Re: [FairfieldLife] Hey Sal, Re: Entities
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
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
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
--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
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
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
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
---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
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
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
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
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
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
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
---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.
