One of the constant issues with moderating this forum is steering between the Scylla and Charybdis of maintaining high quality while allowing broad-ranging discussion.

I've just been asked to approve a post on creationism, and I've provisionally decided that it would lower the tone of the forum, but I'm not confident in my decision.

Which is why I'm asking for feedback. Is a post asking for evidence disproving the Genesis account of creation too far outside the generally accepted bounds of intelligent debate for it to be posted here?

While most Australians would regard it as a silly question, a large proportion of Americans wouldn't. So is it worth debating?

As this post is in the nature of an online poll, please, only short responses, and no discussion which might pre-empt the debate on the post if I ultimately approve it. I'll make a final decision on the moderation after 24 hours.

While it is either going generate lots of hits or none, you know it won't actually achieve anything. Noone will learn and lots of scripture will be quoted.

It's your decision, but just ask yourself: what are you trying to achieve with this site? Will this thread help or hinder that goal?

I personally don't think it will help, and obviously neither do you or you wouldn't have asked us.

Graham, a topic asking for evidence disproving the Genesis version of creation being "too far outside the generally accepted bounds of intellgent debate"? Even science based reasoning should be allowed.

Hmmm, it would probably be a discussion that could fit into the Satire category.
I may or may not contribute but I would certainly read it just for some entertainment.

Discussing creationism would probably evolve in a long thread.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ui42Kdeb2R0

Graham
'Creationism' is well established in Aus too.
albeit at the behest of American based Churches. One of the noteable examples is the 7th day Adventists of which my mum is one.

I think that the topic is a valid even though I don't subscribe.
The only concern I would have is that the issue tends to generate steroid enhanced emotions. Consequently it will need greater editorial control than usual if it's not to degenerate into ad hominemism, gain saying etcrather than my approach of "each to their own"

One wonders why someone wants to raise this topic on a general site?
Beware of wooden horses.

Ultimately It is up to you as to if you think something will be gained by the exchange. Me I don't,being busy (lazy) the extra work would be enough of a final straw to say "why bother?"

Without sounding to be rude or crude or even vulgar, there is no point discussing creationism as it is purely a matter of faith promulgated by church doctrine and dogma. As such there can be neither "proof" nor empirical evidence on the matter. If you asked to disprove creation then we may have a viable thread.