I guess it's a great example of what topics not to debate: There's no new information to be learned, both sides lack good arguments, and it all essentialy comes down to bashing each other's heads in for fun and vitriol.
Anyone up for a derail? I hear CRISPR has the potential to revolutionize the treatment of certain, mostly genetic disorders...
I think almost everybody is being pretty civil and polite, actually
Particularly for a topic like this.
And at least one side has good arguments
I'd rather see them addressed than start talking about... uh... some sort of biochemistry I know nothing about.
Like, I hope we can agree that:
Whether or not it's actually a problem we should care about, the terms "Before Christ" and "Anno Domini" (year of our lord) assert that the Jewish Messiah arrived (within like 10 years of that time) and, contextually, he is our lord.
I'm not saying it's a big deal for most people, including a lot of atheists, but the terms are an assertion that Christianity is correct. They were constructed specifically to assert that. Almost 70% of the world population is non-Christian, and shouldn't be expected to indirectly acknowledge Christ's arrival and dominion whenever they refer to a date.
The Common Era rebranding is simple and fair. Continuing to use the religiously charged terms when there is a commonly accepted alternative is the opposite of "not caring", in my opinion.