[Zen] Re: Don't pray in my school and I won't think in your church.

Sun, 03 Oct 2010 07:36:00 -0700 


--- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusub...@...> wrote:
>
> DP,
> 
> I'm interested to find out more about your church's philosophy as the 
> Christian 
> religion has a history of punishing/forbiding beliefs and behaviour outside 
> of 
> scripture and dogma. I don't think it's a question of "my experience" as 
> this is 
> quite well known and documented. Btw, if a Chritian uses the internet are 
> they 
> "Internet Christians"?

And there are also examples of that not being the case. 
If you go by the "well known and documented" history, the U.S. is a place 
filled with racism, violence, and oppression of other countries. But that's 
nowhere near the whole story.
My Church, the United Church of Canada, has as its creed that Jesus was the 
"word made flesh," and "works in us and others by the spirit." The former 
Moderator of the church was quoted as saying that he did not believe Jesus was 
God, and that "Your soul is lost unless you care about people starving in the 
streets." So, no, I do not believe that "beliefs and behaviour outside of 
scripture and dogma" are routinely punished. I can only talk from my 
perspective.

"Internet Atheist" refers to a specific brand of atheist who uses the internet 
to indiscriminately attack religious belief, often through ridicule and false 
analogy ("why should I respect fairy tales?" My main point was that this was a 
forum in which there was a place set aside for religious discussion, and it was 
overwhelmingly dominated by people who were not just nonbelievers but were 
actively against religion.

> 
> Mike 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: DP <wookielife...@...>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Sat, 2 October, 2010 12:30:14
> Subject: [Zen] Re: Don't pray in my school and I won't think in your church.
> 
>   
> 
> And again, it has never been my experience that my church has discouraged 
> independent thought. If your are talking from your own experience, fine. ?but 
> it 
> spunds an awful lot like the same arguments I've heard from other "Internet 
> Athiests."
> 
> --- In [email protected], "DP" <wookielifeday@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusuboyo@> wrote:
> > >
> > > DP, 
> > > 
> > > Not sure how you could be personally "offended" by a criticism of 
> > > theology. 
> > > Actually, I think all this being 'offended' by religious folk is a bit 
> > > rich 
> > > coming from people who don't blink an eye to tell gays they're an 
> > > abomination 
> >or 
> >
> > > women who have abortions are murderers etc etc etc. Suck it up. I also 
> > > think 
> >you 
> >
> > > misunderstood me aout that survey. I don't think purported Christians can 
> > > understand the intricacies of theology when they don't even know who 
> >delivered 
> >
> > > the Sermon on the Mount. That indicates to me that Christians are told 
> > > what 
> > > theological dogmas to believe without much independant inquiry. To me 
> > > that's 
> 
> > > dangerous especially they get into our schools and systems of government 
> >(hence 
> >
> > > the topic headline above).
> > 
> > Wow, lots of generalization there. My church has ordained gay ministers for 
> >almost 20 years. There is no official position on abortion. Again, they are 
> >in 
> >the mainstream, not a "liberal" church. I have read many books about 
> >theology 
> >and find it quite interesting, and I don't think it's fair to dismiss it out 
> >of 
> >hand.. So pardon me, but yes, I am offended when people assume I'm a bigot 
> >because of my beliefs. 
> >
> > 
> > Again, there have been many cases of progressive movements being led by 
> > church 
> >groups. Ever heard of the Berrigan brothers?
> > 
> > "Who did the Sermon On the Mount" wasn't one of the questions, btw.
> > > 
> > > Mike 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: DP <wookielifeday@>
> > > To: [email protected]
> > > Sent: Sat, 2 October, 2010 1:37:46
> > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Don't pray in my school and I won't think in your 
> > > church.
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusuboyo@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > DP,
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks for the reply. It's probably difficult, if not impossible, to 
> > > > keep 
> > > > religion out of politics in the sense that politicians have personal 
> >beliefs 
> >
> > > > that may impact on their personal decision making. However, we in the 
> > > > west 
> 
> > > > mostly live in secular societies and overt religious decisions should 
> > > > stay 
> >the 
> >
> > > 
> > > > hell (excuse the pun) out of legislative decisions that affect all 
> >citizens. 
