" You had absolutely nothing to say about my post on the Upanishads."

That is because you never did say anything about the Upanishads ! ?

On Feb 9, 4:42 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
> and you have no possible way of knowing my bias, my
> judgment or my abilities without referencing a statement.  Without
> reference, you are attacking me personally by saying that I am biased
> and lack transparency, which can only be your opinion about my
> character.  This is ad hom. <<Molly
>
> It could be if you make it that way.  Obviously I referencing the
> statement in the post I was replying to.  You jumped in and grabbed
> the steering wheel with a comment and link that veer the attention
> away from the core of my comment.  Basically you were saying stop
> picking on Vam and "Look" what is happening in your back yard.  That
> is bias.  You had absolutely nothing to say about my post on the
> Upanishads.
>
> Being biased and lacking transparency in written commentary is not a
> character aspect and to point that out as an opinion is not an
> attack.   I've received more warnings and advisories from you since
> your mod position than I've had in the past two years.  That must say
> something I'm sure.  You can ride me and dissect my posts to the point
> of finding something wrong with them but that won't leave me much
> alternative. I've never felt the need to be walking on eggshells as I
> do now and truthfully that affects my ability to express myself
> freely.
>
> On Feb 8, 2:40 pm, Molly <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > It is no more ad hom than Vam's post to me in which I'm labeled with
> > > anger, angst, frustration and as being riled.
>
> > The big difference is, Vam was asking you questions about your
> > specific statements.  You gave your opinion of my viewpoint, and were
> > not making a statement to a particular statement of mine when you
> > said: "Your bias is predominating your judgment and hindering your
> > ability to see things transparently."  You are not referring to a
> > statement, and you have no possible way of knowing my bias, my
> > judgment or my abilities without referencing a statement.  Without
> > reference, you are attacking me personally by saying that I am biased
> > and lack transparency, which can only be your opinion about my
> > character.  This is ad hom.
>
> > > What does your post or your link have to do with my post, besides
> > > nothing?
>
> > Your statement referenced the slums in India, and insinuated that the
> > truth of the Upshad teaching is somehow less because of their
> > existance in your statement:  "Never mind the Upanishads, I'd
> > rather understand how India supports slum dogs as a viable concept.
> > I
> > find it not only disgraceful but barbaric, primitive and
> > hypocritical.  The movie "Slum Dog Millionaire" tells the story.  Is
> > there some religious explanation for treating people like the garbage
> > they live in?"
> >  -  here, your statements make the equation between the religion of
> > India and slums.  I therefore sited the slums in your state of Texas,
> > and asked what connection they had to the religion of Texans in my
> > question: "Does this have a connection to the positive aspects of
> > religion?" (the topic of the thread)  This is what my post has to do
> > with your post.
>
> > > I never suggested in any way that my sentiments were directed to of
> > > confined to any one area of the globe.  As a response to the
> > > Upanishads (hello, Hindu?) I would think that any minimally
> > > intelligent person would understand my reference to the slums of
> > > India.
>
> > Your language such as "any minimally> intelligent person would understand" 
> > and
>
> > "disgraceful but barbaric, primitive and
> > hypocritical." and "treating people like the garbage
> > they live in?"  indicates outrage or anger.  We are only trying to
> > understand your statements.  India was the only reference you made.
>
> > > You turned it into a pot/kettle theme which revealed a defensive
> > > bias.
>
> > Saying that I have done so does not demonstrate that I have done so,
> > but I will say you misunderstand me.  I am saying that, unfortunately,
> > deporable living conditions exist for people all over the world.  What
> > does that have to do with the positive aspects of religion?
>
> > > On Feb 8, 1:45 pm, Molly <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > "Your bias is predominating your judgment and hindering your ability
> > > > to
> > > > see things transparently."  This is an ad hom attack, Slip, as it does
> > > > not relate to a specific statement that I have made, but rather, your
