Re: [FairfieldLife] For Sal Because I Know How Much She Hates Him

[Sal Sunshine salsunshineini...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]]

Here’s another good article on why everyone should detest the “sewer rat,” as 
Robert Reich calls him.

There honestly seems to be no bottom.  The Republican Party now has as its 
standard-bearer someone who is officially insane, no question about it.

How can they even show their faces?

https://goo.gl/nvSbij

Sal 




On Sep 17, 2016, at 1:48 PM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] 
 wrote:






---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , 
 wrote :

Thanks, but Forbes wouldn’t let me get to it because of my ad blocker, even 
after I turned it off for the site.

Sal 

Not to worry, I'll post something juicier for you later... ;-)




On Sep 17, 2016, at 8:54 AM, awoelflebater@...  
[FairfieldLife] > wrote:






---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , 
 wrote :

I thought you might like this given we both love to hate the guy.



An Open Letter To Donald Trump Regarding His Fondness For Vladimir Putin 

 


An Open Letter To Donald Trump Regarding His Fond... 

You should not overestimate Putin. He has played a weak hand of cards generally 
well, but he has made enormous mistakes. He reckoned that...
View on www.forbes.com 

  
Preview by Yahoo 


I'm pretty sure Trump is incapable of grasping any of this:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2016/01/08/seven-warnings-to-donald-trump-about-vladimir-putin/#616ba7657b8c
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] For Sal Because I Know How Much She Hates Him

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 Thanks, but Forbes wouldn’t let me get to it because of my ad blocker, even 
after I turned it off for the site. 

 Sal 
 

 Not to worry, I'll post something juicier for you later... ;-)
 

 





On Sep 17, 2016, at 8:54 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... 
[FairfieldLife]  wrote:
 
 


 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 wrote :

 I thought you might like this given we both love to hate the guy.
 

 An Open Letter To Donald Trump Regarding His Fondness For Vladimir Putin 
http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2016/09/16/an-open-letter-to-donald-trump-regarding-his-fondness-for-vladimir-putin/#7430810533bb

 
 
 
http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2016/09/16/an-open-letter-to-donald-trump-regarding-his-fondness-for-vladimir-putin/#7430810533bb
 
 An Open Letter To Donald Trump Regarding His Fond... 
http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2016/09/16/an-open-letter-to-donald-trump-regarding-his-fondness-for-vladimir-putin/#7430810533bb
 You should not overestimate Putin. He has played a weak hand of cards 
generally well, but he has made enormous mistakes. He reckoned that...


 
 View on www.forbes.com 
http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2016/09/16/an-open-letter-to-donald-trump-regarding-his-fondness-for-vladimir-putin/#7430810533bb
 Preview by Yahoo 
 

 

 I'm pretty sure Trump is incapable of grasping any of this:
 
http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2016/01/08/seven-warnings-to-donald-trump-about-vladimir-putin/#616ba7657b8c
 
http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2016/01/08/seven-warnings-to-donald-trump-about-vladimir-putin/#616ba7657b8c





 

Re: [FairfieldLife] For Sal Because I Know How Much She Hates Him

[Sal Sunshine salsunshineini...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]]

Thanks, but Forbes wouldn’t let me get to it because of my ad blocker, even 
after I turned it off for the site.

Sal 




On Sep 17, 2016, at 8:54 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] 
 wrote:






---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , 
 wrote :

I thought you might like this given we both love to hate the guy.



An Open Letter To Donald Trump Regarding His Fondness For Vladimir Putin 

 


An Open Letter To Donald Trump Regarding His Fond... 

You should not overestimate Putin. He has played a weak hand of cards generally 
well, but he has made enormous mistakes. He reckoned that...
View on www.forbes.com 

  
Preview by Yahoo 


I'm pretty sure Trump is incapable of grasping any of this:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2016/01/08/seven-warnings-to-donald-trump-about-vladimir-putin/#616ba7657b8c
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Straigtening Sal Out

[salyavin808]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote :

 On 11/3/2014 11:15 PM, Michael Jackson mjackson74@... mailto:mjackson74@... 
[FairfieldLife] wrote:
 
 
   Sal, you have been wrong-headed about jyotish and yagya. All you have to do 
is listen to and watch Dr. John Hagelin in this here video and it will 
straighten out your thinking. Don't resist, because that will be karmically 
rough on you. Watch and believe.


 
 First they came for the Jews, now are coming after the Christians, Hindus and 
the TMers. Next thing you know, they will be coming for the blacks and the 
browns; the gays and lesbians, the cross-dressers and the trans-sexuals, - or 
anyone else they don't like that doesn't agree with them. 
 
 Luckily for you, drama queens aren't on that list.
 

 But I ought to congratulate you, this is a genuine non-sequitur. Shame you 
didn't realise it
 

 

 

 





 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Straigtening Sal Out

['Richard J. Williams' pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]]

On 11/3/2014 11:15 PM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com 
[FairfieldLife] wrote:


Sal, you have been wrong-headed about jyotish and yagya. All you have 
to do is listen to and watch Dr. John Hagelin in this here video and 
it will straighten out your thinking. Don't resist, because that will 
be karmically rough on you. Watch and believe.


