Kevin wrote:I'm finishing up the layout of the BP and need suggestions for the different forums. I'm open to any suggestion that provide a logical layout of political areas of discussion. We have domestic social issues, domestic economic issues, international issues or we could go further into breaking it down. Speak up for the BP does not return until input is received.
That's a tough call. The three main "hot button" topics are, in my opinion, (1) Politics, (2) Religion, and (3) Science.
Regarding (3), it's not so much scientific discovery itself that is controversial (although the funding issue does
politicize it; it's just not as widely known by those outside of academia); it's the implications
of interpretations of scientific results that make people uneasy and / or thrilled. Even if it's not a controversial topic, it would still be nice to have a board for people that want to share interesting science-related articles.
As far as (1) goes, you could break it into just (A) Domestic Issues and (B) International Issues, but so many international issues only grab our (Americans) attention because
they affect us directly. Few, for instance, seem to have much interest in the conflicts in Africa except when American celebrities are involved. The problems that have escalated in Egypt, which RRIG seemed to eerily predict when the revolutions first started, are beginning to be noticed but are also somewhat largely ignored by MSM for some odd reason. Perhaps it is because Syria and the sequester have center stage? A fitting amendment to (B) in light of the considerations might be, "International Relations / Issues," which would simultaneously include non-US-related issues as well as American foreign policy. For symmetry's sake, I would recommend "Domestic Relations / Issues," but the only topics that fall under "Domestic Relations" are those that occur in Tito's household and I really don't care to read about those.
(2) could be a free-for-all discussion about Biblical exegesis, theology, the existence of God, non-Christian religions and beliefs, etc. The only thing then missing from the three categories that I think is important is ethics / morality. Otherwise, we run the risk of conflating "moral" with "legal," which is dreadfully mistaken. Therefore, a proposed amendment to that category, though somewhat misleading, is, "Religion / Morality." I say it is misleading because I hate to imply that morality is only possible with religion, but if it is made clear that it covers both topics, even when they don't intersect, then it shouldn't be too much of an issue.
Just my two cents.