Argument freaks...... --- jim_flanegin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], > "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> > wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB > <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > That occured to me when writing it up. The > exact > > > > *same* story can be pointed to by God freaks > > > > > > Where did that term come from? Is that the > opposite of atheist > > > freaks? > > > > Yes, and it's totally innocuous. It's a lingering > > Sixties-ism in my speech. So far on FFL I have > used > > the term dozens of times, in contexts such as > > "enlightenment freak" and "Bruce Cockburn freak" > or > > "music freak" (both referring to myself), or "neat > > > freak," or "Mongo freak" (referring to fans of a > > certain short fictional detective). It's a slang > > way of referring to the odd things that some > people > > get off on. It has no negative connotations, > except, > > seemingly, in your mind. > > > > > And what's a God freak anyway? I think the term > "freak" is > > > possibly reserved for those pushing an agenda, > as it appears > > > you are doing now, my dear Buddhist atheist. > > > > Jim, since you stopped actively slamming me, I've > > taken a chance and replied to a few of your posts > > as if you were an adult, and as if you were > actually > > a rational human being. My mistake. Back in the > > trashbin you go. > > > I meant no disrespect to you when I used the terms > Buddhist and > atheist. Isn't a person who doesn't beileve in God > an atheist and > aren't you a Buddhist? What you perceived as my > anger or rigidity > was merely intensity. I read back what I had written > and I *got* the > intensity, but no anger. And the intensity was > merely a reflection > of my daily circumstance, not directed at you or > FFL. > > On the other hand, I am trying to be more careful > with my writing. > Sometimes when I am writing, I will look back at > what I have written > and realize it didn't convey what I had intended. > Case in point was > my response to Rory's comment about our taking our > subtitles of the > life movie as gospel. As many things he writes do, > it tickled me and > I responded that it was a great joke. Later I > realized that could've > been miscontrued as me not taking what he said > seriously. Writing is > a skill that is a challenge for me because it must > be self- > contained and linear. Give me a good canvas any day, > literally. > > Now, as to your response that 'freak' is reserved > for the odd things > that people get off on, would you or have you > referred to yourself > as a 'Tantric freak' or an 'atheist freak' or a > 'Buddhism freak'? > The reason I ask is that perhaps the term is not as > innocuous as you > think it is. Maybe, and maybe not. I personally > don't know, and that > is why I am asking you. And I am also curious why > you see atheist as > a negative term? I consider those who choose to not > recognize God as > atheists. What is the issue there? > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Or go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > and click 'Join This Group!' > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC
