Would you be willing to add a "Question For Those On The Left" post?

Also, what is the point of Boundless? Is it meant to be a safe place for politically like-minded individuals? I understand if this is the case and if I am not welcome. I am just curious.

[33. John said the following at 11:17 AM on Feb 14:]

33

"The point I'd like to get across though is that Conservative does not always = Christian."

True, but if you apply God's word to every area of your life, including politics, you will be a conservative.

I think this is where a lot of confusion comes in AND what a lot of the disagreements focus on.

People are very confused on the political threads because they do not even know what the different parties stand for nor that what they stand for is or isn't biblical.

There needs to be a Christian economics and politics website to educate people.

[34. NeedACatchyName said the following at 11:18 AM on Feb 14:]

34

I tend to be more moderate, so maybe I shouldn't be posting on this thread, but...

I think that the problem with refusing to post comments with dissenting opinions is it starts to defeat the whole point of allowing comments. That is, if only comments that are in agreement with the "official stance" are allowed, then comments just turn into a bunch of "I totally agree!" or "Great post" type comments which don't really contribute anything to the original article. At that point, you might as well just not have comments.

Having said that, it's not at all uncommon to disallow comments that disagree with the site's stances on issues. Most conservative political blogs will state straight up that they don't post comments that disagree with their party platform, and that the discussion is for refining ideas within the scope of conservative viewpoints, not for debating ideas with progressives. But in this case, they will clearly make this known so that people don't waste their time writing comments that don't get posted. This is why I think that if you restrict comments (and as I've said before, while I'm personally against restricting comments, I think it's entirely the prerogative of the editors to decide what type of comments to post), it's best to have a comment policy which clearly states what type of comments you'll accept and what you'll reject, so there's no angry posters who typed out a long post only to get it rejected.

Really, the best way to keep debate from getting out of hand is to close threads to new posts when the thread has gotten too contentious or off-topic. Most all internet forums do it and it seems to be the most sensible approach.

[35. cathys said the following at 11:19 AM on Feb 14:]

35

I don't post much unless the issue personally applies to me. As what most would consider a "conservative Christian", I find it hard to comment and be a part of the discussion. Many times because the discussions are so fierce and I don't oppose much of what you all say, no one responds. I would not want to attack anyone or cause a deep divide amongst believers.

But all the diverse opinions and views do make for interesting reading. And I do find encouragement amidst the comments if I read them all. :)

[36. Jacob Douvier said the following at 11:19 AM on Feb 14:]

36

I think it's worth asking ourselves (conservatives and liberals alike) if we're commenting for the sake grinding an axe or if we're honestly interested in discussing an issue. As I pointed out in a comment on the Darwin Day post, for most people, the creation/evolution debate isn't about evidence: it's about prior commitments. In this situation, it's not really that profitable to argue when you can't agree on what counts as evidence, proper method, etc.

So, in light of this, I would say that I am put off by the heated debates and tones that I see in the comments here and am substantially less likely to leave a comment if I think the conversation has already descended into absurdity. Civility is also a concern of mine. There is a lack of charity in many comments, which tells me that the people leaving them are not very mature, and thus not worth interacting with.

Finally, I venture that these reasons are exactly why Boundless should not have a forum. I think you will only see more of the same problems. As the saying goes in the blogosphere, "don't feed the trolls."

[37. Alex C. said the following at 11:23 AM on Feb 14:]

37

I'm registered independant, and my political beliefs have been shifting ever so slightly to the right over the last few years, partly due to what I've been learning in my economics classes.

I think its great that Boundless allows comments from all sides of the issues; I personally find it very irritating when a topic is filled with nothing but comments like "I totally agree! great job!", its boring and it doesn't really add anything to the issue, its just people patting eachother on the back. I'd prefer to have no comments at all, rather than comments ONLY from one side of an issue.

[38. BDB said the following at 11:25 AM on Feb 14:]

38

Well, I became a conservative in college by debating liberal students...and watching the consequences of their (social) choices convinced me that decisions have consequences.

I believe that Ted has gotten much better about giving a measured response to the "progressives."

What a number of conservative faculty members like to point out is that many people on the left never hear a dissenting voice, so they are shocked, SHOCKED when a conservative speaks up. I saw this when James Watt came to my college to speak. He was so conservative - but he could articulate the conservative theory behind all his policy positions. After the speech, about 30 of the liberal students I regularly debated with had him cornered at the cheese table. They were completely flummoxed because he really knew why he believed what he did. It was fascinating to watch. He'd simply thought it through much better than they had, and they didn't know what to do.

I believe you do a good job of moderating the blog, and the reason you get so many comments is the conflict. It's a VERY educated base of commenters.

I hate to admit it, but I didn't really understand the subtle differences between Calvinism and Arminianism before that fight erupted on this blog...

[39. Michela said the following at 11:26 AM on Feb 14:]

39

Since I can still count the number of comments I have posted on one hand, I'm assuming this applies to me. =)

To be honest, I have been quite put-off a few times while reading Boundless. I came looking for support, encouragment, and some challenging thoughts. While these things are present, sometimes it's disappointing (thanks Adam T and Nick T, I'm seconding those posts!) to see the misunderstandings and argumentative comments that are posted. Sometimes it seems like people argue just for the sake of arguing, and that is frustrating to me. Also, I don't think it's fair to the contributors, who put a lot of thought and care into what they write, to constantly dissect and misconstrue what they are trying to say. Case in point, the drama surrounding the Adoption thread... sheesh.

That being said, I keep coming back because I do like so much of what is going on here. And I certainly don't mind hearing different views and intelligent discussion. I just think that we should express our views carefully and lovingly. We single folk get enough crap from the world around us and the lies that we are fed, so it would be nice to have a bit more of an uplifting atmosphere here...

[40. Christina said the following at 11:27 AM on Feb 14:]

40

I am interested in "progressive" comments only if they are written with respect. Unfortunately, a lot of times they aren't and it discourages me from reading the rest of the comments. I would even say some comments are belittling. It surprises me that Christ believers can be so rude; please, guys, be more respectful to other people's opinions!

[41. Jo said the following at 11:30 AM on Feb 14:]

41

Well, as an English gal I don't come at things from a "Conservative v Democrat" or "Left v Right" perspective, however from my perceptions of Boundless I lean more towards conservative than liberal. Abortion and homosexuality are wrong; gun control and government healthcare and education are not. (Although my opinion of the NHS has gone down since I last posted on that topic.)

Anyway, my response to the post...

I would be greatly discouraged if Boundless didn't allow 'dissenting' views. That kind of censorship is always damaging. I would have absolutely no interest in commenting on a blog where everyone agreed with me. Questioning our faith is good. Having our beliefs ('religious' and otherwise) challenged is good. The above is a good example: I never questioned the UK's health system until I started reading Boundless, because I had nothing with which to compare it. Now I'm not saying I've actually swapped sides, but my mind has been opened by the conversations that happen here and I think that's a really positive thing.