> >
> > > 
> > > Well, I don't know how far that can go. People talk about taxing churches 
> >where 
> >
> > > the ministers make overt political statements. Couldn't that have been 
> > > used 
> >to 
> >
> > > suppress Martin Luther King? As well, on the international scene and I 
> > > think 
> >of 
> >
> > > Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Lama, whose faith has sustained them. Dennis 
> >Kucinich 
> >
> > > is another example of someone whose faith (Roman Catholic with a bit of 
> > > existentialism thrown in) has resulted in progressive politics. the 
> > > abolitionists were often religious (Quakers, etc). 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I object to your subject line, because in my (admittedly short) years as 
> > > a 
> > > church goer I have never, ever been told not to think. Quite the 
> > > opposite, in 
> >
> > > fact. And it's not like I go to a small "new age Christian" church, but 
> > > one 
> >of 
> >
> > > the mainline churches in Canada.
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I'd also argue with you over the point about atheists knowing the 
> > > > answers 
> >to 
> >
> > > > a religious survey but not understanding the intricacies of 
> > > > theology. If 
> >
> > > >someone 
> > > >
> > > > doesn't know who delivered the Sermon on the Mount they sure as hell 
> > > > (there 
> >I 
> >
> > > >go 
> > > >
> > > > again) don't understand the "intricacies" of theology. 
> > > > 
> > > > Mike.
> > > > 
> > > I'm more offended, to be honest, but putting "intricacies" in quotes. 
> >Theology 
> >
> > > is quite a large and varied field. and that wasn't my point. My point was 
> >that 
> >
> > > these people were gloating over "knowing more" (in fact, an average of 4 
> > > questions more) than religious people, as if they had understood all of 
> >religion 
> >
> > > better than all those who practise it. These were questions like "what 
> >religion 
> >
> > > was Mother Theresa," and while it's shocking that many people didn't know 
> >that, 
> >
> > > in terms of religion it's the equivalent of "what year did Columbus sail" 
> > > is 
> >to 
> >
> > > history.
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: DP <wookielifeday@>
> > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > Sent: Fri, 1 October, 2010 23:16:46
> > > > Subject: Re: [Zen] More about arguments and ego
> > > > 
> > > >   
> > > > 
> > > > Well, there are ways that politics and religion/spirituality intersect 
> > > > that 
> >are 
> >
> > > >
> > > > (for me) fruitful and interesting. The debate over Obama's old 
> > > > minister, 
> >for 
> >
> > > > example, could have led to a mainstream introduction to Liberation 
> >Theology. Or 
> >
> > > >
> > > > we could talk about "Creation Care," the Evangelical environmental 
> >movement. 
> >
> > > > Instead, there are constant threads about keeping religion out of 
> > > > politics, 
> >and 
> >
> > > >
> > > > how atheists are smarter, more moral and more compassionate than 
> > > > religious 
> 
> > > > people. The latest has been about how atheists did better than 
> > > > religiouis 
> > > >people 
> > > >
> > > > on a quiz about religion. I thought the quiz was superficial, and that 
> > > > just 
> >
> > > > because the atheists knew the answers they didn't know the intricacies 
> > > > of 
> > > > theology. Of course, I was ridiculed for even arguing that theology was 
> > > >complex.
> > > > 
> > > > So yes, some hurt feelings and envy over the people who have "the 
> > > > truth." 
> >but 
> >
> > > > also frustration because I think that it's our emphasis on materialism 
> > > > (in 
> >all 
> >
> > > 
> > > > senses of the word) that causes a lot of the world's problems.
> > > > 
> > > > --- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusuboyo@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi DP,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Could you elaborate on this a bit more: "As well, I am frustrated 
> > > > > that 
> >the 
> >
> > > > > section of the political forum dedicated to religion is dominated by 
> > > > > the 
> 
> > > > > atheists."