/First they came for the Jews, now are coming after the Christians, 
Hindus and the TMers. Next thing you know, they will be coming for the 
blacks and the browns; the gays and lesbians, the cross-dressers and the 
trans-sexuals, - or anyone else they don't like that doesn't agree with 
them./




http://www.nationalyagya.org/videos.html#video=63410702

image http://www.nationalyagya.org/videos.html#video=63410702





Videos | Maharishi Yagyas for the Nation: Prevention, Pr... 
http://www.nationalyagya.org/videos.html#video=63410702
Videos Dr. John Hagelin explains the scientific basis of Jyotish and 
Yagya, the uniqueness of Maharishi Yagya, and the benefits of National 
Yagyas. Dr. John Hagelin...


View on www.nationalyagya.org 
http://www.nationalyagya.org/videos.html#video=63410702


Preview by Yahoo

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Sal, are you a member?

[Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Oh man that is one of my favorite Larson comics!




 From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:52 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Sal, are you a member?
 


  

Not heard of them but it's just up the road, may mosey along for a meeting.

I see someone is doing a lecture on their time in a fundie Christian sect, 
sounds like my cup of Rosie!

The cartoon page is good too:






---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote :


Looks good to me

http://www.hampshireskeptics.org/
  
             
The Hampshire Skeptics Society
HSS Info About Us Contact Us Directory Events Calendar Guest Speakers Charter 
Local Woo-Woo Skeptics of the Round Table Winchester Skeptics Next SitP  
View on www.hampshireskepti... Preview by Yahoo  
  
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] For Sal

[Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Those are pretty funny, but I don't think they apply to those of the Cockney 
persuasion for example.




 From: awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 9, 2014 11:41 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] For Sal
 


  
http://www.tickld.com/x/30-things-british-people-say-vs-what-we-actually-mean-9-is-perfect

Re: [FairfieldLife] For Sal

[awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote :

 Those are pretty funny, but I don't think they apply to those of the Cockney 
persuasion for example.

 

 

 

 

 

 From: awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, August 9, 2014 11:41 AM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] For Sal
 
 
   
http://www.tickld.com/x/30-things-british-people-say-vs-what-we-actually-mean-9-is-perfect
 
http://www.tickld.com/x/30-things-british-people-say-vs-what-we-actually-mean-9-is-perfect
 


 


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[nablusoss1008]

Right. Seems he never did any practice for very long. That's what Rajas does to 
people.
 It looks like the Truq didn't follow up very much on the study part either, 
or the practice, although 
 he has said he has tried mind-fullness meditation. Go figure.
 

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote :

 On 4/21/2014 2:30 PM, nablusoss1008 wrote:
  So The Goddess is important in Buddhism yet The Turq, a proclaimed 
  Buddhist, denies God exist. 
 
 That's because Tara is not a Hindu god, but a Buddhist siddha. The gods 
 may bring boons in the form of material wealth, but they cannot bring 
 one into the siddha field - they do not have that liberating insight. 
 The gods, for all their power, do not see things the way a buddha sees 
 things - a buddha is awakened. The Gods concern is with this world while 
 siddhas are concerned with the transcendental field.
  What a mess.
 
 That's because his teacher, Dr. Lenz, didn't know very much about the 
 history or practice of Tibetan Buddhism, although he wrote a book about 
 surfing in the Himalayas. Go figure. It looks like the Truq didn't 
 follow up very much on the study part either, or the practice, although 
 he has said he has tried mind-fullness meditation. Go figure.
 
 ---
 This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus 
protection is active.
 http://www.avast.com http://www.avast.com

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[TurquoiseBee]

From: steve.sun...@yahoo.com steve.sun...@yahoo.com

To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2014 12:24 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities
 


  
I see what you mean about entities, or components

And yes, you are right, introducing rebirth, or reincarnation does necessitate 
entities.

You look at the accounts indicating rebirth and find them lacking.  

I look at the accounts and find many of them credible.

And so, the point I was making at the outset is that if somehow these accounts 
are found to be credible, or if the preponderance of evidence seems to suggest 
such, or if such a time comes when something such as a causal body can be 
measured, then yes, I would say that an atheist would then be required to 
acknowledge that there must be some organizing body or entities at work to 
maintain order in this process..

I am not saying it proves the existence of God.  All I am saying is that it 
might force a door open that an atheist might not be comfortable seeing cracked 
open. 


And I'm saying you sound kind of desperate, as if -- as you admit -- forcing an 
imaginary 
atheist to be uncomfortable is your real goal. 

In other words, it sounds to me as just *talk* about atheism has been so 
uncomfortable *for you* that you want to make someone else uncomfortable in 
retaliation. 

If your belief in a God is so strong, why is it so challenged just by someone 
believing something different than you believe? You seem to pin almost your 
*entire* reason for believing in God on your desire/need to believe in 
reincarnation. Great...I get it...you don't want to die, and prefer to believe 
that you won't, and in your view you need a God to make that happen. 

