I agree in principle with the observation that we ought to be respectful of other's beliefs.
I disagree, however, that one should refrain from saying something because it will offend many people, let alone one single person (especially not one single person--that's virtually impossible to achieve, unless you want rote, boring, superficial discussion--we can only reasonably control it so far if someone chooses to take offense).
In my view, criticizing benign characteristics that say nothing about what or who a person is by themselves (e.g., race, ethnicity) is always inappropriate. On the other hand, beliefs/actions are totally fair game. (Unless one uses beliefs/actions as thinly veiled code words for race--hear that CJ?) This doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to be respectful when commenting on other people's beliefs, but beliefs have far too great an impact not only on those who share the beliefs and on those who do not share them, to make them off limits to criticism. Just because a belief emanates from a religiously based faith, does not privilege it from other beliefs emanating from other sources. Again, however, mutual respect is generally preferable, but it cuts both ways. I'll respect your religious beliefs to the extent you keep them to yourself or discuss them when appropriate, but make a ostentatious show of them (e.g., Tim Tebow) or try to impose them on me (e.g., Rick Santorum or Utah Legislature), then I feel less constrained by rules of forbearance and politeness.
To me you are saying you agree in principle, but not in action.
I don't think someone should take the Lord's name in vain when they know it is very offensive to people that read posts here. That was my point. I agree that I don't think a person's religion should be shoved in someones face either, to go along with the whole Tebow and any other sports figure that makes a public display of it. Religions views and thanks can be given and shown in private.
My post was about this board specifically, and not the world in general though it could apply. I don't find it rote or boring, or superficial if a poster here decided not to take the Lords name in vain in a post, when they can choose to express themselves in a different manner. There are plenty of filtered words that would be less offensive to me.
That's all I was saying. There can be very good discussions, and have been, without the use of offensive words or language. I try for the most part not to be preachy on here unless it is part of the discussion. I don't hound people too much to keep their filthy and nasty talk and innuendo to themselves, and I don't post things if I know it will be truly offensive to them. I let most stuff go, but for me taking the Lords name in vain crosses the line.
Just my opinion, take it with a grain of salt I guess, because it seems it doesn't bother too many people.