Here's where I differ from John and others: I think someone who agrees with homosexuality CAN be a Christian. I think someone who agrees with abortion CAN be a Christian. I think they're completely and seriously wrong on these issues, and I think we should be very proactive in aiming to correct those beliefs, BUT all of us have areas where we're blind. None of us has the monopoly on truth, and we have the responsibility to value, listen to, teach and learn from each other. Even though the politically conservative tone here sometimes frustrates me as a non-American, I appreciate the range of views represented in the comments.

Debate is fine; I do however, wholly agree with this:
"I enjoy all the comments, but it's sometimes off-putting when the attacks venture into personal territory instead of staying with the ideas."

[42. Katie P. said the following at 11:34 AM on Feb 14:]

42

First of all, I really enjoy reading Boundless. The articles are thought-provoking and well-written, and I am so thankful to the staff for their dedication!

I am pro-life, pro-marriage, and generally conservative, although I would probably be described as a moderate by many who post here. And to be honest, although I read the Line frequently, I do not post often. I feel like no matter what I write, I will be attacked by someone for being either too conservative or too liberal. It really doesn't feel like a safe place to share my views, mainly because it seems like some people are far more concerned with being right than with finding the truth (not everyone, though). However, I know that its a personal concern, and that because I tend to be a fairly non-confrontational, can't-we-all-just-get-along kind of person, it is my own choice not to post much. I would not in any way want Boundless to stifle others opinions just because I am uncomfortable with the nature of their response!

[43. Elizabeth said the following at 11:40 AM on Feb 14:]

43

I would say I'm more inclined to read an article that I feel would ruffle some feathers in the comment section. I find in interesting to see the different perspectives that people in the church body can have.

[44. sarah said the following at 11:56 AM on Feb 14:]

44

Knowing that Focus (and Boundless) take a conservative/literal Biblical interpretation stance, I often wonder why people who so blatantly disagree with the theology read and comment so much on here.

Are you/they truly seeking to better understand the Bible, Christianity and your own faith? Or are you seeking to argue your point?

I personally agree with Focus' stance on the Bible and related issues. I don't mind comments that question or seek to understand/debate. It pushes me to study the Bible more and work through why I believe what I believe.

As others have commented, I don't appreciate comments that seem to argue for the sake of arguing - particularly when those arguments are not accompanied by Biblical backup.

If you are arguing your point based on an interpretation of Scripture - include that Scripture! Don't just say "as the Bible says" or have no backup.

[45. Bethany said the following at 12:09 PM on Feb 14:]

45

I am most probably not one of those people you want to comment here, so I understand if you don’t post this. I am usually to the left of Boundless, though I still consider myself moderate in the grand scheme of things. I certainly do not “hold much of Scripture to be myth/fable/metaphor,” and I intensely hope none of my comments ever came across as questioning the efficacy of the gospel. I love Jesus. And to boot, my husband and I don’t own a television (so I don’t think I’m one to “denigrate those who practice media discernment,” either).

I wanted to respond to your post because I have also been surprised at the opinions of many commenters. Perhaps people who disagree with a post are more likely to comment. Perhaps your demographic (young Christians) is more diverse than anybody supposed. Whatever the explanation, it seems I am far from being alone among your readers on many issues. I remember occasions when this caused me relief. It did not occur to me that this phenomenon may be alienating your [intended?] readership.

My observation is that reading Boundless for years (long before the Line) has indeed made me think through and defend my beliefs – if I disagree with you, then I must have a good reason. I would hope that continuing to read has also helped keep “religious conservatives” human in my mind --- not a mass of stereotypes, not ill-intentioned crazies, but people, people who love the same God I serve. I may not agree with you on a lot of things, but I will defend you against accusations of stupidity and hatred. Just read the responses to NYT’s op-ed by Nicholas D. Kristof, “Evangelicals a Liberal Could Love,” to remind yourself of the kind of anti-evangelical feelings that exist out there; or rather, don’t, and save yourself the stress.

Of course, I don’t believe that “liberals” are made of evil, either.

I believe it is good to listen to people with whom you disagree, all the more so if we are brothers and sisters in Christ. I will keep trying to listen closely and fairly. I appreciate being included in the conversation.

[46. Raj Sharma said the following at 12:26 PM on Feb 14:]

46

Question: When did calling an idiot an idiot become a personal attack?

I am one of those people who will question your salvation if you tell me that you are a pro-abortion (yes, pro-abortion as there is no such thing as pro-choice) democrat.

And yes, I find the comments quite distressing and thus have spent less and less time on the line.

[47. Jenny said the following at 12:30 PM on Feb 14:]

47

Hi, I'm one of your conservative readers that doesn't comment as frequently.

I would say I do like the debate aspect of the Line, except when it turns into personal attacks. I think it's good to hear opposing views because it challenges me to think about why I believe what I believe. Do my opinions line up with what Scripture says, or have I just believed what I've heard other people say? If I had a friend with these same thoughts/questions, would I be prepared to answer biblically?

Usually the reason I won't comment is either because I'm not particularly interested in the topic or because my view has already been represented in the responses. But occasionally I won't comment because there is such an overwhelming percentage of the commentors who don't believe what the Bible says about a certain topic. It feels like it would be useless to add my thoughts. However, I've been convicted that that is the very place a biblical perspective is most needed.

The sermon at church last night was about how teaching others what we know from the Bible is a very important part of growing in Christ ourselves. The Christian body isn't designed for absorbing information and keeping it to ourselves. As we interact with others and build each other up, the body as a whole becomes stronger and better able to work as a unit. "As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another." (Proverb 27:17) Teaching others is one of the best ways for me to really learn and understand something myself.

So as long as I'm still reading the Line, I'm going to try to do better in making sure the truth of Scripture is represented in the comments. The word of God is powerful. (See Hebrews 4:12) If the Holy Spirit brings to mind a verse that my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ--and those who aren't yet--need to hear, I need to be obedient and bring it to the discussion, and let God work from there.

Although, as my posts tend to be lengthy, others of you who know the truth might speak up to keep me from posting a really long comment! :oD

[48. erin said the following at 12:46 PM on Feb 14:]

48

I have to admit that if I do comment on Boundless, it's usually on those posts that are less likely to lead to conflict and debate. I get frustrated with the way some people appear to comment just to get a rise out of people, so I feel the best way to handle that is to ignore them.

I do think that all sides of the political spectrum should remember that all viewpoints should be treated with respect; even if you don't agree with the person, there's a way to express your viewpoint without resorting to personal attacks or immature insults.

[49. Bethany said the following at 1:04 PM on Feb 14:]

49

I have no issues with good healthy debate and think we all have things to learn from each other. But it seems that oftentimes the "liberal-leaning" commenters overwhelm the spirit of the original blog and clog up the comments section with not kind or well-thought out comments. Debate as defined by "wikipedia" is:

"a formal method of interactive and position representational argument. Debate is a broader form of argument than logical argument, since it includes persuasion which appeals to the emotional responses of an audience, and rules enabling people to discuss and decide on differences, within a framework defining how they will interact.

Informal debate is a common occurrence, but the quality and depth of a debate improves with knowledge and skill of its participants as debaters."

It would seem that comments could be monitored a little closer so as to get rid of those that are mean-spirited and attack the other commenters, instead of debating their ideas so that as this definition says, the debate would improve with the knowledge and skill of the participants.