As I've told you, I don't believe in God, and yet I sorta suspect there is 
something to reincarnation. Millions of Buddhists feel the same way -- they 
believe in reincarnation and don't believe in God. Doncha think you're being 
kinda silly to try to make someone feel uncomfortable just because you can't 
conceive of reincarnation being an automatic process that requires no 
intervention or supervision?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[nablusoss1008]

 So Goddess Tara isn't a God :-)

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote :

 From: steve.sundur@... steve.sundur@...
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, April 21, 2014 12:24 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities
 
 
   I see what you mean about entities, or components
 

 And yes, you are right, introducing rebirth, or reincarnation does necessitate 
entities.
 

 You look at the accounts indicating rebirth and find them lacking.  
 

 I look at the accounts and find many of them credible.
 

 And so, the point I was making at the outset is that if somehow these accounts 
are found to be credible, or if the preponderance of evidence seems to suggest 
such, or if such a time comes when something such as a causal body can be 
measured, then yes, I would say that an atheist would then be required to 
acknowledge that there must be some organizing body or entities at work to 
maintain order in this process..
 

 I am not saying it proves the existence of God.  All I am saying is that it 
might force a door open that an atheist might not be comfortable seeing cracked 
open. 








And I'm saying you sound kind of desperate, as if -- as you admit -- forcing an 
imaginary atheist to be uncomfortable is your real goal. 

In other words, it sounds to me as just *talk* about atheism has been so 
uncomfortable *for you* that you want to make someone else uncomfortable in 
retaliation. 

If your belief in a God is so strong, why is it so challenged just by someone 
believing something different than you believe? You seem to pin almost your 
*entire* reason for believing in God on your desire/need to believe in 
reincarnation. Great...I get it...you don't want to die, and prefer to believe 
that you won't, and in your view you need a God to make that happen. 

As I've told you, I don't believe in God, and yet I sorta suspect there is 
something to reincarnation. Millions of Buddhists feel the same way -- they 
believe in reincarnation and don't believe in God. Doncha think you're being 
kinda silly to try to make someone feel uncomfortable just because you can't 
conceive of reincarnation being an automatic process that requires no 
intervention or supervision?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[steve.sundur]

 --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote :
  steve.sundur@... steve.sundur@...
 

 And I'm saying you sound kind of desperate, as if -- as you admit -- forcing 
an imaginary atheist to be uncomfortable is your real goal. 


 

 Well Barry, IIRC, your answer to this possibility was that there are zillions 
of ways this could take place, or something to that effect.  So, I guess that 
is what works for you.  As for the desperate part, I think that is something 
you like to pin on people when a discussion goes past what you consider a 
proper stopping point.  You are the acting police chief in that regard I guess.

In other words, it sounds to me as just *talk* about atheism has been so 
uncomfortable *for you* that you want to make someone else uncomfortable in 
retaliation. 
 

 Well, of course Barry.  That fits your narrative doesn't it. People that are 
critical of some of the things you are say are either:
 

 desperate, cult apologists, or, wait..the grand answer 
-Trying to Sell Me Something.
 

 

If your belief in a God is so strong, why is it so challenged just by someone 
believing something different than you believe?
 

 Oh, Barry, can you ever get out of your rut.  Where did I ever say my belief 
in God was so strong?  I've never said such a thing, and I've separated the 
discussion of reincarnation from the necessity of God.  Are you really unable 
to deviate from your narrative that everyone is trying to sell you something?
 

  You seem to pin almost your *entire* reason for believing in God on your 
desire/need to believe in reincarnation. Great...I get it...you don't want to 
die, and prefer to believe that you won't, and in your view you need a God to 
make that happen. 
 

 Read the discussion Barry. It's not about God.  You, yourself said that there 
is no need to bring in God in explaining reincarnation.  You know, the previous 
life experiences you've talked about many times.  Here's what it is Barry.  It 
is you who are afraid of this possibility.  That' s why you are engaging in 
this shoot the message episode  Be real about it Barry.  Be willing to give 
up your beliefs if need be.  You'll feel liberated.  Didn't someone say that 
the other day?

As I've told you, I don't believe in God, and yet I sorta suspect there is 
something to reincarnation. Millions of Buddhists feel the same way -- they 
believe in reincarnation and don't believe in God. Doncha think you're being 
kinda silly to try to make someone feel uncomfortable just because you can't 
conceive of reincarnation being an automatic process that requires no 
intervention or supervision?
 

 Barry, once you remove the lens that anyone expressing an opinion that you may 
not agree with, is not trying to sell you something, I think discussion will be 
more fruitful.  Until then, I think this is the conclusion you are likely to 
come to.
 

 Anyway, gotta go now.  Thanks for your comments.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[steve.sundur]

Oh, and  by the way, the whole impetus behind my post was that I didn't 
understand the way sal was using the term entities.  Once he said it was 
comparable to components, it make more sense to me.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote :

 
 --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote :
  steve.sundur@... steve.sundur@...
 

 And I'm saying you sound kind of desperate, as if -- as you admit -- forcing 
an imaginary atheist to be uncomfortable is your real goal. 


 

 Well Barry, IIRC, your answer to this possibility was that there are zillions 
of ways this could take place, or something to that effect.  So, I guess that 
is what works for you.  As for the desperate part, I think that is something 
you like to pin on people when a discussion goes past what you consider a 
proper stopping point.  You are the acting police chief in that regard I guess.

In other words, it sounds to me as just *talk* about atheism has been so 
uncomfortable *for you* that you want to make someone else uncomfortable in 
retaliation. 
 

 Well, of course Barry.  That fits your narrative doesn't it. People that are 
critical of some of the things you are say are either:
 

 desperate, cult apologists, or, wait..the grand answer 
-Trying to Sell Me Something.
 

 

If your belief in a God is so strong, why is it so challenged just by someone 
believing something different than you believe?
 

 Oh, Barry, can you ever get out of your rut.  Where did I ever say my belief 
in God was so strong?  I've never said such a thing, and I've separated the 
discussion of reincarnation from the necessity of God.  Are you really unable 
to deviate from your narrative that everyone is trying to sell you something?
 

  You seem to pin almost your *entire* reason for believing in God on your 
desire/need to believe in reincarnation. Great...I get it...you don't want to 
die, and prefer to believe that you won't, and in your view you need a God to 
make that happen. 
 

 Read the discussion Barry. It's not about God.  You, yourself said that there 
is no need to bring in God in explaining reincarnation.  You know, the previous 
life experiences you've talked about many times.  Here's what it is Barry.  It 
is you who are afraid of this possibility.  That' s why you are engaging in 
this shoot the message episode  Be real about it Barry.  Be willing to give 
up your beliefs if need be.  You'll feel liberated.  Didn't someone say that 
the other day?

As I've told you, I don't believe in God, and yet I sorta suspect there is 
something to reincarnation. Millions of Buddhists feel the same way -- they 
believe in reincarnation and don't believe in God. Doncha think you're being 
kinda silly to try to make someone feel uncomfortable just because you can't 
conceive of reincarnation being an automatic process that requires no 
intervention or supervision?
 

 Barry, once you remove the lens that anyone expressing an opinion that you may 
not agree with, is not trying to sell you something, I think discussion will be 
more fruitful.  Until then, I think this is the conclusion you are likely to 
come to.
 

 Anyway, gotta go now.  Thanks for your comments.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[steve.sundur]

And you know what else.  I gotta say that at first blush, your view and 
evidently the view of Buddhism sounds an awful lot like Classical Theism, in 
the broadest sense of word. 

 I'd love to hear you address that.  And no, I am not trying to sell it.
 

 I'd like to know how you see it differing.  Forget about reincarnation.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote :

 Oh, and  by the way, the whole impetus behind my post was that I didn't 
understand the way sal was using the term entities.  Once he said it was 
comparable to components, it make more sense to me.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote :

 
 --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote :
  steve.sundur@... steve.sundur@...
 

 And I'm saying you sound kind of desperate, as if -- as you admit -- forcing 
an imaginary atheist to be uncomfortable is your real goal. 


 

 Well Barry, IIRC, your answer to this possibility was that there are zillions 
of ways this could take place, or something to that effect.  So, I guess that 
is what works for you.  As for the desperate part, I think that is something 
you like to pin on people when a discussion goes past what you consider a 
proper stopping point.  You are the acting police chief in that regard I guess.

In other words, it sounds to me as just *talk* about atheism has been so 
uncomfortable *for you* that you want to make someone else uncomfortable in 
retaliation. 
 

 Well, of course Barry.  That fits your narrative doesn't it. People that are 
critical of some of the things you are say are either:
 

 desperate, cult apologists, or, wait..the grand answer 
-Trying to Sell Me Something.
 

 

If your belief in a God is so strong, why is it so challenged just by someone 
believing something different than you believe?
 

 Oh, Barry, can you ever get out of your rut.  Where did I ever say my belief 
in God was so strong?  I've never said such a thing, and I've separated the 
discussion of reincarnation from the necessity of God.  Are you really unable 
to deviate from your narrative that everyone is trying to sell you something?
 

  You seem to pin almost your *entire* reason for believing in God on your 
desire/need to believe in reincarnation. Great...I get it...you don't want to 
die, and prefer to believe that you won't, and in your view you need a God to 
make that happen. 
 

 Read the discussion Barry. It's not about God.  You, yourself said that there 
is no need to bring in God in explaining reincarnation.  You know, the previous 
life experiences you've talked about many times.  Here's what it is Barry.  It 
is you who are afraid of this possibility.  That' s why you are engaging in 
this shoot the message episode  Be real about it Barry.  Be willing to give 
up your beliefs if need be.  You'll feel liberated.  Didn't someone say that 
the other day?

As I've told you, I don't believe in God, and yet I sorta suspect there is 
something to reincarnation. Millions of Buddhists feel the same way -- they 
believe in reincarnation and don't believe in God. Doncha think you're being 
kinda silly to try to make someone feel uncomfortable just because you can't 
conceive of reincarnation being an automatic process that requires no 
intervention or supervision?
 

 Barry, once you remove the lens that anyone expressing an opinion that you may 
not agree with, is not trying to sell you something, I think discussion will be 
more fruitful.  Until then, I think this is the conclusion you are likely to 
come to.
 

 Anyway, gotta go now.  Thanks for your comments.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[steve.sundur]

or anyone for that matter
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote :

 And you know what else.  I gotta say that at first blush, your view and 
evidently the view of Buddhism sounds an awful lot like Classical Theism, in 
the broadest sense of word. 

 I'd love to hear you address that.  And no, I am not trying to sell it.
 

 I'd like to know how you see it differing.  Forget about reincarnation.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote :

 Oh, and  by the way, the whole impetus behind my post was that I didn't 
understand the way sal was using the term entities.  Once he said it was 
comparable to components, it make more sense to me.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote :

 
 --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote :
  steve.sundur@... steve.sundur@...
 

 And I'm saying you sound kind of desperate, as if -- as you admit -- forcing 
an imaginary atheist to be uncomfortable is your real goal. 


 

 Well Barry, IIRC, your answer to this possibility was that there are zillions 
of ways this could take place, or something to that effect.  So, I guess that 
is what works for you.  As for the desperate part, I think that is something 
you like to pin on people when a discussion goes past what you consider a 
proper stopping point.  You are the acting police chief in that regard I guess.

In other words, it sounds to me as just *talk* about atheism has been so 
uncomfortable *for you* that you want to make someone else uncomfortable in 
retaliation. 
 

 Well, of course Barry.  That fits your narrative doesn't it. People that are 
critical of some of the things you are say are either:
 

 desperate, cult apologists, or, wait..the grand answer 
-Trying to Sell Me Something.
 

 

If your belief in a God is so strong, why is it so challenged just by someone 
believing something different than you believe?
 

 Oh, Barry, can you ever get out of your rut.  Where did I ever say my belief 
in God was so strong?  I've never said such a thing, and I've separated the 
discussion of reincarnation from the necessity of God.  Are you really unable 
to deviate from your narrative that everyone is trying to sell you something?
 

  You seem to pin almost your *entire* reason for believing in God on your 
desire/need to believe in reincarnation. Great...I get it...you don't want to 
die, and prefer to believe that you won't, and in your view you need a God to 
make that happen. 
 

 Read the discussion Barry. It's not about God.  You, yourself said that there 
is no need to bring in God in explaining reincarnation.  You know, the previous 
life experiences you've talked about many times.  Here's what it is Barry.  It 
is you who are afraid of this possibility.  That' s why you are engaging in 
this shoot the message episode  Be real about it Barry.  Be willing to give 
up your beliefs if need be.  You'll feel liberated.  Didn't someone say that 
the other day?

As I've told you, I don't believe in God, and yet I sorta suspect there is 
something to reincarnation. Millions of Buddhists feel the same way -- they 
believe in reincarnation and don't believe in God. Doncha think you're being 
kinda silly to try to make someone feel uncomfortable just because you can't 
conceive of reincarnation being an automatic process that requires no 
intervention or supervision?
 

 Barry, once you remove the lens that anyone expressing an opinion that you may 
not agree with, is not trying to sell you something, I think discussion will be 
more fruitful.  Until then, I think this is the conclusion you are likely to 
come to.
 

 Anyway, gotta go now.  Thanks for your comments.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[awoelflebater]

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote :

 From: steve.sundur@... steve.sundur@...
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, April 21, 2014 12:24 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities
 
 
   I see what you mean about entities, or components
 

 And yes, you are right, introducing rebirth, or reincarnation does necessitate 
entities.
 

 You look at the accounts indicating rebirth and find them lacking.  
 

 I look at the accounts and find many of them credible.
 

 And so, the point I was making at the outset is that if somehow these accounts 
are found to be credible, or if the preponderance of evidence seems to suggest 
such, or if such a time comes when something such as a causal body can be 
measured, then yes, I would say that an atheist would then be required to 
acknowledge that there must be some organizing body or entities at work to 
maintain order in this process..
 

 I am not saying it proves the existence of God.  All I am saying is that it 
might force a door open that an atheist might not be comfortable seeing cracked 
open. 








And I'm saying you sound kind of desperate, as if -- as you admit -- forcing an 
imaginary atheist to be uncomfortable is your real goal. 

In other words, it sounds to me as just *talk* about atheism has been so 
uncomfortable *for you* that you want to make someone else uncomfortable in 
retaliation. 

If your belief in a God is so strong, why is it so challenged just by someone 
believing something different than you believe? You seem to pin almost your 
*entire* reason for believing in God on your desire/need to believe in 
reincarnation. Great...I get it...you don't want to die, and prefer to believe 
that you won't, and in your view you need a God to make that happen. 

As I've told you, I don't believe in God, and yet I sorta suspect there is 
something to reincarnation. Millions of Buddhists feel the same way -- they 
believe in reincarnation and don't believe in God. Doncha think you're being 
kinda silly to try to make someone feel uncomfortable just because you can't 
conceive of reincarnation being an automatic process that requires no 
intervention or supervision?

