--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@>
> wrote:
> > > > <snip>
> > > > > If it weren't for the by far greater number of spiritual
> > > > > seekers who do NOT fall into this trap and become fanatics,
> > > > > the few who *become* fanatics would stand as a blanket
> > > > > condemnation of spirituality and the spiritual path itself.
> > > > > Fortunately, the balanced, sane followers of spiritual
> > > > > paths are more numerous, and represent well the same
> > > > > traditions that the unsane fanatics make a mockery of.
> > > >
> > > > Barry's shoot-the-messenger demonization
> > > > tendencies are brilliantly on display in this
> > > > post. And note that his rant represents the
> > > > identical us-vs.-them kind of polarization he's
> > > > decrying: reasonable people vs. "fanatics,"
> > > > sane vs. "unsane."
> > > >
> > > > Fanaticism, unreasonableness, and "unsanity"
> > > > exist at the extremes of both sides of these
> > > > issues. In between there's a wide range of
> > > > views, but there's no such middle ground for
> > > > Barry. Distinguishing between shades of gray
> > > > is "hard work" that it's just too much trouble
> > > > for him to undertake.
> > > >
> > > > Barry Wright, Master of Inadvertent Irony.
> > >
> > > Yep, he is someone who is only comfortable in a black and
> > > white world. The fanatics of which he speaks only exist
> > > in the comfort of his unenlightened mind, where he creates
> > > them in order to have a false foundation from which to make
> > > sense of an illusionary world.
> >
> >
> > Uh, Judy and Jim...
> >
> > I'm trying to understand why you're reacting so
> > strongly above to what I wrote. Did you somehow
> > think that I was referring to YOU?
>
and I'm trying to understand why you think my one brief paragraph
concerning what you wrote constitutes a strong reaction? Or are you
confusing *your* strong reaction with my neutral one?