Simple answer: Anytime anyone is being agressive and hostile, I won't post and I cringe to even read responses, because any further posts are not usually thought-out, beneficial, loving, or of intelligent matter.

[50. Matthew said the following at 1:12 PM on Feb 14:]

50

I'd describe myself as strongly conservative on a lot of things (though not all, and probably I tend to express my more liberal opinions when I comment.) Honestly, if anything puts me off it's people who say (or insinuate) that if we are liberal on issue X, Y, or Z we must not be discerning Christians. The liberal comments get nasty sometimes, but I feel like some of the conservative ones (especially those from John) tend to be the nastiest. If there is any more editing or protection of the comments, I would like to see it less based on ideology and more based on the level of venom, bitterness, or mean-spiritedness of the posts.

[51. TN1 said the following at 1:21 PM on Feb 14:]

51

The Line is just a blog. People are free to comment and say whatever; it doesn't mean all of it should be taken seriously. I don't see the comments here as being any different from news websites that allow for comments at the end of articles.

[52. Louise said the following at 1:23 PM on Feb 14:]

52

Okay, Eliza weighed in before me so I'm not the first non-conservative to comment on here.

Mr. Slater, could you be so kind as to point out the discussion containing the comments which "denigrate those who practice media discernment?"

I found my way to the "I am a bratwurst" discussion of Nov. 2007. The comments addressed the issues of how to practice such discernment and why to do so, but I did not see any comments that denigrated the concept in any fashion.

Are you perhaps referring to a different discussion? If so, which one?

Thank you,

Louise

[53. Natasha said the following at 2:04 PM on Feb 14:]

53

Yeah, I do find that the negative comments sometimes hinder my desire to add my own (comment). Often, it seems as though those who comment (for example, in the evolution/creation debates) don't really want to seek out the truth, but just air their opinions. In situations like these, I tend to refrain from adding my own comments because I figure that they've already heard the facts/truth (from multiple other posters) and now it's God's job to speak to their hearts. I'm not intending to be rude, but the verse "pearls before swine" is what I think of.

I also agree with some of the previous posters on this topic that all of us who post on Boundless should try to be more civil and focus on seeking out God's truth, instead of scoring points off your opponent in the debate.

:)
With love in Christ.

[54. Elizabeth said the following at 2:27 PM on Feb 14:]

54

As a conservative Canadian (not a member of the Conservative Party, mind you. I prefer the Christian Heritage Party.), I must say I don't mind reading comments that are opposed to my beliefs. I myself don't comment too much because I find that I often engage in debate merely for the sake of proving someone wrong, rather than for the sake of showing that person, in love, that what he believes is contrary to Scripture and is hurting his Christian walk.
As for other people's opinions... The intentions are much more important to me than the actual beliefs in this case. I will respect (though not agree with) a liberal who has thought through his position clearly and tells it respectfully much more than a conservative who is disrespectful, rude, and says things without any evidence to back up his beliefs. So I think that it is fine for Boundless to post differing opinions, but I think that all who comment should do so with respect, love, and clarity.

[55. Bethany D. said the following at 2:31 PM on Feb 14:]

55

It's very interesting and informative to have a broad range of opinions represented, but the manner in which they are presented is crucial to whether or not I'm willing to comment. For me to feel like it's worth making a contribution, I need to be confident that A) people will consider the whole of my comment rather than quoting one snippet out of context, B) that good reasoning and logic will be our weapons of debate, not strawmen armies and emotional attacks, and C) that I'm actually addressing the main topic at hand. For comparison, I like the way that livejournal blog comments are laid out in threads, so that you can have several mini-debates to split out different points in the discussion, rather than trying to go four ways at once as occasionally happens here on The Line. It's frustrating when the original blog is on one topic, a discussion started around a related topic or two, and then it got hijacked off in some other direction completely; I wind up not being sure which to respond to - so I don't respond to any.

[56. Anne said the following at 2:32 PM on Feb 14:]

56

I don't have a problem with hearing from "liberals".

I do get frustrated with the length and lack of thoughtfulness of many comments. Less is more.

Many folks would do well to be "quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry."

[57. Jo said the following at 2:34 PM on Feb 14:]

57

First, I consider myself a conservative. I do not agree with abortion or homosexual marriage, but at the same time, I agree with more of the liberal ideas about foreign politics.

I agree with everyone who has made the point that a political conservative does not necessarily equal Christian. There are many Christians who disagree with the war in Iraq.

Also, people are more likely to post when they disagree with something than when they do agree.

[58. MarkB said the following at 2:40 PM on Feb 14:]

58

Ted,

I would be one of those more conservative types but my world view would be too difficult to describe given the broad arenas of life and just how I perceive or value them. Let's just say I'm a Christ-follower to the end, but could easily wish much of the "religious church structure" to crumble. I'm all for a relevant church but just don't leave His word compromised.

I also believe the lines of scripture draw lines in our politics and both Parties are sorely lacking in supporting my faith. But as one that then measures the weights on a balance, who is disheartened by the corporate powers and oil on one side and godless social policies of the other, immorality in both, my dark glasses keep me strongly leaning to the right.

But does that effect my desire to engage other thoughts? No, not in the least. Do I get discouraged with professing Christ followers that seem to have a signficantly different outlook? Yes, yes I do. But hopefully it's brilliant windows on the internet, like Boundless.org, that help to reform and reshape those views, causing us to rethink our beliefs and our actions often and repeatedly.

You, brilliant boundless brethren, are on the frontlines of the battle. Stay the course. Persevere by asking intelligently, seeking diligently, knocking persistently. If influences more that it seems, and it will effect changed minds!

[59. Jonathan from Canada said the following at 2:41 PM on Feb 14:]

59

Everywhere we go, we're bombarded with left-wing anti-Christian propaganda. The schools have been taken over, the government is complicit, progressive billionaires are throwing money at shadow groups, the media is about 90% liberal, judges have bought into their law making power trips... so Boundless being hijacked by lefties doesn't really surprise me.

The end times will be filled persecution. There will be false prophets with sweet tongues. They will claim the power to remake the world a better place, to change the very nature of man. "Yes we can" they will say, when only God can do those things.

So, I've basically sat out on the comments section for a good half year now. I don't need to read liberal propaganda any more than I already get from EVERYWHERE around me. Don't worry editors, I still love you.

[60. Kellie said the following at 2:46 PM on Feb 14:]

60

I seem to comment more on the posts I disagree with, so it may seem that I'm liberal leaning, but I'm actually fairly conservative. Many of the posts on the line seem to be more of the writers opinions rather than biblical principles....and even conservative Christians don't agree on everything.

[61. Alyene said the following at 3:45 PM on Feb 14:]

61

I agree with Adam T. in the idea of Boundless as a haven. It has helped build and rebuild biblical applications which the rest of the world seems to constantly attempt to tear down. I also support John's recommendation to "not allow liberal ideas to be posted unchallenged."

[62. kaarina said the following at 4:59 PM on Feb 14:]

62

I find the term "progressive" misleading. One must be going somewhere clearly defined to make progress. I find most people don't have a clearly defined political worldview.

That said, I, a "right-leaning moderate" (leave my constitutional rights, my firearms, and the economy alone), think Boundless Line places much too much emphasis on "left" and "right" ideology. I think this attitude galvanizes people on both sides of the fence into a them-us attitude when in many cases we essentially agree on the problem, but not on the solution.

That said, I think if Boundless spent more time exhorting gentleness of reproach and humility and discernment, and less time making politically contentious posts which use sarcasm to tear down "the other party", you might find posters more kindly to each other as they feel less need to defend themselves. At times I feel myself on the defensive for being a moderate independent (presumably not "right" enough for Boundless though I'm against infanticide, not an advocate of gay marriage, and want to avoid socialist principles and programs from eating the budget), as if somehow wishing to avoid being blinded by party loyalties to see the truth most clearly in all circumstances is a flaw.

[63. bob said the following at 5:09 PM on Feb 14:]

63

In many ways, I'm rather conservative (particularly regarding scripture), though I suppose I have a few "progressive" ideas as well.

So now that my basic ideology is clearly established, here's my opinion. I believe that the moderators should not censor posts based on the ideas contained in them. While the concern about new believers being misled is valid, I believe that they will encounter false ideas elsewhere regardless of whether they are posted here or not.

Another concern may be that people will see the ideas put forth in comments as endorsed by this site. However, the comments are user-generated, and I believe that users will make that distinction and understand that the comments reflect the views of the readers of this site.

One of the things I value most about this site is the open conversation that allows everyone to present their own view. I believe that without this open discussion, this site will not be as valuable to its readers.

In conclusion, I believe that posts should not be censored based on the ideology presented. However, I think it is perfectly reasonable to censor comments that attack others rather than making a clear case for the poster's point of view.

[64. KES said the following at 5:11 PM on Feb 14:]

64

I'm definitely on the right, and I just wish that the commenters on here would grow up a little, apply some critical thinking skills, and write with sincerity. I'm tired of the snide comments, the blatant misinterpretation, the assumptions of what people are "really" saying, and just plain bad arguing skills.
"Logic! Why don't they teach logic in the schools today?"

[65. Marc said the following at 5:24 PM on Feb 14:]

65

I am a conservative Republican who occasionally has "third-party" tendencies, if that makes any sense...

Anyways, there are a few regulars who comment on the blog-posts and I wonder, "If you seemingly hate most everything The Line posts, why do you keep coming back?!"

There are also certain attacks on denominations that do not impress me. For example, I remember reading someone proclaiming that they were a Presbyterian and that Baptists need a lot of grace. And I just thought to myserlf, "Excuse me?!"

I, personally, am a Baptist, but you'll never see me slam a Prebyterian, Luthern, Methodist, or any denomination.

[66. Jeff L. said the following at 5:33 PM on Feb 14:]

66

I think I belong in the moderate camp of readers who do not post often(if ever). I love coming to Boundless for the advice on relationships, developing God-loving families, and for the encouragement to dig deeper in my faith. Much more often than not I agree with the writers' interpretation of scripture, but there are times I disagree. If I agree, I will often not bother to comment; if I don't agree, there is a greater chance that I will want to weigh in on the topic.

I wholeheartedly agree that when posters begin to lose their tempers and stop treating each other with love and respect, something needs to happen. We must hold each other accountable to Christ's standards of love.

Honestly, I think politics can hamper us in our call to bear fruit. Drawing lines between Christians on either side of the aisle does not bring us closer to Christ or to each other. I loved it when Leann quoted Titus 3:9: "But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless."

In 2Timothy 3:16-17, we read that "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." We are commanded by God to use his word to hold each other accountable. It is great when we do this for each other as brothers and sisters in Christ.

But we should feel free to disagree with each other when discussing topics which are not explicitly covered in God's Word. He doesn't explicitly tell us in scripture if we're allowed to kiss before marriage, or if Jackie Chan movies are too violent, or if we should allow our kids to say "Dangit" or if the world is facing an environmental crisis. Here, writers can expect to have healthy opposition to their views from people who love Christ just as much as they do.

Wow. What a rambling post. "Yes" to healthy debate. "No" to mean-spirited remarks. "Yes" to mutual love and respect. Finally, Ted, a question: why write "Personally, I am fine with [comments that disagree with Boundless' position]", but in the next paragraph, question if Boundless should allow "such disagreeable comments through"?

[67. Ellie Biswell said the following at 5:49 PM on Feb 14:]

67

Because I agree with Boundless on most issues, I don't feel like there's much to discuss. If I disagreed I would probably post, but as it is, I just appreciate the wit and wisdom Boundless provides every week.

[68. farmer Tom said the following at 5:54 PM on Feb 14:]

68

First my vitae. I am a born again Christian fundamentalist, separatist, Constitutionalist, husband, father of four, leader in my church, Jr. High Sr High Sunday School teacher, youth leader, mechanic, gun owner, hunter and when I'm not doing that I work for a family farm operation. Oh, and in the evening I also interact with the a small segment of the public by blogging here and at other blogs with a Biblical or Constitutionalist/libertarian worldview.

My use of the farmer tag is intentional attempt to play on the prejudices of the educated and intelligent who tend to look down on those who make their living doing manual labor. I like farming because I am a results oriented type person. There is nothing more satisfying than planting a field in the spring and seeing that field yield immense returns in the fall. Nothing is more satisfying than helping a cow give birth to a new calf. Yet people here and at most other blogs I visit assume that because I'm a farmer I am an ignorant, knuckle dragging, stupid, mouth breathing, hick. Only some of that is true. I have a college education, I am by far the most well read person in all of my circle of friends, scattered over several states.

Why all the drivel?

Getting to Ted's question. As a Christian, it drives me to the point of pulling my hair out, to come to a blog with a Christian worldview, and see people who claim the name of Christ post things that are overtly, blatantly, irrefutably, contrary to the written Word of God. I did not spend those years in Bible college, and accumulate a library of several hundred volumes to let some poser claim things from Scripture which are patently untrue. When I see false theology, it's like waving a red flag in front of a bull. I can't stop myself.

The disheartening thing is how often I see "christians" posting things here which are clearly WRONG. Jesus Christ is truth. In Him and through Him we find truth. To let comments or ideas full of untruths go unchallenged is contrary to the very principles that Jesus Christ represents.

If you do not know the Word, you can not know truth. The Word is Truth. And the place which helps us find Truth is in God's revealed Truth, His Son Jesus Christ. What Jesus Christ has to say about anything then is of ultimate importance because, Jesus Christ is Truth.

Another thing that trips my trigger is seeing young people in college or just out of college spouting the propaganda that some college professor or teaching assistant told them in some lecture hall. Many of the posters here have done little actual thinking about the issues, instead they are parrots, repeating whatever someone else they liked has said. Or even more infuriating is seeing "christian" quote or cite atheist or liberal sources as evidence. If your using the arguments of those opposed to the God of the Bible, and His Authority, you need to reevaluate your relationship to the Creator God.

And all of these things fit, together. If you reject God as the Creator, you cannot logically believe that "We hold these truths to be Self-Evident, that all men were endowed by their Creator, with certain unalienable right, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness(Property)." So then you also reject the foundational document for our system of Government. You are a materialist, you believe that government power comes from survival of the fittest, from superiority of race? intellect? power?