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Mike
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > From: DP <wookielifeday@>
> > > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > > Sent: Fri, 1 October, 2010 7:58:28
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Zen] More about arguments and ego
> > > > > 
> > > > > ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > I appreciate your comments, and your story. That is strange, and yet 
> > > > > not 
> 
> > > > > uncommon from what I've heard. OTOH, it's a valuable metaphor for how 
> > > > > we 
> 
> > > > > experience the world. We ultimately really don't know. And perhaps 
> > > > > what I 
> >
> > > >feel 
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > > is envy over their illusion of certainty (which they definitely 
> > > > > present)
> > > > > 
> > > > > And yet another part of it is that I feel that some of the issues in 
> > > > > the 
> 
> > > >world 
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > > (this is a political forum that I'm talking about) need a spiritual 
> >outlook 
> >
> > > >as 
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > > well as a real world, material component. Certainly the idea of 
> > > > > "there is 
> >
> > > > > nothing more to this world, and when you die that's it" seems to 
> > > > > counter 
> >any 
> >
> > > 
> > > > > sense of hope for the future, at least in my opinion.
> > > > > 
> > > > > As well, I am frustrated that the section of the political forum 
> >dedicated to 
> >
> > > >
> > > > > religion is dominated by the atheists.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I guess if I *was* more secure in my beliefs I wouldn't let it bother 
> me.
> > > > > --- In [email protected], Kristy McClain <healthyplay1@> 
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *bows to all*
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > I wasn't going to comment on this thread, but after reading DP's 
> > > > > > posts 
> >on 
> >
> > > > >this, 
> > > > >
> > > > > >iÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  decided to share an 
> > > > > >experience i am having right 
> >now..
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > To begin, I was struck when 
> > > > > > youÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  wrote that what 
> >really bothers you 
> >
> > > >is 
> > > >
> > > > >that 
> > > > >
> > > > > >people attack you aboutÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > >what the "truth" is when it 
> >comes to 
> >
> > > >religion.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > >
> > > > >I 
> > > > >
> > > > > >have said before here that, in my view, there really is no such 
> > > > > >thing as 
> >
> > > >"the" 
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >truth or even "a" truth.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > >Its simply one's perception 
> >of it--beit 
> >
> > > >ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ a 
> > > >
> > > > >person, 
> > > > >
> > > > > >idea, theologyÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  or 
> > > > > >event.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  The 
> >need to be right or somehow 
> >
> > > >prove that 
> > > >
> > > > >one 
> > > > >
> > > > > >person's perception is correct and therefore, another's is wrong, is 
> > > > > >at 
> 
> > > > >theÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > >
> > > > > >heart of our societal and global conflicts.
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > I think most of that is ego-driven, but to pretend or deny that 
> > > > > > humans 
> 
> > > >don't 
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > > >have egos is equally 
> > > > > >foolish.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  Its okay to have 
> >opinions, beliefs, 
> >
> > > >values 
> > > >
> > > > >and 
> > > > >
> > > > > >moral 
> > > > > >constructs.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > I think the 
> >danger of egoÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  in 
> >
> > > >this is when one 
> > > >
> > > > >insists 
> > > > >
> > > > > >their viewiint is the only correct 
> > > > > >one.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > IÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ agree with Chris-- great 
> > > > > > wisdom there when he 
> >suggests that when 
> >
> > > >you do 
> > > >
> > > > >not 
> > > > >
> > > > > >respond to some flaming post or insult or complaint, you actually 
> > > >demonstrate 
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > > >greater emotional maturity, and they are aware you maintain your 
> > > > > >views, 
> >but 
> >
> > > 
> > > > >are 
> > > > >
> > > > > >now moving on to the more important matters of your real life.
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > I also agree with Bill.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > > Such 
> >mattersÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  cannot be analized 
> >
> > > >in some 
> > > >
> > > > >logical 
> > > > >
> > > > > >frame.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  If you have faith-- 
> > > > > >thenÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> >logic has little to do 
> >
> > > >with it, and 
> > > >
> > > > > >perhapsÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > >useÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> >yourÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  faith that perhaps your 
> >message 
> >
> > > >will resonate 
> > > >
> > > > >somehow via 
> > > > >
> > > > > >less tangible means.
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > Now, as I am now facing a problem that started with internet 
> >discussion, 
> >
> > > >but 
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > > >has now become a real life threat, 
> > > > > >IÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  must caution 
> >others to beware 
> >
> > > >those 
> > > >
> > > > > >on-line who indeed may have psychiatric buttons you do not want to 
> >inflame.
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > The man I've written about here who claims a lifetime of trauma , 
> >abuse, 
> >
> > > > > >tragedy and drama is at it again. 
