0

The road to Taxila

As usual in this recent history, everything has been destroyed by the religions of “peace” aka muslims and christians.

Are such comments and posts "normal" across SE sites for religions? E.g., on Islam SE, are users allowed to bash Hinduism, Christianity and other religions in comments and posts?

After I objected to the use of such language:

'As usual in this recent history , everything has then destroyed by the religions of “peace” aka muslims and christians.' - such sarcasm/unnecessary commentary is not recommended on SE sites. I think it also breaks the SE Code of Conduct. – sv. Aug 31 at 17:44

...OP edits his post and marks the line in bold:

https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/revisions/42662/2 (edited Sep 1 at 2:19)

A flag on this post aged-away:

rude or abusive – sv. Sep 1 at 10:06 aged away

Another answer uses even more colorful language:

The religions of the Mlecchas enjoin mass-rape, genocide and massacre, as similarly done by Asuras and Rakshasas.

A flag on this post also aged-away:

rude or abusive – sv. Jun 25 at 2:33 aged away

According to this user, Christianity and Islam are more suitable for rajasic and tamasic people:

@DiyaSuhaniAmarॐ - each religion is suitable for people of certain temperaments. Just as there are 3 gunas, to cater to each type, there are 3 main religions - Hinduism (Satva), Christianity (Rajas), Islam (Tamas) – ram Jan 3 at 22:33

This user clearly has some problem with Abrahmic religions and their followers:

Were ancient Hindu polytheists?

Not for Abrahmic followers. Pre-Vedic based question.

...

Because nowadays Teachings are interpolated translations from Ancient Adharmic Abrahmics texts


Makes me wonder if this site is still about Hinduism or has it turned into a Hindu website?

The only active moderator assured in a comment hidden away under a post that this isn't a Hindu website but I'm not sure if he really means it $:

This is not a Hindu site but is a site about Hinduism. This word [mleccha] shouldn't be used for addressing/targeting foreign people. – Pandya♦ Sep 25 '19 at 11:05





$ "Means it" => if a mod spots such a comment or post they take immediate action without waiting for a flag.