Am I "put off" by the liberal, godless, christians who post here, ....yes. However, that also makes it a tremendous challenge. If I can help one person here, come to a more complete knowledge of the Truth, Jesus Christ, then it is worth the aggravation. Is it discouraging.....yes. Because the evidence is that the Church of Jesus Christ is failing to teach its young people the Truth. The Church is raising up a generation that does not truly know the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

And one more thing. I find the constant discussion of tone to be especially grating. First it is difficult to establish tone on the written page anyway. But, when someone says something stupid, ignorant, unBiblical, to not react with some passion, righteous anger, or zeal would be an act of acceptance of that idea. I correct my children when they are in error. Depending on the urgency of the situation or error, my tone will change. If they are crossing a busy street without looking, I might yell to get their attention. Jesus literally threw the money changes out of the temple in His righteous anger at their actions. Showing a reaction is sometimes necessary to stress the importance of the issue being discussed.

A long post to say, you'll are doing a good job, keep it up. I'll keep coming around as long as it is OK to discuss issues and ideas in a open and Biblical manner.

[69. A.M.C. said the following at 5:58 PM on Feb 14:]

69

Ted, I have a question about your definition of "conservative" here. Are you assuming the "U.S. definition," i.e. favoring more restrictions on moral/social issues but favoring fewer restrictions on fiscal/economic issues? I'm raising this question because I've noticed that most of the "liberal stances" that you've mentioned are happen to be moral and social issues, or at least theological stances (e.g. "pro-choice," opposition to Biblical authority, supporting same-sex marriages, anti-Biblical dating/courtship, anti-media discernment, anti-efficacy of gospel).

Well, you might have already noticed from my previous posts, such as the one in unChristian, that I would consider myself myself to be "leaning liberal on economic issues, but leaning conservative on social/moral issues." Does that mean I risk being considered an "enemy" of Boundless Line just because I happen to favor more governmental intervention on economic issues (which would be "liberal" per the U.S. definition), even though I'm pro-life, pro-Biblical authority, against same-sex marriages, pro-Biblical dating/courtship, pro-media discernment, and pro-efficacy of gospel, etc. (i.e. generally conservative on moral and social issues, and perhaps most important, non-negotiable theological stances)?

==> In case you're wondering why I'm currently leaning "liberal" on economic issues... here's some background information in my own defense.

* Since I started taking my Christian faith seriously while in college, I noticed a major internal change in myself over the past two years-- namely, I became more "polarized" in my stances of issues. On social, moral, and theological issues, I became noticeably more conservative, mostly due to taking the Scripture more seriously and thus, applying my faith to those real-world situations. I could even tell that the PCUSA church that I attended back during high school was teaching things that are nice to hear but aren't necessarily true to the Gospel. In fact, after attending a PCA church close to my college campus for the last two years, I liked it enough to be willing to become an official member (this happened on 2/10/2008, actually)-- and I must say that one of the reason why I joined is that I deemed its theology to be more conservative (should I say more accurate?)

* At the same time, though, I also found myself becoming more liberal on economic and "social justice" issues. Curiously, that might also be the direct result of taking the Scripture seriously (take Isaiah 58 for example). And since about a year ago, I actually started sensing that I might be called to settle in an inner-city neighborhood after college to "serve the city and its people" if this is really what God's calling me to do, even (to my parents' dismay, who admittedly have sacrificed quite a bit financially to allow me to emigrate to the U.S. back then) to the point of being willing to give up financial security and social prestige in the process. [Translation: I'm taking literally the Biblical idea of following Jesus at all costs.]

* Sure, I do agree with fiscal conservatives that charities work better than government aid, and that faith-based rehabilitation programs are often far more effective than "secular" programs (I know that this is true from experience, i.e. volunteering with Christian service organizations). But I would personally be okay with (at least in principle) taxing the rich more, implementing universal healthcare (if there's ever a way for that to work in the U.S.), or perhaps funding schools with more than just local property taxes, for example.

==> I won't elaborate on the arguments for these stances for now, because that's not my main intention. My point is that I might sometimes take a more "liberal" stance on a certain issue that I don't consider to be non-negotiable for a Christian (such as the ones listed above), if I believe that doing so will actually better reflect God's will. But unlike the "stereotypical liberal," I'm open to the possibility that my interpretation can be dead wrong at times and would be willing to change my stances afterwards.

The problem, however, is that it seems to me that the notion that "liberal comments, although allowed here due to free speech, are frowned upon" is telling me to shut up. Now it seems as if I'm being persecuted by both liberals and conservatives at the same time. Is it only me, or are there people out there who also feel this way? :-(

[70. Katie said the following at 6:24 PM on Feb 14:]

70

I like the back-and-forth--it sharpens me. BUT it does make me less likely to chip in...I like to keep my head intact upon my shoulders....not snapped off in a fit of misunderstanding. :) (Maybe I should learn to be more thick-skinned anyway, eh?)

[71. Matt said the following at 6:40 PM on Feb 14:]

71

"Do you find some of the comment discouraging? Do you find yourself inclined not to visit The Line because of the argumentative nature of some of the discussions?"

Absolutely. What I find most discouraging is that the conservatives are often just as argumentative if not more so.

I would like to be able to think of Boundless a haven. A haven where people are above acting like jerks and launching personal attacks at others who don't hold their views.

[72. Drew said the following at 7:10 PM on Feb 14:]

72

I find the articles on the line to be encouraging. I often skip the comment section because it tends to always argue with the traditional position. It is discouraging to see so many people that just do not believe the Bible, and are unwilling to listen to it. Then wander why they have so many problems. However it is helpful to know were others that call them selves Christians are coming from. Even if they are wrong.

[73. Melissa S. said the following at 7:49 PM on Feb 14:]

73

Yeah, I admit that it was disappointing and off-putting to discover that most of the blog comments were seemingly anti-everything this website stands for. Like finding out that the "Furry Feline Club" consists mostly of cat haters and a few dog lovers.

That's just my overall impression...maybe if all comments were tallied the "anti" comments wouldn't actually be so overwhelming.

Maybe most people here are more logical and Christian than they seem, or maybe this is the place they will learn to integrate their Christian worldview with everyday life. But for the most part, comments seem to struggle against nearly everything that is said. Sometimes I don't know why people read this blog since they don't really like much that is posted on it.

I would prefer to see comments that provide more actual contribution to and expansion on blogs. And comments that oppose a Christian worldview should be answered.

And it is especially irritating to see comments that say Boundless has no business to post on this or that topic. The purpose of Boundless, according to "About Us" is to integrate a Christian worldview with all of life. That covers everything! Not to mention that a non-subscription blog like this can post on anything they want to!

Also, there is a difference between "conservative politically" and "conservative Biblically". It's really mystifying to see so many comments make everything about strictly politics and not the underlying principles and issues(like all the global warming drama).

To go with the global warming example: it's not about the politics of global warming. It's about finding out what is true or false and being responsible with that information. Positions on global warming or anything else aren't taken because they are politically conservative. They are taken because of a Christian worldview, such as faithfulness to truth. The point isn't to automatically reject all aspects of global warming that comes out of a Democrat's mouth and to automatically accept whatever comes out of a Republican's mouth. The point is to examine everything that comes out of both sides for the sake of finding out what is true and consistent with a Christian worldview.