> > > > > >ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  After calmly 
> >making it clear to 
> >
> > > >him 
> > > >
> > > > >that I 
> > > > >
> > > > > >will no longer be a part of his self-created dramas, but 
> >wishÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  him 
> >
> > > >well-- 
> > > >
> > > > >the 
> > > > >
> > > > > >followingÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ events have 
> > > > > >unfolded..
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > I received an e-mail from a man claiming to be an ordained 
> > > > > > minister, 
> > > >ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ and 
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > > >friend of this man.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > >Telling me that 
> >****ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  was in a serious 
> >
> > > >car 
> > > >
> > > > >accidentÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  and 
> > > > >
> > > > > >has been taken to a local 
> > > > > >hospital..ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  Stating 
> >thatÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  the 
> >
> > > >eventÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > >
> > > > >details were 
> > > > >
> > > > > >still unclear, but reassuring me this man is 
> > > > > >alive.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> >Etc., 
> >
> > > >etc..ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ He 
> > > >
> > > > >offers his 
> > > > >
> > > > > >e-mail if I have questions or concers.. as if I must certainly 
> >beÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> >
> > > > >anxiouslyÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > >
> > > > > >awaiting any information on this tragic 
> > > > > >event.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> >ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Certain that this is more of the same 
> > > > > > IÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  do not 
> >reply or 
> >
> > > >respond.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ For 
> > > >
> > > > >people 
> > > > >
> > > > > >with this type ofÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > >psychological disorder which is to 
> >a large 
> >
> > > >degreeÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > >
> > > > > >attention-seeking,ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > >grandiose ideation, and other 
> >symtoms.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> >
> > > >There is a 
> > > >
> > > > >bit of 
> > > > >
> > > > > >narcissisism, but his whole personality is more complex, and best 
> > > > > >left 
> >to be 
> >
> > > >
> > > > > >diagnosed by medical professionals.
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > But I do know the worst thing you can do to such a person is ignore 
> > > >them.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >Though it is the only appropriate and sane 
> >respomseÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ or 
> >
> > > >treatment.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > I received a second e-mail a day later stating that the car was 
> > > > > > totally 
> >
> > > > > >destroyed, andÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  he had 
> > > > > >retrieved the personal 
> >belongings (and cell 
> >
> > > > >phone)ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  of 
> > > > >
> > > > > >our "friend", and encouraged me tio call him with support. He is 
> > > > > >being 
> > > > > >transferred to another 
> > > > > >hospital.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > 
> >Reminding me to keep jim 
> >
> > > >in ourÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > >
> > > > >heart and 
> > > > >
> > > > > >prayers. And soÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  and so on.
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > Again, I do not respond, and suspect 
> > > > > > thatÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  the 
> >person writing the 
> >
> > > >e-mails 
> > > >
> > > > >is 
> > > > >
> > > > > >indeedÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  my "friend" 
> > > > > >himself. 
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > This morning, i received a third e-mail from this minister friend 
> > > > > > of 
> >the 
> >
> > > > >man.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > >
> > > > > >Starting out with telling me that the man in the hospital had 
> >toldÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> >
> > > >him a 
> > > >
> > > > >bit 
> > > > >
> > > > > >of what i said to him.. and could not believe how i could be so 
> > > > > >horrible 
> >to 
> >
> > > 
> > > > >such 
> > > > >
> > > > > >a wonderful, decent, giving 
> > > > > >manÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  Etc., 
> >Etc.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  It escalated 
> >
> > > >into a temper 
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > > >tantrum on-line with 
> > > > > >capitalizedÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  angry retorts 
> > > > > >and 
> > > >profanity.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > >
> > > > >(Ministers 
> > > > >
> > > > > >aren'tÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ what
> > > > > > they used to be) 
> >*sigh*
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > At this point, I know I'm dealing with a very unbalanced individual 
> > > > > > who 
> >is 
> >
> > > 
> > > > > >indeed in psychic pain.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > >But this is out of my 
> >league. I care deeply 
> >
> > > >about 
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > > >prople and ache for every child on the 
> > > > > >globe.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ Not 
> >knowingÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> >
> > > >me, its 
> > > >
