If Nietzsche were to post in this Religion forum, I would hold him to the same standards.
Luckily, Nietzsche wrote books instead of talking on Forums so he didn’t have to be moderated by a forum admin.
What would you do to someone who did both?
Hold them to the same standard.
I don’t understand what you mean exactly…are you saying that arguing in the manner of Nietzsche, or maintaining and defending the same propositions as Nietzsche did is against the rules in the religion forum now?
He would be held to the same rules.
Yikes! I’m just going to assume you’re saying he and anyone who argues in the manner in which he did, and in favor of what he did would be breaking the rules.
The rules are very few; they are fairly straightforward; I am a pretty fair fellow; and I doubt these rules will cause quality discussions any problems.
I’m sure you’re fair, but your responses to me are not exactly “straightforward”. Your answer to my question as to how the new rules would handle the issue I raised is that the rules would handle them. And I’m pretty that comment about quality is a thinly veiled jab at me.
No; it was not a jab.
It was an assurance that I do not think that quality threads will be impacted.
As to the how; by my discretion.
If the rules are crossed, I will use my discretion to determine if and what the reaction should be.
I’m not asking how you will deal with someone who breaks the rules. I’m asking whether it is against the rules to argue in the manner and in favor of the positions I’m talking about. A yes or no would suffice. If you need a demonstration, go to the Absolute Randomness thread and look at the last post by me there. I wrote it as a sort of reply to one of the topics in the religion board, but being unsure, I decided to just throw it in mundane babble. How would you deem that post? Does it break the rules?
Absolutely within the rules bounds.
Talking with distaste for aspects of religion is far different than slandering a specific religion or person.
Slander is the big part here.
Slander was described in the rules as: An insulting remark that is damaging to ones reputation or merit.
Stating that one thinks something is frivolous to your perspective, or simply mistaken placement of personal needs, is not the same as downright insulting a religion.
And belittlement is not applicable because the value of the religion to those that find it of value is not being condescendingly looked down upon and reduced in value.
Think of it this way; if you aren’t saying something along the lines of, “You are stupid and pathetic for believing that”, or “That religion is stupid and pathetic”, or something akin to these, then you are most likely in the clear.
Alrighty then. 
I believe there is enough content explored in this announcement notification for anyone reading to understand the rules.
I am locking this thread from here on.
Thank you all who participated in the exploration of what the rules mean.