I enjoy the back and forth. But I stop enjoying the back and forth when it doesn't seem that people are trying to integrate Christianity with everyday life but only want to resist everything the Line says.

On the other hand, maybe those people aren't the point. Maybe the comments exist for the people who are trying to live a Christian life...to get practice with even more media discernment? lol

I know this comment is agonizingly long but it was kind of a relief to be able to say some honest thoughts from the dark side in a "protected" area. I hope it's not too inflamatory or anything. If so, then it's just for the Line writers! Thanks!

[74. Kelly said the following at 8:03 PM on Feb 14:]

74

Is it just me, or has The Line become more and more political? I find terrifying the implication that supporting one party over another means you're 'less-Christian' or 'wrong'. There's been quite a bit of outright hatred on this blog directed towards certain groups. "Hate the sin, not the sinner," but some of the posts cross this fine line.

Additionally, a lot of the readers here are non-Americans. You do manage to alienate quite a lot of us with rants about Democrats or Republicans. One country's internal politics is hardly the 'entire world' that God is interested in. I've lived in several countries and may return to the US, but what about those who will never live there? (Focus on the Family defines its mission as "worldwide".)

Finally, I agree that some threads can get particularly nasty. Particularly when ONE LINE of a person's comment is quoted out of context, or people are told flat-out that they're terrible. What happened to politeness? It's not hard to say, "I appreciate your point of view but disagree for these Biblical reasons (exact verses would be nice for those of us who are still learning more about the Bible).

[75. Becky said the following at 8:24 PM on Feb 14:]

75

*first time commenter*
As someone who leans slightly left of center, my comment probably isn't welcome here.

Jesus was the only perfect human being, and it stands to reason that the rest of us will be wrong sometime. How are we supposed to figure out when we're wrong if we shut out those who disagree?
There seem to be quite a few things the Bible doesn't explicitly dictate (eg dispensationalism vs. Covenant theology), and it seems that it would be most Christ-honoring to seek to show His love during disagreements than to bash the opinions of others.

I can't speak for everyone center and further left, but I personally spent four years at a very conservative Christian college constantly being criticized and shunned by students who believed me worse than a pagan , because my faith led me to believe differently about my responsibilities as a woman, the importance of public education, and how Christians should steward God's creation. Over the course of four years I suffered deep wounds that made me struggle to see the Church as more than just her biting, vicious parts. I believe many Boundless readers on both the left and right ends of the spectrum have been treated with such disrespect from those who disagree that they have a very difficult time listening to others' positions.
I enjoy seeing the different opinions voiced on the Line, however, I ache for the body of Christ when disagreement dissolves into savage attacks.

[76. Becky said the following at 8:27 PM on Feb 14:]

76

--as an aside, I think God is big enough to make Scripture *both* metaphorical and factual. One doesn't necessarily preclude the other.

[77. John said the following at 8:36 PM on Feb 14:]

77

Exibit A: People just don't know what constitutes liberal/left thinking nor that liberal/left is not biblical.

“Abortion and homosexuality are wrong; gun control and government healthcare and education are not."

You're 2/5ths of the way there. Or maybe half way. It's hard to say. Who would argue that education is bad? :)

It would not be censorship if the Line decided to prevent ANY post whether left or right.

His word requires we have an answer (defense) for the hope we have AND that we tear down vein philosophies.

We should know what we know well and why. Having the enemy's lies infront of you and countering them should increase your understanding of your own faith.

Is this the place for that? Hm.

The sad thing is that the libs posting here don't want to consider the biblical perspective.

And supposed conservatives are more concerned with misperceived tone than truth.

Seriously, it gets tiresome having to point this out. Several individuals keep making the assertion that I do this or that, yet not one example to back up the assertions.

Stop bringing me up and focus on the OP.

[78. Leah said the following at 9:25 PM on Feb 14:]

78

Eliza,

At an attempt to answer your question, I think Ted was simply thinking that conservatives probably expect to find a relatively friendly, welcoming and fostering environment on a conservative blog like The Line, and when they don't, he's wondering how that affects them. So I don't think it's a matter of liberals not being welcome, just a matter of how much opposition the staff allow to conservative beliefs. (That applies to NeedACatchyName too- I don't believe Ted is looking at banning opposition!)

I think it was explained by Michela when she said I came looking for support, encouragment, and some challenging thoughts. While these things are present, sometimes it's disappointing to see the misunderstandings and argumentative comments that are posted.

That was my impression anyway :)

[79. DT said the following at 10:08 PM on Feb 14:]

79

It absolutely makes me uncomfortable. People have argued with me in the comments over conservative things I've said. I expect more from Focus on the Family readers, frankly. So many places I visit on the Internet are full of people completely unlike me who like to pick fights with those of us who are religious conservatives. It gets tiresome.

[80. Rachael said the following at 10:38 PM on Feb 14:]

80

Hmmm. This is an interesting question! I think that Boundless articles do a wonderful job of addressing issues relevant to Christians who desire to live according to God's will as revealed in the Bible. It is very encouraging to have a forum available to hash out the details pertaining to this "quest,"if you will. Personally, I think it is healthy and biblical to be open to thinking through our faith and obedience with fellow believers. In a certain sense, it is imperative to continue exhorting one another, and this a valid way to do so. In that sense, anyone who claims to be a Christian deserves to be treated as one, i.e. to be challenged by fellow believers to obey God and submit to His Word. There is a danger in thinking that a politically "conservative" affiliation somehow safeguards Christians from having to be diligent in studying the scriptures and seeking God's guidance to show themselves approved. Let's not grow complacent in our affiliations! So long as we as individual Christians take care to submit our own comments and conclusions to God, we have nothing to fear and much to gain from communicating with even the most "liberal" of Christians...And should any non-Christians stumble upon our conversations, what a blessed opportunity for each of us to act as an ambassador for Christ with all meekness and gentleness!

[81. Brandon said the following at 11:40 PM on Feb 14:]

81

I don't mind the debates as long as they are civil. Some of the things that are said are definitely not bibically based. Even from those saying they go to and are actively involved in what they call a church.
My only wish is that good Bible believing Christians who know and can handle the truth would speak up. The discouraging thing to me is when I read a bunch of lies that are spoken as truth and no one responds to it.

[82. Ariana said the following at 12:22 AM on Feb 15:]

82

Perhaps some of the negative comments from the "liberals," are due to the tone of the original post? An idea can be stated in a way that is itself divisive, or topics can be chosen that everyone knows people disagree on. For instance, even if I don't believe in human-caused global warming, I might just feel the need to play devil's advocate if Boundless publishes a post talking about how plainly obvious it is that all of the global warming talk is just a bunch of hype. It really isn't that black and white, and to write as if it is is, I think, somewhat presumptuous.

I think that it helps conversations like these to posit ideas in a way that does not inherently judge the hearts of those who disagree. In real conversations, you have to suspend judgment until you have listened to the other person long enough to make sure you understand just where they are coming from. I think we too often make conclusions when we probably should spend much more time asking follow up questions.