This is your never-ending tactic, Bawwy. First, you set yourself up as the 
independent thinker who doesn't give a shit about just about anything and then 
you proceed to berate and belittle anyone who doesn't feel the same as you do, 
all the while making up characteristics almost nobody here possesses just so 
you have an opportunity to make yourself feel superior in some way. You've got 
an interesting gig going and so, so predictable.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[Richard J. Williams]

On 4/21/2014 5:40 AM, TurquoiseBee wrote:
Millions of Buddhists feel the same way -- they believe in 
reincarnation and don't believe in God. 


You are incorrect. Traditionally Buddhists throughout the Buddhist world 
consider that the universe contains more beings in it than are normally 
visible to humans. Buddhists have no objection to the existence of the 
Hindu Gods or Devas.


Nevertheless, Buddhists can't take refuge in the gods because the gods 
are not Buddha. That is, they are not enlightened. All the Hindu gods, 
for all their power, are not the final truth of things. Power does not 
necessarily entail insight, and for Buddhists the gods do not have the 
liberating insight. But, none of this entails that the gods do not exist 
or that the gods cannot exert a powerful influence over our lives. Thus, 
the Buddhist has no problem with the gods like you seem to have. Somehow 
Barry seems to have don a 180 and got all mixed up. Go figure.



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection 
is active.
http://www.avast.com

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[authfriend]

This sounds like one of Barry's paranoid fantasies--that Steve, by his own 
admission, wants to force atheists to be uncomfortable. There's zero 
indication of that in what Steve wrote. He lists some possible future 
scientific developments that he speculates might make an atheist uncomfortable 
if they were to take place. 

 Apparently those possibilities do make Barry uncomfortable, or he wouldn't 
have responded as he did. So he projects his own discomfort onto Steve, who 
hasn't been showing the slightest degree of discomfort in this discussion. In 
fact, he's been going to some lengths to avoid making Barry uncomfortable. 
Barry, however, will take offense and blame Steve for being offensive no matter 
what, even accusing him of being desperate because his belief in God is so 
strong. This after Steve has been explicit that proof of reincarnation would 
not prove the existence of God.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote :
 

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote :

 From: steve.sundur@... steve.sundur@...
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Monday, April 21, 2014 12:24 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities
 
 
   I see what you mean about entities, or components
 

 And yes, you are right, introducing rebirth, or reincarnation does necessitate 
entities.
 

 You look at the accounts indicating rebirth and find them lacking.  
 

 I look at the accounts and find many of them credible.
 

 And so, the point I was making at the outset is that if somehow these accounts 
are found to be credible, or if the preponderance of evidence seems to suggest 
such, or if such a time comes when something such as a causal body can be 
measured, then yes, I would say that an atheist would then be required to 
acknowledge that there must be some organizing body or entities at work to 
maintain order in this process..
 

 I am not saying it proves the existence of God.  All I am saying is that it 
might force a door open that an atheist might not be comfortable seeing cracked 
open. 








And I'm saying you sound kind of desperate, as if -- as you admit -- forcing an 
imaginary atheist to be uncomfortable is your real goal. 

In other words, it sounds to me as just *talk* about atheism has been so 
uncomfortable *for you* that you want to make someone else uncomfortable in 
retaliation. 

If your belief in a God is so strong, why is it so challenged just by someone 
believing something different than you believe? You seem to pin almost your 
*entire* reason for believing in God on your desire/need to believe in 
reincarnation. Great...I get it...you don't want to die, and prefer to believe 
that you won't, and in your view you need a God to make that happen. 

As I've told you, I don't believe in God, and yet I sorta suspect there is 
something to reincarnation. Millions of Buddhists feel the same way -- they 
believe in reincarnation and don't believe in God. Doncha think you're being 
kinda silly to try to make someone feel uncomfortable just because you can't 
conceive of reincarnation being an automatic process that requires no 
intervention or supervision?

This is your never-ending tactic, Bawwy. First, you set yourself up as the 
independent thinker who doesn't give a shit about just about anything and then 
you proceed to berate and belittle anyone who doesn't feel the same as you do, 
all the while making up characteristics almost nobody here possesses just so 
you have an opportunity to make yourself feel superior in some way. You've got 
an interesting gig going and so, so predictable.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[Richard J. Williams]

On 4/21/2014 6:44 AM, nablusoss1008 wrote:
 So Goddess Tara isn't a God :-)
 
This is where followers like Barry get really mixed up. The White Tara 
in Vajrayana Buddhism is Sarasvati in Hindu Sri Vidya. According to 
Blofield, White Tara counteracts illness and thereby helps to bring 
about a long life. The Tara sadhana was revealed to the Nath Siddha 
Tilopa in 995 C.E., who is the human father of the Karma Kagyu sect of 
Tibet.

