RELIGION: What's So Great About Christianity? (Disputation)

When I posted the question set out above on LinkedIn, I included the following introduction.

Former White House Domestic Policy Analyst Dinesh D'Souza has written a book picked as the main selection of a major book club. (See over 90 positive reviews at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Whats-So-Great-About-Christianity/dp/1596985178/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1204071889&sr=8-1)

Among other things, the author writes about: The Future of Christianity; Christianity and the West; Christianity and Science; The Argument from Design; Christianity and Philosophy; Christianity and Suffering; Christianity and Morality; Christianity and You.

Recognizing that I am going against conventional wisdom in beginning such a discussion, nevertheless my hope is to promote a form of debate on LinkedIn that will allow participants to express their responses in a most compelling way to show how change management may be enhanced by open-minded discussion called disputation.

So here is the format I plan to use in a series of upcoming questions and would encourage others who like this format to use it:

1. LEADER'S TOPIC: [In this case, Religion.]

2. STRATEGIC ISSUE about the Topic: [In this case, "Is Christianity a believably better, indeed great, way to live?"]

3. RESPONSES: [In this case, your affirmative and negative answers to the issue posed about the Topic as provided by participants in this Q/A.]

4. WISDOM LINKS: [Links that all may provide to enhance future discussion.]

5. PARTICIPANT OBJECTIONS: [Responses organized by questioner into areas of concerns about value, mission, purpose, vision, leadership, strategy, client focus, wisdom, co-worker focus, process management, and results.]

6. QUESTIONER'S REPLY: [Upon closing the question, the person initiating the question, processes the responses and clarifies his or her own take on the answer.]

7. RESULTS: [The questioner replies to the points made by the participants.]

Thanks for participating.

About twelve participants responded.

Then the question was flagged as "inappropriate content" and hidden from public view.

What do you think about the disputation idea; the topic in question; or the way LinkedIn dealt with this?

I have now posted a new question: "DISPUTATION: Is disputation the best way to focus participants in change management? (Disputation)". Hopefully this one won't get flagged. We'll see.