[83. Ellie said the following at 12:39 AM on Feb 15:]

83

I like the fact that the opposing points of view on this blog, if nothing else because it makes it look more credible than "just another Focus propaganda tool." But it does cause me not to post because I don't have enough time or energy to defend my arguments (on basic issues) against often ridiculous attacks. I do agree with Eliza, I would like to see a thread on why lefties follow this blog (and to a lesser extent the trueu coffee shop).

[84. James said the following at 1:08 AM on Feb 15:]

84

Ted, in short, yes. I do find it discouraging. However, I am not discouraged to read the blog posts, but rather discouraged to post comments.

There are some things I sometimes would like to say something about that, when I read the comments said, I choose not to. I simply see no benefit then in commenting and simply stirring up the hornet's nest. So, I keep quiet and keep my thoughts to myself.

I still read the blog posts themselves. I am more wary of reading the comments simply b/c I know on the more controversial issues, some of the comments will get my blood boiling.

[85. Theo K said the following at 3:14 AM on Feb 15:]

85

"However, at times, no matter the scripture quoted and such, continued opposition becomes frustrating."

So true... I think that the problem with people of liberal ideas (e.g. about same-sex marriage and abortion) is that they haven't yet acquired a biblical worldview. And the only way to obtain such a worldview is to immerse yourself in the scriptures.
So I would encourage liberal readers to actually check their beliefs and opinions against scripture. I know it is hard to realise that something that you held for so long as correct is actually sinful. But it is better to live in the light than living in darkness, no matter what this costs you.
Of course there are other issues that are not so clean-cut in the bible (e.g. global warming). I think that on these issues we could all happily agree to disagree.

I guess what I am trying to say to the liberals of the group is to re-evaluate the authority of the Bible over their beliefs and practices. Those that stubbornly reject the authority of the Bible as the only rule of life and faith should seriously question their “faith”. Those that are actually Christians but their minds haven’t being renewed yet, I hope that God will work with you in such a mighty way that in a couple of years you will be remembering about your same-sex marriage and abortion supporting comments with shame.

However, I have to say (and perhaps I have also been guilty of the same) that there are times that comments from a conservative point of view are mean spirited, containing personal attacks. I should hope that we all strive to speak the truth in love.

To the editors, I would suggest that you don’t moderate excessively, since as other posters have already commented, perhaps God is using these debates and arguments in order to shape His children. After all the Bible is indeed sharper than any double-edged sword. I would think however that it would be good to actually follow through the discussions and make sure that no unbiblical arguments are left unchallenged.

[86. S said the following at 4:02 AM on Feb 15:]

86

I am "conservative" on some issues and "liberal" on others. Like some of the earlier posts expressed, I don't think that Republican = Christian. I enjoy a healthy debate. (Although, I agree that the super long posts are really tedious to read, I usually skip those.) The debates that are discouraging to me, however, are the married v. single ones. Those are the ones that have caused me to stop reading this blog for a few days. The headline of this blog reads "Bringing Focus to the Single Years", yet some out there don't seem to realize some of us have more single years than others.

[87. Grays said the following at 6:02 AM on Feb 15:]

87

This is the internet. Nobody comes here except to fight. =p

Honestly, I am tired either way (with the whole internet, not just here). Tired of people pointlessly railing against each other, tired of people talking but not listening. The disagreeable comments get dreary, sure. So do the agreeable comments. ;)

On another note, another complaint against the world ^_^ I object to the word "Liberal" being used for ideas that tie people down, lock them into little rooms and take away everything they need to really live.

But I do not share all this discouragement to discourage you =)

[88. Eva said the following at 6:06 AM on Feb 15:]

88

as a moderate, i'm not put off by either extremes.

the fact is that while conservative republicans tend to hold to certain biblical principles (the sanctity of life, for example), "liberal" democrats tend to hold to other biblical principles (compassion and concern for the less fortunate, for example).

i try to hold to all of what jesus taught. all of what the bible teaches. i'm pro-life all the way; not just for the unborn.

i think it's mindless, to be frank, to equate christianity with republicanism and bad environmental stewardship and americanism.

jesus wasn't an american. he wasn't a republican. and i think it grieves Him that many of us get on republican agendas (as if they're inherently christian) and ride these agendas all the way.

many of their policies are definitely anti-christian.

we need to be christian first, and only ascribe to political policies (whether they be democrat or republican) where they serve biblical aims.

[89. Grays said the following at 6:09 AM on Feb 15:]

89

I should say though:

Comments should be almost wholly unmoderated (in other words, print everything printable) or else they should be HEAVILY moderated (that is, picking the most original, thoughtful, best-of-the-best...see lifehacker.com for a fine example).

Hahahaha! Did I just tell you to avoid "moderation in moderation"? Yesss, yes I did. ^_^

And the reason is this: every site I've ever seen that tries it, ends up stupid.

Let the comments be of highest accessibility, or of highest quality. Just let them be of highest *something* -- I haven't got the answer as to highest *what*, but think about it. =)

[90. Grays said the following at 6:15 AM on Feb 15:]

90

Another problem (for me), and I don't know how to fix this one either, and I'm part of the problem with my three consecutive posts =P

is that there are so many comments I know I will never have time to read them all.

See, when a site gets big (and big means, f'r instance, over twenty comments per post) the comments become decreasingly useful because...people don't have time to read them all, but they still want to chime in.

That's what I'm doing right now, LOL! And that's where all the repetition comes from, and people get so worried that no one will hear them, they just start shouting their thoughts over and over, and stop listening. Instead of a thoughtful polylogue you end up with nothing but noise. (With nuggets of thoughtfulness hidden through and through, for those more diligent than myself to find).

[91. Jade said the following at 6:32 AM on Feb 15:]

91

I lean towards the right side of the spectrum and rarely comment on this blog unless I take a personal interest in the topic. I usually agree with the posters and see no reason to comment. I've been reading this blog and the Boundless website in general from pretty much the very beginning and I can say that it has strengthened and deepened my Christian walk. I don't participate much on the blog comments because I don't see the point of getting in an argument with an online persona who may or may not represent them self honestly. I think that a lot of the very liberal posters just come here to stir the pot and not to edify and build up other Christians, although true Christians can certainly fall at any place of the liberal-conservative spectrum. Also, I think that young Christians today are much more "liberal" than their elders when it comes to tolerance and social issues.

Finally, unless Boundless line wants to limit this forum to only comments and not debate, the mods absolutely ***must*** figure out a more efficient way to run the conversation. As an earlier poster said, the livejournal method would work much better, or really almost any other method other than the present one! I do truly appreciate all the hard work and effort Ted, Mott, Denise, Candace, and all the other put into this forum.

[92. Laura said the following at 6:45 AM on Feb 15:]

92

Ted & staff,

I've been reading Boundless regularly for 9 years (since my freshman year of college) and the Line since it's been up. This is my first post. I'm pretty much a traditionalist and a conservative Christian.

I'm sure a large portion of your readers have roughly similar views to you; we may just not feel the need to constantly comment on articles that we tend to agree with. If Candice wrote an article that I thought was coming way out of left field, I may have written and said "what's going on with Candice?" Other than that, I, for the most part, just enjoy reading the articles and blogs and glance with agreement, amusement and, sometimes, concern at people's comments.

