Selina . wrote:
If people feel unable to read or contribute to a project that has things
that don't agree with the theology of their own personal religion, they're
not suitable for working on ANY secular project.
Agree
Having things critical of religion on Wikipedia is not
the same as "
"foreign" faiths or cultures aren't welcome" at all.
Agree
If people simply cannot cope and have a temper tantrum
when they see
anything in their religion criticised (ala. the Mohammed cartoons), maybe
they should set up a strictly religious Wiki where the thin-skinned and
reactionary can "safely" contribute.
I wonder how you can expect people not to feel at least irritated,
if their religion gets criticized. Calling them reactionary is the
kind of arrogance, which unnecessarily heats up the debate.
I strongly disagree, that the Mohammed cartoons are merely
a critique on Islam. Instead they consist of mockery on Mohammed,
an insult (one of the cartoons states: "Prophet, you crazy bloke!")
and insinuate Mohammed an his followers to be terrorists.
You might prefer only unreligious people to contribute to Wikipedia,
but that would result in a big loss too, since religious topics
wouldn't be covered a quarter as good. Furthermore is it especially
bad to write a one-sided article on a controversy.
Yes, critique on religions should be included in Wikipedia,
but WP:NPOV does not mean to call those who disagree vandals
and block them, if they deem the "critique" a respectless
insult and remove it. This is what I was refering to, when
I wrote "foreign faiths or cultures aren't welcome".
--
Raphael