18
  • 2
    Those comments aren't bashing Abrahamic religions, they are stating facts about it. "The religions of the Mlecchas enjoin mass-rape, genocide and massacre, as similarly done by Asuras and Rakshasas" is a fact admitted by the Abrahamics themselves in the Old Testament, Quran, etc. – Ikshvaku Dec 30 '20 at 3:28
  • 2
    Every religion has different opinions. Even other religion SE sites follow the same model where if an answer is in comparison with other religions, they show up themselves as on upper hand. Since this is a well-researched answer (and maybe just interpretation), we should be fine with this. This is for this post. Also, “peace” aka muslims and christians. yeah such tone is unnecessary. – Mr_Green Dec 30 '20 at 4:14
  • 3
    Removed the unnecessary tone.. link. For some things we don't require mods' attention. – Mr_Green Dec 30 '20 at 4:51
  • 2
    @Mr_Green Exactly! If one finds such content in the question body, they can simply edit the question. – TheLittleNaruto Dec 30 '20 at 6:28
  • @TheLittleNaruto Are we allowed to edit other people's questions? – Ikshvaku Dec 31 '20 at 3:14
  • 1
    @Ikshvaku yes if we see any grammar mistake or formatting issue, also issues like this one. – TheLittleNaruto Dec 31 '20 at 3:23
  • Ok. Btw, how do we remedy the current moderator situation? We only have one active mod. – Ikshvaku Dec 31 '20 at 3:43
  • 1
    @Ikshvaku election will happen next month because CMs are on vacation for new year and Christmas celebration. – TheLittleNaruto Dec 31 '20 at 5:38
  • sv, lol - 'a website ABOUT hinduism' - meaning, we should entertain all sorts of notions about the religion ? for e.g. Imagine if there was a SE called fatpeople.stackexchange, which contained nothing but posts hating fat people. But, according to your logic, since that site is ABOUT fat people, not a FAT PEOPLE's site, it is OK.. It would be similar to r/nongolfers - People who don't golf, but sit around talking ABOUT it. Like any site though, our content is decided by users and mods. If we like baseless Hindu bashing content, we'll allow it, if not, we won't. @MrSigma – mar Jan 10 at 4:45
  • "'a website ABOUT hinduism' - meaning, we should entertain all sorts of notions about the religion ?" - as usual, playing the strawman, read the whole post from start to end before commenting. I never said a site about Hinduism means 'all sorts of notions about the religion'....besides, I'm not sure what parts of Hinduism you are not comfortable discussing? Are you afraid to have an open Q&A on certain topics? What are they? @ram – sv. Jan 10 at 9:30
  • @sv, I'm not afraid of topics. I'm also not afraid of questioners. I'm afraid for audience. If the audience (normal folks) are not discerning enough to differentiate scientific discussions from pseudo-scientific ones, they have to be protected from being misled (security via obfuscation). You think Sanatana Dharma doesn't encourage open discussion ? There is more discussion on atheism in our dharma than entire text of other religions where your tongue (or head) gets cut off - See Brahma Sutras if interested. I however, have an extra desire to show pseudo-rationalists their rightful place. – mar Jan 10 at 9:35
  • Regarding your new edit, we can edit that away in a better way. Just did.. hinduism.stackexchange.com/posts/44197/revisions – Mr_Green Jan 13 at 3:28
  • FYI, I appreciate you are bringing this up here. But I think, being a high rep user, you can edit those posts and leave a friendly comment if needed. I don't think we can change users' beliefs and understanding (that is not our job here). If possible, at least, we can try guide new users to avoid such remarks. I understand this is all broken but we can't blame mod always. – Mr_Green Jan 13 at 3:44
  • "being a high rep user, you can edit those posts and leave a friendly comment if needed." - if you didn't notice, I tried explaining to User 1 and also flagged the post, the flag aged-away. Why do I want to waste my time editing others posts to my liking and get into arguments and edit-wars with them? 'we can't blame mod always' - What were the mods doing when all this was happening? Are they consciously turning a blinding eye to this issue? Why did the flags age away? Are the mods condoning such things to appease some high-rep users? Lot of unanswered questions. @Mr_Green – sv. Jan 13 at 12:03
  • @sv. I am trying to say maybe once we try to edit, there will be lesser cases of such which you mentioned in the post or maybe none. For example, after checking your post, I edited and informed the same to the user. The user took it in a friendly way. Although that user has some other issues with me :P. We cleared these things too in the chatroom. – Mr_Green Jan 13 at 12:21
3

Makes me wonder if this site is still about Hinduism or has it turned into a Hindu website?

While your concerns are substantial, your expectations are irrational. HSE might not be a Hindu site but the users who are using & perpetuating the site are non-scholar & unsecular Hindus with their Hindu sentiments. We barely have your "About Hinduism" scholars here who could secularly engage here.

I have been lurking around Buddhism, Islam, etc. SE also & found them to express their religious sentiments while completely or subtly denigrating Hinduism but I didn't bother about that, for that's expected.

Let's look at individual comments,

As usual in this recent history, everything has been destroyed by the religions of “peace” aka muslims and christians.

Yes, the tone looks inappropriate though it is factual. The user should say it secularly & diplomatically while referencing the proper evidence(s).

The religions of the Mlecchas enjoin mass-rape, genocide and massacre, as similarly done by Asuras and Rakshasas.

Yes, the tone is highly inappropriate though it might be factual. The user should say it secularly & diplomatically while referencing the proper evidence(s).

@DiyaSuhaniAmarॐ - each religion is suitable for people of certain temperaments. Just as there are 3 gunas, to cater to each type, there are 3 main religions - Hinduism (Satva), Christianity (Rajas), Islam (Tamas) – ram Jan 3 at 22:33

This is a normal comment, nothing to get thin skinned about it. Let alone religions, even scriptures are often classified on the basis of Gunas. We have had history of bashing each other's sects. Goswami Tulsidas went on to banish Kaulvas. At least, this comment seems to rather establish acceptance of other religions indirectly by talking about their relevance to each mind set.


