[i_am_right]

Leftist Atheist here... I have no problem with this Code of Conduct. This isn't like "In god we trust" on our currency or the 10 Commandments in our courthouses. I could contribute to this project with a clear conscience because a lot of what I believe is very much in line with Christ's (if he even actually existed) actual teachings. Take care of the poor. Don't judge people who have differing lifestyles than you do. Love your neighbor. Do unto others. Etc.

I think the Golden Rule is a wonderful Code of Conduct and it's how I try to live my life. If only more people followed that rule.

[raspie]

Sure, I follow the categorical imperative myself.

The author had a chance to make his CoC the golden rule. But instead he made a deeply religious statement. He has full right to do what he wants, but to also claim that this is somehow inclusive because you can close your eyes to things incompatible with you is nonsense, sorry.

All religions teach largely the same good things, but you generally won't see their devotees agreeing to any document that proclaims their love for a different God.

And yet atheists are expected to swallow that. No thanks.

[fareesh]

Swallow how though? Feel dirty when submitting a patch? I really don't understand the west's fascination with these codes and statements. Why not just do your work and avoid drama?

By standing up for/against things like CoC as opposed to actual incidents, nothing is really achieved except - I believe the term is bike shedding?

Open source exists so that everyone can contribute their talents to something that benefits everybody. If Joseph Stalin or bin Laden wrote a great patch, I'd want it. We'd all be better for it. We can fight his ideas in a different arena. It doesn't have to be the SQLite mailing list. It is not a sensible place to have these other types of ideological battles.

Here in the third world life is hard. Business ethics are non existent, workplaces are dominated by obsession with job security. If you have to make a life for yourself, you have to do your work. I find perhaps the greatest "white privilege" as it seems to be called in the west, is having the luxury of debating CoCs instead of supporting yourself and your family.

[raspie]

> I really don't understand the west's fascination with these codes and statements. Why not just do your work and avoid drama?

And you will never understand it if you look at "the west" as a single organism. Its millions of people with different opinions. They don't have to be consistent with each other.

CoCs exist to promote desired (usually understood as "professional") communication and collaboration standards in open source projects. People who want to bring their political or religious agenda into those CoCs are indeed largely undesired even in "the west", that's why this particular CoC riled up so much attention.

> Why not just do your work and avoid drama?

I'd love that, and I'm doing that. But I'm not a "turn the other cheek" kind of person, and I'll call out bullshit when I see it. This here is bullshit.

> If Joseph Stalin or bin Laden wrote a great patch, I'd want it. We'd all be better for it.

That theoretical programmer-Bin-Laden would never contribute a patch to a project with SQLite's new CoC because it is incompatible with his faith. You said we would be better off if he did, so by your own logic such a religious CoC is detrimental to us, which is why it is a problem.

> It doesn't have to be the SQLite mailing list. It is not a sensible place to have these other types of ideological battles.

Indeed, it is not a sensible place because SQLite itself is not a sensible place for religion. But its author made it a place for religion, with very predictable consequences.

> Here in the third world life is hard.

> I find perhaps the greatest "white privilege" [...], is having the luxury of debating CoCs instead of supporting yourself and your family.

That's perhaps a bit of an overstatement, and definitely a false dichotomy. Moreover, here you are enjoying the same white privilege in the third world. A bit hypocritical to accuse others of something you yourself are engaging in, don't you think?

[fareesh]

> And you will never understand it if you look at "the west" as a single organism. Its millions of people with different opinions. They don't have to be consistent with each other.

It isn't a single organism, this attitude is a very popular one in the west, that's all.

> That theoretical programmer-Bin-Laden would never contribute a patch to a project with SQLite's new CoC because it is incompatible with his faith. You said we would be better off if he did, so by your own logic such a religious CoC is detrimental to us, which is why it is a problem.

Is why I had Stalin in there too. I guess I can add David Duke as well, I'll add as many examples as required for the point to be made, which you have avoided.

> Indeed, it is not a sensible place because SQLite itself is not a sensible place for religion. But its author made it a place for religion, with very predictable consequences.

Many of these sacred cows like diversity, tolerance, political correctness, etc. are all religious ideas. By using religion, the author makes an excellent point, one that is sadly lost on many though.

As for me, I am stating my apathy towards CoCs and the communities behind whichever open source project I need, so no, I am not debating CoCs. Like I said, I would gladly use Joseph Stalin's library for my projects.

[raspie]

I don't know why you picked Stalin. He wasn't exactly tolerant of religion, and would never agree to auch a CoC.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USSR_anti-religious_campaign...

David Duke on the other hand would happily contribute to this project. He would never contribute to a project that had a muslim CoC though.

...You demonstrated yet again that religious CoC are not inclusive, which is my point. I feel like you're just trolling at this point.