> > > > >hardÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  for 
> > > > >
> > > > > >anyone here to knowÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > >myÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> >realÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ heart 
> >orÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> >
> > > >values. I am not being 
> > > >
> > > > >cruel,ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ I am 
> > > > >
> > > > > >doingÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  the right thing for 
> > > > > >him and 
> >myself.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > This isÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  hard on two 
> > > > > > levels.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> >First, thisÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  man is 
> >
> > > >much "sicker" 
> > > >
> > > > >thanÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ I 
> > > > >
> > > > > >realized, and I am personally 
> > > > > >afraid.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  He has my 
> >address.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  I 
> >
> > > >have 
> > > >
> > > > >blocked his 
> > > > >
> > > > > >numbers from my phones, and will keep all e-mails in a folder for 
> > > > >evidence.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > >
> > > > > >But this man does own firearms, is emotionally unstable 
> >andÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ I got 
> >
> > > >into this 
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >mess by just trying to be a 
> > > > > >friendÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  at an interfaith 
> >workshop and 
> >
> > > > >discussion 
> > > > >
> > > > > >group.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > It is times like this 
> > > > > > thatÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  having a family of 
> >attorneys is 
> >
> > > >comforting. I 
> > > >
> > > > >have 
> > > > >
> > > > > >contacted friends who are MD's and a psychiatrist, and explained the 
> > > > >events.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  I 
> > > > >
> > > > > >just want to be left alone, and let the medical personnel where he 
> > > > > >is 
> >sort 
> >
> > > > >this 
> > > > >
> > > > > >out.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > BUT~~ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  what if its all a 
> > > > > > lie? If he is seeing all 
> >these 
> >
> > > >doctors,ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  they 
> > > >
> > > > >are 
> > > > >
> > > > > >going to pick 
> >upÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ onÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ this.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > But if he 
> >is just a 
> >
> > > >neurotic man behind a 
> > > >
> > > > >computer 
> > > > >
> > > > > >screen, I have reason to fear.
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > My point is-- sheezus--ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > > take a 
> >breath.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  Stand by your 
> >
> > > >convictions if 
> > > >
> > > > >its 
> > > > >
> > > > > >important to you.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  Let 
> > > > > >go.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  The 
> >other option is surrender to 
> >
> > > >listening 
> > > >
> > > > >to 
> > > > >
> > > > > >others views with a softened 
> > > > > >heart.ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  We all have the 
> >right to have 
> >
> > > >our on 
> > > >
> > > > > >viewpoint, so long as it does not hurt self or others. Or maybe get 
> > > > > >a 
> >new 
> >
> > > > > >hobby:)
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > KristyÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > --- On Thu, 9/30/10, DP <wookielifeday@> wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > From: DP <wookielifeday@>
> > > > > > Subject: [Zen] More about arguments and ego
> > > > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > > > Date: Thursday, September 30, 2010, 12:51 PM
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚  
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I've thought some more about my problrm with getting into arguments 
> > > > > > on 
> >the 
> >
> > > 
> > > > > >internet. I think that the internet has fueled a certain type of 
> >ugliness in 
> >
> > > >
> > > > > >arguments, with its tendency towards short comments that snipe at 
> >miniscule 
> >
> > > 
> > > > > >errors in one's posts. I want to walk away, and yet I hate the idea 
> > > > > >of 
> >the 
> >
> > > > > >bullies winning the argument.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I find that in religious discussions the "internet atheists" (a 
> >specific 
> >
> > > >term 
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >for these type of arguers, not all atheists) tend to crowd out 
> > > > > >people 
> >who 
> >
> > > >want 
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >to sincerely discuss religion on particular forums, so I get 
> > > > > >frustrated. 
> >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > But here's where the ego comes in. Obviously, there is ego involved 
> > > > > > in 
> 
> > > > >winning 
> > > > >
> > > > > >an argument, but there is also some ego in leaving. I feel like I'm 
> >saying 
> >
> > > > >"i'm 
> > > > >
> > > > > >taking my ball and going home."
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > As well, i'm very insecure about my beliefs, and I feel like I'm 
> >somehow 
> >
> > > >not 
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > > >worthy of my arguments. How does insecurity relate to ego, or is 
> > > > > >that a 
> 
> > > > > >completely different question?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>




------------------------------------

Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to