191–200 of 301 posts
First, I never knew SQLLite was quite so religious, Second 69. Love your juniors. Really? Won't HR get involved?
I will also remind you of three important words: Filos, Eros and Agape.
I had to read this as an elaborate joke around such codes. It'd be certainly amusing to see people trying to be in compliance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes it does; you have a fundamental misunderstanding of one, the other, or both
Pretty much any dictionary on the planet will disagree with you. But then, so does basic logic. But I mean, we're debating an open source project that has adopted a Code of Conduct, with point one demanding that contributors believe in a superstitious all powerful being. We're way past fucking logic here aren't we.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're certainly Christian values, but they're not "conservative", at least not by the American definition. I'll point you to these tenets: * Relieve the poor. * Clothe the naked. * Visit the sick. ... those seem like "liberal values" to me, at least on the American spectrum.
Christ never advocates for the state to do anything. These are individual commands.
Clothing and housing are artefacts of this world, not the kingdom of Christ. Ergo rendering unto Caesar what is caesar’s involves providing clothing and housing to those who do not have it, with the state as proxy and effort multiplier.
People being far too literal here about the "Love the Lord God". Your God is whatever you worship, and yes even the Atheist worships something. The commandment is two parts: (a) Jehovah (The Lord) should be your God and (b) your God should be the priority in your life. If you're Atheist or another faith then replace A by identifying "your God" and make it your priority. Live with purpose!
You're just making up your own meanings for words.
Yes, it can be said that a person can worship god or worship a person. But they're different concepts, and because the text is so specific about using the term "God", capital G, it's a reference to a specific named thing.
This isn't like a kid saying he wants KFC and you pan fry some chicken.
Stop pretending you know anything about atheists or anti-theists - the text is written by christians, and (like pretty much all monotheistic religions) they get pretty iffy when you try to dispute "one true god".
> identifying "your God" and make it your priority. Live with purpose
having purpose is almost the exact opposite of believing in a sky fairy to absolve yourself of guilt or blame.
If the code of conduct angers you, stop and think -- how did you feel one minute before you read the CoC? Is the problem really the CoC, or is it your collection of beliefs that is causing the problem? Furthermore, are you even affected? Do you contribute bug reports or patches? Follow the SQLite mailing list? Is anything here designed to prevent you from continuing to do so? SQLite's author is a spiritual guy. There…
#1 on the list is: First of all, love the Lord God with your whole heart, your whole soul, and your whole strength. I'm an atheist - I am unable and unwilling to comply with this CoC. So yes, I would say that I am affected. Other well known religious folk in the foss world, such as Larry Wall, do not insist on this kind of exclusion.
The maintainers (and only contributors) implemented a Code of Conduct in line with their community.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good news, the CoC is inclusive for you, with the following: "those who wish to participate" ... "are expected to conduct themselves in a manner that honors the overarching spirit of the rule, even if they disagree with specific details. Polite and professional discussion is always welcomed, from anyone ." In other words, calm down.
It's weird, though, right? I mean, flip the logic. What if someone had a code of conduct that was clearly about people treating each other well...but started it with "First, you must acknowledge that there is no God." Or "First you must acknowledge that Mohammad is God's messenger." Or "First you must accept the mitzvot as binding." Or "Brahman is Truth and Reality." None of these is promoting inclusion. That said: I…
In any case, western civ has deep roots in the christian tradition and I don't know any atheists that are so extremely fragile or sensitive that they are "offended" by simply seeing people repeating 1500+ year old fragments of it. Especially when they use the disclaimers that were used here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah, but the original Latin has iuniores diligere , that's means "esteem highly", "regard with affection" & so on. Instead you have these age and gender silos in American society, and the silly sex jokes and the Pence Rule, it's worrisome for anyone who has to navigate through it.
What on earth are you talking about? Can you rephrase in a way that a reasonable person can follow?
diligo: love, distinguish by choosing, regard above others, esteem highly, value, prize. Romantic love is 'amo' in latin (and Italian), St. Benedict is not telling you to get into problems with HR when loving anyone.
Iuniores means just what it says, 'the younger' so 'iuniores diligere' does mean 'love the younger' and as such fits perfectly in whatever 'age silo' doctrine you want Americans to accuse of professing. There is no mention of gender at all, nor do Pence or sex jokes come into play here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because if you take it as a satirization of the adoption of CoC's, it's saying "we don't think CoC's address real problems and we'll do it with a general set of ideals that do nothing to solve problems". Which ignores the very real problem of harassment in tech.
This does not seem like satire in the least. The rules seem more like common sense than anything humorous.