General Chat

Just post it again Island - but give us a clue about what's on the internet that someone doesn't want us to see.

keep up Joy. Do you not know what the thread is about? :-S

Clearly I do, Island - as you have already noticed from my earliest post here.

It must be the way you phrased 'something on the Internet etc' because I thought you had come up with something new that we'd all missed as we were all :-S

Chill out lass. :-D

One point I think we need to bear in mind about this case is that it is occurring in a different society.

We have pretty much lost the concept of the extended family in our own society and I can remember an African student remarking on how difficult it must be to raise our children in that way.

I seem to have offended at least one, and I'm not sure how.

Is there more than one David posting ?

Caroline, Rose, Island, anybody, every body, I apologise for what seems

to be offensive in my thread. :-(

If I hadn't started it, some one else would :-S

I doubt they would David, but I don't object to the posting of it, but I do think you might consider whether topics are suitable for the "Christian thread"?

No one knows better than me how difficult it is to stick to a topic when ones mind flits about to other things, but that is probably not the thread to ponder on non-related topics really as other people find it a comfort to read it for the prayers and 'Christian'/biblical topics.

I wasn't offended I didn't get to even see any of the reported comments! I'm offended someone thinks they have to be offended enough to rr it!!

David, you haven't offended me at all :-S

I've no need to 'chill out' Joy.

At least I told you to your face David
which I prefer to do and not hide behind an RR.

My opinion is that this is probably a topic that could appear on General Chat for discussion ........ which means everyone can post their views and discuss the matter without anyone getting upset, calling others names, or getting RR'd.

However, like Emma ............. it didn't strike me as a topic to post on the Christian Thread and comparing it with Sarah in the Bible. I have responded to you on there.

I may have mentioned this once before, but if not here goes.

Would it be such a bad thing for those who have posts deleted to

identify themselves to the thread and explain WHY the deletion ?

Or would it be easier to ignore it ?

Only saying

As has been said many many times over the years when the suggestion is made that RR's be identified .......................

It sounds like a good idea, but many people also think that it could lead to harassment of the RR'er, which could/would be unwarranted if the post reviewed offended on grounds such as race, sex, homophobia, religion. And it might therefore lead to people not RR'ing a post that really does offend.

There are regular threads about every 2 or 3 months on this topic, David.

You'll find out tomorrow or within the next 2 or 3 days whether your post is considered offensive or not by GR ......... just as they do with every one of your previous posts that have been RR'd.


But maybe you should consider doing what several people have suggested to you ............. that you really think about what you are posting, how you are saying it, and is it really to be posted on here, whether that is on your own thread or on someone else's. It often seems that you do not think through exactly what you are saying or how you say it.

I mean ............. I am not easily offended, but I do quite frequently think "WTH is he posting now?", and "why is he posting it?"

In all my time on here I have only RR'd 2 posts but have told the poster it was me and my reasons for doing so.

LaGooner ..........

I have also usually told the poster why I had RR'd a post, and it is always because of being offensive to me and hopefully most people because of hatred toward race, sex, LGTBQ2, religion, or once a truly offensive post about still born children
that upset several people on here.

Otherwise I consider posts on here to be open to full debate or discussion and that we are all adults who should be able to debate or discuss all sides of a question without being offensive, hateful or rude to other posters with alternative opinions.

If I find a poster to be generally offensive to me personally because of their views or what they insist on posting, then I just ignore that poster and do not read any of their postings.

Sometimes I wish there was a function on here such as on FB where you can block seeing someone's posts! :-D

I'm not likely to disappear, I've nowhere to go. <3

Sylvia a blocker would be lovely as there are one or two on here that really wind me up :-D. As you say I either read and ignore or else ignore the OP completely as I know it will be a load of Bull**** :-D

Sylvia a blocker would be lovely as there are one or two on here that really wind me up :-D. As you say I either read and ignore or else ignore the OP completely as I know it will be a load of Bull**** :-D

I get Sharron's post about a different society - she is right about that.

I am sure I am not alone in realising that the birth rate has always been higher in poorer, less-developed countries because there is rarely any comprehensive nationwide system of care or social security. In such instances, parents have a lot of children for a number of reasons, one being a higher infant mortality rate and another being the need for children to look after their parents in old age.

The parents in this case have already reached the age when it is expected that their offspring will care for them. It makes one ask whether the children may end up needing care themselves. So sad for them, I think.

This may not go down well but another query springs to mind; is the story absolutely true?