Although those are facts, their tone is inappropriate & undiplomatic. So, In my opinion, the solution can be as follow

  • They can be allowed to express about other religions but in appropriate & diplomatic tone.
  • Whenever they are claiming something that could unease others (or your "About Hinduism" scholars), they should embed a link to a relevant reference provided the comment or detail is contextual.

If they don't abide by any of the aforementioned rule, the flag raised should be served appropriately otherwise they should be allowed to express themselves appropriately & diplomatically. It's impractical to elude the truths.

Example, instead of saying "As usual in this recent history, everything has been destroyed by the religions of “peace” aka muslims and christians." one could avoid name calling but rather say, "There has been records of persecution of Hindus by the adherents of religions you mention."

7
  • "your expectations are irrational" - you mean impractical? If you call such an expectation irrational, you are essentially calling the SE CoC irrational. The "About Hinduism" is not my idea/expectation, even the only active mod agrees with it in principle. It was also discussed before in this meta post. But there is a lack of conviction on part of the mods. "I have been lurking around Buddhism, Islam, etc. SE also & found them to express their religious sentiments while completely or subtly denigrating Hinduism" - do you have examples? – sv. Jan 9 at 22:11
  • 1
    @sv. SE CoC is perfect for non-religious SEs. Moreover, the solution I have given conforms CoC only. I haven't kept record of all Hinduism banishment in other SEs but you can have a look here to know about possibility. – BasedShaiva Jan 10 at 4:22
  • "SE CoC is perfect for non-religious SEs."- There lies the problem. This shows lack of conviction. Read this post on Islam Meta SE on how seriously some moderators, even on sites for religions, take the SE CoC. They do not compromise on the CoC to appease the site's users. They do not express views like "This is not a Hindu site but is a site about Hinduism" hidden away in comments, they tackle the problem head-on - by writing a post that everyone can easily quote/reference. – sv. Jan 10 at 9:15
  • "Moreover, the solution I have given conforms CoC only." - If you think my expectations are unrealistic/irrational, why are you offering solutions? This is what I find a bit confusing in your answer. "you can have a look here to know about possibility" - this is nowhere near what I cited ("religions of the Mlecchas enjoin mass-rape, genocide and massacre, as similarly done by Asuras and Rakshasas"). If you noticed comments bashing Hinduism on other sites and still did not flag/report the content to site's mods, then you are part of the problem. – sv. Jan 10 at 9:22
  • 1
    @sv. Complete censor of expressions on factual acts committed by adherents of different religions is irrational. – BasedShaiva Jan 10 at 9:31
  • I think you've misunderstood the intent of my post, I never asked for censorship. I even supported a user with deeply conservation views here - it is the same users who are bashing (or condoning the bashing) of Abrahamic religions who went after that user because they thought he was "misrepresenting" Hinduism. They drove him mad and he deleted his account. It is a mod who wanted the user's answers censored. His words, not mine: "scriptures should not be used to demean particular caste or gender" – sv. Jan 10 at 9:48
  • The way I see it, mods here are ok with 'citing scriptures bashing other religions' but not ok with similar citations bashing sects, castes, women, etc. (because it reflects badly on Hinduism?). Reminds me of 'hypocrisy ki bhi seema hoti hai' (hypocrisy has a limit too). – sv. Jan 10 at 9:54
2

Converting my comment to an answer:

The religions of the Mlecchas enjoin mass-rape, genocide and massacre, as similarly done by Asuras and Rakshasas.

Every religion has different opinions. Even other religion SE sites follow the same model where if an answer is in comparison with other religions, they show up themselves as on upper hand. Since this is a well-researched answer (and maybe just interpretation), we should be fine with this.

Also,

As usual in this recent history, everything has been destroyed by the religions of “peace” aka muslims and christians.

Yes, such tone is unnecessary and has been edited out. link

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .