Actually, strangely, the opposite is true, Neil old boy. I had the instinct to be stung, and yet I couldn't place my finger on the why. The motivation was missing. At times, it almost seems like Gabs is some advanced form of AI cycling off responses according to a sense of programming I haven't quite figured out. So instead, I decided to address the source and see if could understand what the line of questioning was. If it's simple Puckery, then I'll wink and laugh...well played indeed. It was prostitute that did it...a word so disconnected from the depth of connectedness in my post that I had to assume it was some sort of trolling. Gab's lack of an overt malicious nature makes it difficult to actually take offense, although the undeserved sense of persecution at times is a bit worrisome.
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 12:00 AM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > Socrates claimed to act like a gadfly Chris. One lingers briefly on > the hope that Gabbers might be easier on the eye than the greek- > sandalled hemlock quaffer before realising sexism is crass and lookism > a major fetish of history. There are times to rise to the bait and > others in which solace can only be gleaned by flying on a beetle to > the moon, in tense consideration of the porpoise of the universe. I > suspect you have been stung mate, though as more than a three-time > loser on the gently-vicious sex front, I fear I cannot give expert > evidence. Ointments and unctions may give relief to those Chris- > crossed on the crucifix of censorship or spiked on the kebab. Let's > dream up an Iron Man hippy-cull and test the ultimate out of body > ethical question of our age - whether it should be legal to take the > stash off a dead hippy (Cartman for the defence) whilst doing a Flying > Harrington stoned on that non-coffee corn burnings the Mormons use in > conversion rights. I'm telling you man, this is good stuff! > > On 26 Mar, 15:19, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: >> That I would do what again, ban you? I wasn't the one who banned you the >> first time, Donna, nor do I know the history behind it, although I might >> guess it had something to do with abstract posts of an inflammatory nature. >> In your history here, you've been known to inject emails which seemengly had >> nothing to do with the topic at hand, including one notable thread where you >> accused the Mind's Eye Icon of being racist because the eye was blue. >> >> As opposed to simply dismissing you out of sorts, since you don't seem to >> actually display any sort of maliciousness, I'm simply trying to understand >> what it is you are trying to say. Is there a point to your posts, or are you >> the Robin Goodfellow of the Eye, determined to inject mischief where you see >> fit? I have seen thoughtful participation from you, articulate conversation >> on complex topics. I know that this isn't a language barrier issue. I don't >> really think you are trying to martyr yourself on the cross of "Chris is a >> horrid censor", which is a load of bollocks anyways. So, fess up, Gabs. Does >> it crack you up endlessly to constantly have us on so? >> >> >> >> [ Attached Message ]From:gabbydott <[email protected]>To:"\"Minds Eye\"" >> <[email protected]>Date:Thu, 26 Mar 2009 03:37:16 -0700 >> (PDT)Local:Thurs 26 Mar 2009 10:37Subject:[Mind's Eye] Re: Speaking of Out >> of Body Experiences... >> >> Tense mistake. The question always goes : what is the porpoise. >> Now I would say that I found out that you would do it again. >> >> On 26 Mrz., 00:03, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > I would rather you explain the purpose behind making a baseless and >> > inflammatory post. Nothing in your statement carries a true correlation to >> > what I actually wrote...it bore only the most surface resemblance to the >> > topic, and as noted, used loaded language of an insulting nature. If >> > you're not trolling, what was the purpose? >> >> > [ Angehängte Nachricht ]Von:gabbydott <[email protected]>In:"\"Minds >> > Eye\"" <[email protected]>Datum:Wed, 25 Mar 2009 15:25:54 -0700 >> > (PDT)Lokal:Mi 25 Mrz. 2009 23:25Betreff:[Mind's Eye] Re: Speaking of Out >> > of Body Experiences... >> >> > No, I'm not. Do you want to ban me nevertheless - again? >> >> > On 25 Mrz., 15:14, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > Gabby, that's a nice turn of phrase, but completely discounts everything >> > > I posted, and uses loaded language which seems intended to insult. Being >> > > the fan of Wittgenstein that you are, I've wondered if your recent bouts >> > > of cantankerousness (with Orn and Slip) were intended to spark ire, >> > > while your twinkling eyes watched with a giggle. >> >> > > Are you trolling, Gabs? >> >> > > [ Angehängte Nachricht ]Von:gabbydott <[email protected]>In:"\"Minds >> > > Eye\"" <[email protected]>Datum:Wed, 25 Mar 2009 04:30:11 -0700 >> > > (PDT)Lokal:Mi 25 Mrz. 2009 12:30Betreff:[Mind's Eye] Re: Speaking of Out >> > > of Body