> > > > opinion of my perspective.  As a moderator, I suggest you be more
> > > > careful in your phrasing and respond to specific statements that
> > > > others make.
>
> > > > "Emotional retorts such as this irrelevant
> > > > link is clear example."  Can a link be emotional?  The link itself
> > > > provided factual information reported by the state of Texas, not
> > > > emotional opinion.  As Vam also addressed your apparent anger here, I
> > > > will kindly suggest to you that the emotion you percieve may be your
> > > > own.  I have no emotional investment here.
>
> > > > On Feb 8, 2:37 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Your bias is predominating your judgment and hindering your ability to
> > > > > see things transparently.  Emotional retorts such as this irrelevant
> > > > > link is clear example.  Since when are you worried about thread
> > > > > integrity?
>
> > > > > A better visual might be this:http://archone.tamu.edu/chud//
>
> > > > > Which is in no way a comparative to India's 
> > > > > slums.http://fotservis.typepad.com/photos/mother_india_calcutta_var/slums.jpg
>
> > > > > The only real positive aspect of religion is its eventual self
> > > > > deprecation.  Human compassion is just that, human compassion born
> > > > > from humanity.  Religion is born out of a need to create social
> > > > > strata, the chosen people and the condemned and is ultimately a
> > > > > nuisance, a barrier and a hindrance to equality.
>
> > > > > On Feb 8, 8:56 am, Molly <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > The same could be said about what goes on in your back yard, 
> > > > > > Slip,http://www.sos.state.tx.us/border/colonias/faqs.shtml Does 
> > > > > > this have
> > > > > > a connection to the positive aspects of religion?
>
> > > > > > On Feb 7, 11:51 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Yeah, and I'm so very touched by it.  Never mind the Upanishads, 
> > > > > > > I'd
> > > > > > > rather understand how India supports slum dogs as a viable 
> > > > > > > concept.  I
> > > > > > > find it not only disgraceful but barbaric, primitive and
> > > > > > > hypocritical.  The movie "Slum Dog Millionaire" tells the story.  
> > > > > > > Is
> > > > > > > there some religious explanation for treating people like the 
> > > > > > > garbage
> > > > > > > they live 
> > > > > > > in?http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navclient&gfn...
>
> > > > > > > Fraternity and Brotherhood?  As long as you have the right 
> > > > > > > brother?
>
> > > > > > > I guess if you pile enough bullshit on top of the bullshit you 
> > > > > > > won't
> > > > > > > see the bullshit, right?
>
> > > > > > > On Feb 7, 9:10 pm, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > How many here have read the Upanishads ? !
>
> > > > > > > > The two most positive aspects of religion are concepts of 
> > > > > > > > fraternity
> > > > > > > > and brotherhood, in times when most of the world were 
> > > > > > > > barbarian, on
> > > > > > > > one hand, and the practice of introspection or self - 
> > > > > > > > examination, on
> > > > > > > > the other.
>
> > > > > > > > On Feb 8, 2:50 am, 1CellOfMany <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > There have been many discussions here where the negative 
> > > > > > > > > results of
> > > > > > > > > religion have been brought up as a side issue to another 
> > > > > > > > > discussion.
> > > > > > > > > I would like to start two parallel threads here, one about 
> > > > > > > > > the good
> > > > > > > > > that religions and religious people have done in and for the 
> > > > > > > > > world,
> > > > > > > > > and the other about the bad things that have come from, and 
> > > > > > > > > been done
> > > > > > > > > because of religion.
>
> > > > > > > > > In this thread, lets concentrate on discussing the positive
> > > > > > > > > contributions of religion. The good acts, the positive 
> > > > > > > > > results of
> > > > > > > > > religious teaching, and the positive things that can be 
> > > > > > > > > learned from
> > > > > > > > > reading the "source books" of religion, such as the Bible, the
> > > > > > > > > Upanishads, the Koran, and other writings that are considered 
> > > > > > > > > "Holy"
> > > > > > > > > by any religion.
>
> > > > > > > > > A historical time-line might also be useful, correlating the 
> > > > > > > > > beginning
> > > > > > > > > and growth of each religion to historical events and trends 
> > > > > > > > > in the
> > > > > > > > > places where the religion was spread.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -

-- 
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.

Reply via email to