Honestly, it seems like some of the people who are constantly commenting on some of the more "conservative" blogs and articles on here with vitriol and malice are just looking to pick a fight, tick off those conservative, Christian wackos. That's really sad. Maybe they just need to vent their anger. It reminds me a little of the Hate Hannity Hotline on Sean Hannity’s radio show that my husband listens to sometimes.

Readers should be free to post whatever they want, but if their ONLY aim is to vent at the “Right” then maybe they might consider starting their own blog.

Just my thoughts. . .

[93. Lis said the following at 7:06 AM on Feb 15:]

93

Ted, since you asked: It's a hard call, because I want to make everyone feel welcome, but I do often avoid the comments and find at least some of them discouraging.

Now I'm asking myself how I behave when I visit very liberal sites (which I sometimes do). Certainly I get upset with some of the perspectives I find there, but I generally voice that frustration to friends who understand that I don't have a personal vendetta against liberals. I might make a comment if I happen to have a piece of information that those on the site don't have, but feel that it's generally disrespectful and a waste of time to try to <> a person over to my perspective, especially when I'm their guest.

This sounds like I'm against all liberal/conservative debates. I'm not: I think it's important to understand what others believe, to practice expressing what I believe, and to keep open to learning new things. I just don't think that learning is as likely to go on in an atmosphere that's high on emotion and low on respect for others.

If (and I only mean if) some people really hate everything Boundless authors say, maybe they'd be more comfortable with inviting us to c'mon over to their site to read about their perspective there.

[94. Louise said the following at 7:48 AM on Feb 15:]

94

One more point I would like to add here: The Jan. 2008 article "Myths about Living Together" does not support what Boundless considers to be the "biblical dating/courtship" model.

I don't know if it goes so far to reject the concept, but it does not support it.

[95. Michele Samuelson said the following at 8:26 AM on Feb 15:]

95

Saw this yesterday and couldn't stop to post, but I really wanted to chime in.

I work for a political non-profit, my husband and I met at a Republican convention, all that jazz. When I was in college, I was part of a conservative student organization that took a pretty radical approach to getting our message out on campus, and I've been called every name under the sun - "Nazi," "fascist," "self-loather," "John Bircher," other less creative names. All for either my politics or my Christianity, depending on the day! In 2004, the day after the election, I woke up to swastikas drawn on the whiteboard I kept on my dorm room door, and my "W Stands for Women" sticker disfigured.

All of that to say, I've had my fill of ridicule and name-calling, and I'm sometimes hesitant to post on The Line because that feeling of being judged for my beliefs overrules desire when I read what people have been posting.

I work for an economic issues non-profit - which has resulted in being called a "jihadist" when lodging complaints about the outrageous spending in Texas cities, but never in someone claiming I must wish to see all women raped because I object to the "Vagina Monologues." (that really happened, in my college paper, when I spoke out against that play) I can handle ridicule because of my politics, though I find it annoying and juvenile (and sometimes insulting), but for my religious beliefs? No thanks. I'm a pretty conservative Christian, and that's all I really want to get into when I'm responding to a blog post.

I love the way these things are handled on Boundless, but a lot of times, I won't even bother to read the comments, because I don't want to know what the other side thinks - I just want to take in what I've read on my own.

[96. Jesse said the following at 8:39 AM on Feb 15:]

96

It sometimes discourages me to find that sound doctrine and good hermeneutics are out of fashion. I'm wary of the progressive church that sometimes leaves God's Word behind.

[97. Christy said the following at 9:08 AM on Feb 15:]

97

I used to check The Line multiple times each day. Due in part to discussions in the comments, I no longer visit Boundless or its blog on a weekly basis.

The discursive process is wonderful, and inherently involves some disagreement between people. At times, though, the comments sections do not seem to build toward the unity and strength of Christ's body.

[98. Bene said the following at 10:13 AM on Feb 15:]

98

Ah, I thought that perhaps I could not comment on this because I get the feeling that Boundless considers people such as myself "liberal" but then I re-read your description. I am actually none of the things that you described, so I guess that means that I can comment. :-)

Two thoughts:

1. I am concerned with the conflation of liberal/"non-traditional" with disrespectful and unnecessarily insulting comments. I realize that this may frequently be correct simply because those who are liberal are more inclined to agree with the Boundless consensus and thus fight. But still, I think that if Boundless chooses to sensor more comments, it should set it's target against animosity rather than "liberalism".

2. The point may not be so much about readers as the Boundless staff. I hope that most of your readers are mature enough to simply not click on the link for comments if they are bothered. But, if your staff finds encountering disagreement too draining, then perhaps you must eliminate the opposition. I am thinking here of the adoption thread which finally got me to comment after years of reading Boundless and then enjoying the blog and reading others comments.

[99. Jo said the following at 10:23 AM on Feb 15:]

99

John (sigh), you said...

"Exibit A: People just don't know what constitutes liberal/left thinking nor that liberal/left is not biblical.

“Abortion and homosexuality are wrong; gun control and government healthcare and education are not."

You're 2/5ths of the way there. Or maybe half way. It's hard to say. Who would argue that education is bad? :)"

I didn't make that comment to start yet another debate. I was merely explaining my personal position, which is neither completely conservative or completely liberal because I am BRITISH. There is in my political spectrum no "left/liberal" or "right/conservative", and I couldn't care less which American party espouses which ideas since I won't be voting for either of them.

I base my beliefs on the Bible first, and my experience second. As I said in the second half of that comment, I enjoy Boundless because my experience is not everyone's and it broadens my mind to hear other people's views and challenge my own. However, my opinions remain valid and I remain entitled to them, and I'd appreciate you not jumping on me every single time I express one.

[100. Jill said the following at 10:26 AM on Feb 15:]

100

I am a regular reader of The Line, but I don't comment much for a few reasons--the first being that I live in Hawaii and by the time I am awake, most of what I would say is already reflected in the comments. Many of the comments tend to get repetitive, so there is really not much to add.

I am politically and culturally conservative, but I sometimes put off by the banter on both sides. I believe very strongly that my faith has implications for politics, and the way I vote reflects that. However, I believe that there are many political topics on which reasonable people (and Christians!) can disagree (e.g. fiscal policy, foreign policy, global warming, health care, etc.). I guess that's why it is sometimes shocking to me that the original posts are so political. I know that the editors in many cases come from very political backgrounds, but I don't really come to Boundless to hear the Republican party-line. It doesn’t bother me if these things are genuinely posted to prompt discussion and debate—I welcome hearing other viewpoints. I just cringe at the thought of arguing for the sake of arguing, or playing "gotcha" with the other side.

That being said, I sometimes don't even look at the comments for particular posts because I can predict almost exactly what comments will be there--there will be 15 comments on a thread that begin “I can’t believe a Christian would say…” That kind of discussion is unproductive. It's really not a good use of my time, and I leave feeling depressed or frustrated.

And as my husband likes to say--comments tend to reflect the extremes anyway, which is probably why there isn't a whole lot of moderation. If you don't care either way--you don't post.