Experiences... >> >> > > Speak about your own pains that make you a prostitute for delusional >> > > substances instead of ideas, Chris. Kierke set his understanding >> > > parameters to overstand, which is fair enough. >> >> > > On 24 Mrz., 20:20, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > Ah, so you do enjoy a bit of novacaine when having molars extracted >> > > > then...and admit that you're only being pedantic and pedagogical when >> > > > making such broad condemnations across a vast portion of the >> > > > population. >> >> > > > In your defense, the "Mormons' Struggle" is part of your ideology. >> > > > Combined with the "Salt of the Earth" hard working farmers' lifestyle, >> > > > I would expect a hard edged outlook. However, even farmers like a good >> > > > pint of beer and a couple of Advil after plowing the north 40. It's >> > > > all about gradients. >> >> > > > Winston Churchill turned to the attractive woman next to him and >> > > > asked, "Madam, would you be convinced to sleep with me for a million >> > > > pounds?" >> >> > > > "A million pounds? Why, of course!" she replied. >> >> > > > "Well then, how about ten pounds?" he asked. >> >> > > > "Mr. Churchill! What kind of woman do you think I am?" she responded >> > > > angrily. >> >> > > > "We've already established that," he replied. "Now we're negotiating >> > > > the price." >> >> > > > When there are exceptions to the rule, then we have validated the fact >> > > > that the rule is not absolute, and what constitutes an exception >> > > > varies according to the perception of the person granting the >> > > > exception. You may find it weak that my best friend, who has an >> > > > advanced degenerative case of MS needs both Merinol and smoked >> > > > Marijuana to ease the muscle spasticity and other symptoms to be able >> > > > to function as a normal human, but I assure you, his struggles to >> > > > continue functioning as a tax paying citizen and good father to three >> > > > children are as challenging some mornings as an Olympian struggling to >> > > > shave another 3/100ths of a second off their track time. You mean no >> > > > disrespect to him, you don't know him, and yet you flippantly dismiss >> > > > his pain and suffering as weakness, without ever having witnessed or >> > > > considered his life. >> >> > > > You think that the pain is good for his soul; yet, what good comes of >> > > > his complete inability to walk or pick up his child? This is what his >> > > > life is like without marijuana. Is that good for his soul, to be >> > > > locked in a claw fisted position on the couch? >> >> > > > You, like many others, make judgements about a movement that you know >> > > > little about. You discount the medical marijuana movement because you >> > > > assume that medical marijuana patients are malingerers looking for an >> > > > excuse to get high. Until you can get past your narrow perspective >> > > > which automatically associates marijuana with burnout stoner hippie, >> > > > you'll never be able to judge the issue fairly on its merits, or see >> > > > medical marijuana patients with a truly sympathetic eye. That doesn't >> > > > bode well for your defense attorney work... ;) >> >> > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Kierkecraig <[email protected]> >> > > > wrote: >> >> > > > > What I say and what I do are almost always two different things. :) >> > > > > But just because I don't practice what I preach doesn't mean that >> > > > > what >> > > > > I preach is wrong. So I wouldn't call myself a stoic, but a defender >> > > > > of stoicism. >> >> > > > > On Mar 23, 11:10 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > >> Congratulations, you're a stoic. You're in good company...Marcus >> > > > >> Aurelius would agree with you completely. And yes, if someone saws >> > > > >> your leg off without anesthetic, you will most certainly see God. >> >> > > > >> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 1:07 AM, Kierkecraig >> > > > >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > >> > Get rid of it all. We're all a bunch of pansies. We need to go >> > > > >> > back >> > > > >> > to the days when they pulled teeth with pliars. Thats when men >> > > > >> > were >> > > > >> > MEN. :) >> >> > > > >> > On Mar 23, 7:22 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> >> > > > >> > wrote: >> > > > >> >> What about anesthesia for dental procedures, or surgery? >> >> > > > >> >> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 8:31 PM, Kierkecraig >> > > > >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > >> >> > Chris, >> > > > >> >> > I'm very unsympathetic to the marijuana apologists arguments. >> > > > >> >> > Their >> > > > >> >> > arguments always appeal to weakness. I'm of the philosophy >> > > > >> >> > that the >> > > > >> >> > only good arguments are the arguments that appeal to a >> > > > >> >> > position of >> > > > >> >> > strength. If you want a spiritual experience, why do it the >> > > > >> >> > easy >> > > > >> >> > way? Its good for the soul to have to work for something like >> > > > >> >> > that. >> > > > >> >> > And why would you want drugs to relieve you from pain? Pain >> > > > >> >> > is good >> > > > >> >> > for the soul as well. And if you don't stand in the position >> > > > >> >> > of >> > > > >> >> > defending drugs from the argument of absence from pain, or >> > > > >> >> > abundance >> > > > >> >> > of pleasure, then what argument do you have? >> > > > >> >> > So in sum, I disagree with the aims of drug use. (i.e. >> > > > >> >> > avoidance of >> > > > >> >> > pain, excess of pleasure) And even if I agreed with the aims, >> > > > >> >> > drugs >> > > > >> >> > don't sufficiently accomplish those aims. They end up doing >> > > > >> >> > more harm >> > > > >> >> > than good. >> >> > > > >> >> > On Mar 23, 1:50 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> >> > > > >> >> > wrote: >> > > > >> >> >> I understand. I thought you were making a judgement of the >> > > > >> >> >> tribe itself. The New Age movement is particularly American, >> > > > >> >> >> and for the most part, abstains from the chemical roots of >> > > > >> >> >> the religions that it borrows many of its philosophies from. >> > > > >> >> >> It's an interesting contradiction to your accurate >> > > > >> >> >> observation. >> >> > > > >> >> >> [ Attached Message ]From:Kierkecraig >> > > > >> >> >> <[email protected]>To:"\"Minds Eye\"" >> > > > >> >> >> <[email protected]>Date:Mon, 23 Mar 2009 12:13:11 >> > > > >> >> >> -0700 (PDT)Local:Mon, Mar 23 2009 1:13 pmSubject:[Mind's Eye] >> > > > >> >> >> Re: Speaking of Out of Body Experiences... >> >> > > > >> >> >> Chris, >> > > > >> >> >> What I meant by perfect fit for modern america is that we are >> > > > >> >> >> always >> > > > >> >> >> looking for a quick fix. We Americans don't like to put forth >> > > > >> >> >> effort. I did not mean that physchodelic drugs are not >> > > > >> >> >> ancient. >> >> > > > >> >> >> On Mar 22, 9:43 pm, Chris Jenkins >> > > > >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > >> >> >> > Ayahuasca tea, along with the ritual use of amanita >> > > > >> >> >> > muscaria, is not a >> > > > >> >> >> > modern american ritual at all. These are South American >> > > > >> >> >> > immigrants, >> > > > >> >> >> > Craig. Did you not read the article? This is a religion >> > > > >> >> >> > that has >> > > > >> >> >> > archaeological evidence dating it at least as old as >> > > > >> >> >> > Christianity, >> > > > >> >> >> > perhaps two to three times as old as that. >> >> > > > >> >> >> > Nothing modern at all about the use of psycho-actives. If >> > > > >> >> >> > anything, >> > > > >> >> >> > it's a modern idea that you can achieve a "spiritual state" >> > > > >> >> >> > without >> > > > >> >> >> > them. >> >> > > > >> >> >> > On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:24 PM, Kierkecraig >> > > > >> >> >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > Maybe if you aren't willing to put forth the effort, then >> > > > >> >> >> > > you don't >> > > > >> >> >> > > deserve the experience. Sounds like these hallucinogens >> > > > >> >> >> > > are a >> > > > >> >> >> > > spiritual experience for the lazy. A perfect fit for >> > > > >> >> >> > > modern america I >> > > > >> >> >> > > guess. >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > On Mar 22, 7:10 pm, Chris Jenkins >> > > > >> >> >> > > <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > >> >> >> > >> I would posit that there are few people anymore who >> > > > >> >> >> > >> practice the rituals to the degree necessary to self >> > > > >> >> >> > >> manufacture the amounts of DMT necessary to have the >> > > > >> >> >> > >> "religious experience". Buddhist monks, perhaps, and >> > > > >> >> >> > >> some extreme branches of Catholicism who still practice >> > > > >> >> >> > >> flagellation. For the rest of us, a legitimately altered >> > > > >> >> >> > >> state of reality is not likely to occur without >> > > > >> >> >> > >> assistance. >> >> > > > >> >> >> > >> [ Attached Message ]From:Slip Disc >> > > > >> >> >> > >> <[email protected]>To:"\"Minds Eye\"" >> > > > >> >> >> > >> <[email protected]>Date:Sun, 22 Mar 2009 >> > > > >> >> >> > >> 16:07:12 -0700 (PDT)Local:Sun, Mar 22 2009 >> > > > >> >> >> > >> 5:07 pmSubject:[Mind's Eye] Re: Speaking of Out of Body >> > > > >> >> >> > >> Experiences... >> >> > > > >> >> >> > >> I guess I'm going to have to take another look at the >> > > > >> >> >> > >> DMT you tossed >> > > > >> >> >> > >> at me on another occasion, you see Chris, I didn't >> > > > >> >> >> > >> forget! >> >> > > > >> >> >> > >> I'm glad that people can have the liberty to practice >> > > > >> >> >> > >> their faith in >> > > > >> >> >> > >> the way they see fit without interference from big >> > > > >> >> >> > >> brother. >> >> > > > >> >> >> > >> The question is, though, why do religions need to use >> > > > >> >> >> > >> hallucinogens if >> >> ... >> >> read more » > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