'The Tantric Mysticism of Tibet'
A Practical Guide to the Theory, Purpose, and Techniques of Tantric 
Meditation
by John Blofeld
Penguin, 1992

'The Cult of Tara'
Magic and Ritual in Tibet
by Stephen Beyer
University of California Press 1992

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection 
is active.
http://www.avast.com

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[Richard J. Williams]

On 4/21/2014 9:55 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
So he projects his own discomfort onto Steve, who hasn't been showing 
the slightest degree of discomfort in this discussion.


Now this is funny - according to Barry he was in a cult himself, so he 
projects that everyone else here must have been or is in one now. If you 
disagree with Barry, you are a cult apologist. LoL!


I studied with a guy who could turn huge rooms in convention centers 
gold, to the point where even the security guards saw it, but that never 
made me think he was enlightened, only that he could do cool things with 
light.


From: Uncle Tantra
Subject: Re: Two simple questions for the bhakti supporters
Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental
Date: March 16, 2003


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection 
is active.
http://www.avast.com

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[nablusoss1008]

 So TheGoddess is important in Buddhism yet The Turq, a proclaimed Buddhist, 
denies God exist. What a mess.

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote :

 On 4/21/2014 6:44 AM, nablusoss1008 wrote:
  So Goddess Tara isn't a God :-)
 
 This is where followers like Barry get really mixed up. The White Tara 
 in Vajrayana Buddhism is Sarasvati in Hindu Sri Vidya. According to 
 Blofield, White Tara counteracts illness and thereby helps to bring 
 about a long life. The Tara sadhana was revealed to the Nath Siddha 
 Tilopa in 995 C.E., who is the human father of the Karma Kagyu sect of 
 Tibet.
 
 'The Tantric Mysticism of Tibet'
 A Practical Guide to the Theory, Purpose, and Techniques of Tantric 
 Meditation
 by John Blofeld
 Penguin, 1992
 
 'The Cult of Tara'
 Magic and Ritual in Tibet
 by Stephen Beyer
 University of California Press 1992
 
 ---
 This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus 
protection is active.
 http://www.avast.com http://www.avast.com

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[Richard J. Williams]

On 4/21/2014 2:30 PM, nablusoss1008 wrote:
 So The Goddess is important in Buddhism yet The Turq, a proclaimed 
 Buddhist, denies God exist. 
 
That's because Tara is not a Hindu god, but a Buddhist siddha. The gods 
may bring boons in the form of material wealth, but they cannot bring 
one into the siddha field - they do not have that liberating insight. 
The gods, for all their power, do not see things the way a buddha sees 
things - a buddha is awakened. The Gods concern is with this world while 
siddhas are concerned with the transcendental field.
 What a mess.
 
That's because his teacher, Dr. Lenz, didn't know very much about the 
history or practice of Tibetan Buddhism, although he wrote a book about 
surfing in the Himalayas. Go figure. It looks like the Truq didn't 
follow up very much on the study part either, or the practice, although 
he has said he has tried mind-fullness meditation. Go figure.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection 
is active.
http://www.avast.com

Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities

[steve.sundur]

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote :
 
  Doncha think you're being kinda silly to try to make someone feel 
uncomfortable just because you can't conceive of reincarnation being an 
automatic process that requires no intervention or supervision?


I guess I missed this.  I am sorry you feel I am trying to make someone 
uncomfortable because they don't believe as I do.
 

 I think that is an inaccurate assessment.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Sal, What have you been eating?

[Michael Jackson]

Depends on the kind of duck - the ones I have had in Chinese restaurants have 
all been mighty tasty.





 From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 10:01 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Sal, What have you been eating?
 


  
I recall my father-in-law talking about duck hunting in San Francisco Bay, 
years ago, and how when he got the ducks home and cooked one, it had a very 
fishy flavor, couldn't eat it.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote:

 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, salyavin808 fintlewoodlewix@ wrote:
 
  
  
  Mmmm, . You don't know what you're missing, barbecued with 
  a few boiled potatoes and some mustard with a fried egg on
  top. A quality bit of foraging.
  
  There's too many of the bloody things anyway, we need a bit of
  predation to keep the numbers down, and if it annoys her majesty
  all the better!
 
 My opinion about human beings. 
 
 I would imagine swan is awfully greasy like goose and duck. And whatever 
 they're eating out of the Thames can't be good.
  
  
  
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson mjackson74@ wrote:
  
   England: Queen’s Swan Is Barbecued and Eaten
   By STEVEN ERLANGER
   Published: August 21, 2013 
   The charred carcass of one of Queen Elizabeth’s own swans was found on 
   a riverbank near Windsor Castle after having been barbecued and eaten, 
   according to the police and a charity called Swan Lifeline. 
   
   
   The swan was one of about 200 that live on Baths Island and belong to the 
   queen. 
   Until 1998, under a law dating to the 12th century, killing or injuring a 
   swan was classified as treason, and the crown retains ownership of all 
   unmarked mute swans in areas along the River Thames. Wild swans are also 
   protected under a 1981 act, and to injure or kill a swan †let alone 
   eat one †is against the law. 
   
   
   Wendy Hermon of Swan Lifeline said that 
   “the whole breast had been removed, and it looked like it had been 
   eaten for lunch.†There was “just a swan skeleton left,†she said. 
   “It’s 
   absolutely disgusting, I can’t imagine the kind of people that would do 
   this.†She said the carcass, with its feathers still attached, was taken 
   by her group to be cremated.
  
 



 

Re: [FairfieldLife] If Sal were a character in Dilbert...

[Sal Sunshine]

On Oct 13, 2008, at 6:48 PM, gullible fool wrote:


http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2008-10-09/


Hey, I was just talking about solar energy with someone today.

Get your kicks in now, gull, cause after the election
you won't have Sal to kick around anymore...

Sal

Re: [FairfieldLife] If Sal were a character in Dilbert...

[gullible fool]

 
You're not planning on leaving us??
  
Love will swallow you, eat you up completely, until there is no `you,' only 
love. 
 
- Amma  

--- On Mon, 10/13/08, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

From: Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] If Sal were a character in Dilbert...
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, October 13, 2008, 8:16 PM




On Oct 13, 2008, at 6:48 PM, gullible fool wrote:







 
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2008-10-09/

Hey, I was just talking about solar energy with someone today.


Get your kicks in now, gull, cause after the election
you won't have Sal to kick around anymore...


Sal

 


  

Re: [FairfieldLife] If Sal were a character in Dilbert...

[Sal Sunshine]

On Oct 13, 2008, at 8:44 PM, gullible fool wrote:


You're not planning on leaving us??


I was just kidding, gull, just (mis)quoting St. Richard the Maligned...

This place is great!  I could never leave!  And people
like you, Rick and a few others really make it special...

Sal

Re: [FairfieldLife] If Sal were a character in Dilbert...

[gullible fool]

I was just kidding, gull, just (mis)quoting St. Richard the Maligned...
 
I am behind on my post reading and missed that one. I did manage to make it 
through the entire Raja John thread this afternoon, but that was, as I like to 
say, rich.
 
Love will swallow you, eat you up completely, until there is no `you,' only 
love. 
 
- Amma  

--- On Mon, 10/13/08, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

From: Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] If Sal were a character in Dilbert...
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, October 13, 2008, 9:49 PM




On Oct 13, 2008, at 8:44 PM, gullible fool wrote:







 
You're not planning on leaving us??

I was just kidding, gull, just (mis)quoting St. Richard the Maligned...


This place is great!  I could never leave!  And people 
like you, Rick and a few others really make it special...


Sal

 


  

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Sal, I find your position inconsistent

[Sal Sunshine]

On May 25, 2006, at 4:18 PM, shempmcgurk wrote:

 n FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
 
  That's why I said if Shemp--if it had been proven, i.e. in court-
 -not
  based on here-say.  That's inconsistent?



 Yeah, it's inconsistent because there was no if with at least one
 incident with Clinton and yet you defended him.

 There are only if's with Muktananda (not that I'm defending him).

And that's why I didn't say to toss him in prison--nothing's been 
proven and, since the man is dead, nothing ever will be.


  Re: your comments about Clinton I have no answer, didn't we just
 go
  over this topic? You seem to be simply obsessed with the man. 


 As I've said many times, I like the man.

 Give it
  up, Shemp, he's been out of office 6 *years.*


 Then why go out of your way to defend him and yet come out with the
 statement about Muktananda?  Again, you're inconsistent.

You know, this is really silly. I've mentioned Clinton exactly *once,* 
about two weeks ago in passing, in relation to Tucker Carlson and the 
scandal he went through. I've never said another word about him on my 
own, and yet, that's enough to cause a rash of messages on how I'm 
defending him--and not only that, going out of my way to do so.

I'm sure there must be a 12-step group for this addiction, Shemp.

Sal







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'








  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Religion and spirituality
  
  
Maharishi mahesh yogi
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Sal, I find your position inconsistent

[Sal Sunshine]

You are once again getting extremely defensive when your argument turns out to have no basis, Gertrude.

Sal


On May 25, 2006, at 5:36 PM, shempmcgurk wrote:

Hey, Salvatore, if you can't take people pointing out your 
inconsistencies, it's not my fault.

Re: [FairfieldLife] For Sal

[Sal Sunshine]

On May 11, 2006, at 12:17 PM, shempmcgurk wrote:

 I have absolutely no idea whether the following allegations are
 founded or unfounded, Sal

Then why post them?

 , but judge for yourself whether they have
 more or less credibility than, say, the allegations against Clarence
 Thomas (who, by the way, was never accused by Anita Hill of ever
 actually being TOUCHED by Thomas).

They have none. It talks of rape while presenting absolutely no 
evidence whatsoever other than heresay, by right-wingers who apparently 
find a fantasy-life more fulfilling than reality.

What I find interesting, Shemp, is how you and other conservatives go 
absolutely bonkers at the mere mention of Clinton--it's like even his 
name triggers something that you just can't seem to get beyond or get 
over.

Sal







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'








  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Maharishi university of management
  
  
Maharishi mahesh yogi
  
  
Ramana maharshi
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.