Seeker, I don't just "harvest" .... these same people also get an e-mail letting them know what is available on the internet for support.
That is the very definition of "harvesting" email...
a couple of people have claimed i am co-dependent ..... a few years back i had to go through this list and do the following: .
codependents frequently:.
codependents frequently:.
Seeker, I don't just "harvest" .... these same people also get an e-mail letting them know what is available on the internet for support.
That is the very definition of "harvesting" email...
a couple of people have claimed i am co-dependent ..... a few years back i had to go through this list and do the following: .
codependents frequently:.
codependents frequently:.
READ MY LIPS!I do not deliberately add people without asking!!!!!!
Read my lips: Yes you do.
Just by harvesting their email in order to ask them the question, you have violated rule #1 for online civility. Just don't do it. Period. No, really. Yes, I mean it. Never. Ever.
You want to add to your email lists? Post something at the end of your messages inviting persons who have an interest to email you with a request to join. That would be fine. But if you harvest names, even just to ask them if they want to join a list, you have violated a univeral rule of conduct in the online world, and people will get mad. You want mad people, keep irritating them. You want to avoid mad people, stop emailing them without their permission.
Jus how many times do I have to apologize to these people.
Every single time you do it. I'm not talking about taking people off lists when they ask you to do it. I'm talking about not emaling people in the first place unless they request you to email them first.
Ever.
And I'm not Seeker4.
a couple of people have claimed i am co-dependent ..... a few years back i had to go through this list and do the following: .
codependents frequently:.
codependents frequently:.
Steps to get along in the online universe:
1. Never put someone on an email sub list unless they ask first to be put on the list.
2. See step 1.
3. Exceptions? See step 1.
4. But what I have is important? See step 1.
something to pass the time.
something to record the words and thoughts .
we've all been victims of crimes.
Hi Angel,
I'm not as frivolous as my picture, needless to say...
Your poetry (song lyric?) was beautiful and haunting. I was immediately reminded of another song I once heard by the Techno group Mono, called Slimcea Girl. The lyrics have a similar haunting reminisce of the past:
As she walked down the street
The rain began to fall
He called out
But she passed on by
Like she never noticed him at all
Then the words of the song
Remind her of those days
Sees herself in the face of a stranger
Sat in a Station Road Cafe
She remembers the day
When things were going her way
Only memories remain of
The way she used to be
Way she used to be
She stays home every night
And exagerates her past
Now he knows
That slimcea girl
And she lives alone in Prozac Park
All the old photographs
Were never thrown away
She looks through them
For what made her cry
And then she decides live for today
She remembers the day
When things were going her way
Only memories remain of
The way she used to be
Way she used to be
this was sent to me today.
i thought it was an interesting statement on how far america has come.
) sorry it's kind of jumbled.
Mulan, in response to Abaddon's post, you said:
But I don't think the Netherlands has quite got it right yet, either. I think an earlier age for first sexual experience is nothing to brag about.
Then be ashamed of what fundamentalists have done to the USA, for if you re-read what Abaddon said, he said the exact opposite of what you think. The freer, more sexually open, more sexually educated population of the Netherlands has a later first sexual experience than the USA.
this was sent to me today.
i thought it was an interesting statement on how far america has come.
) sorry it's kind of jumbled.
There is a time and a place for everything, and the principal got it all wrong.
It would be wrong to push homosexuality at a football game, right? It would be wrong to make abortion announcements at at football game, right? So why would it be right to push Christianity at a football game?
Christians loves to cry, "Persecution!" every time they don't get their way. Rubbish! They are not being persecuted in this country. Instead, every time they try to push their beliefs on others, the country says, "Uh, no, we have freedom of worship in this country, which includes both freedom to worship as you please AS WELL AS freedom not to worship anyone or anything." Then the Christians run around screaming, "Persecution!" So silly.
Christians can pray all they want, whenever they want, however they want. Nobody is going to stop them. It's when they want to force others to listen to their form of worship that they step over the line.
This is NOT a Christian country, never was, never will be. It's not for any one religion. We are a melting-pot country, with all sorts of beliefs. As long as Christians show this level of intolerance toward others, others will complain. Then the Christians can cry about persecution again while everyone else just shakes their heads in weariness.
this was sent to me today.
i thought it was an interesting statement on how far america has come.
) sorry it's kind of jumbled.
First of all, that has got to be an urban legend. No way some principal would say all that in such a setting. It sounds too made up.
However, if anyone uses this facility to honor God and ask Him to bless
this event with safety and good sportsmanship, Federal Case Law is violated.
Thankfully! Imagine how outraged this good Christian would be if there was an offical prayer to Vishnu before the game. Or to Satan. Oh boy, then he would be all hot to put a stop to such blasphemey! So since he would despise using offical school time to encourage the worship of a god he disagrees with, why is he upset that those who disagree with his god cannot use the school as a soapbox to push his religion?
School is school, church is church, and let's keep 'em that way. Kids have to go to school by law, so don't push somebody elses religion on the kids. Do that at voluntary attendance at church. Or else one day somebody's going to force that principal's kid to pray to Allah, and I don't think he would want that, would he?
my discussion group recently debated this topic.. i am interested in everyone's thoughts on these questions:.
why is there evil?.
what motivates those who perpetrate it?.
So, evil is merely deviation from societal norms?
No, for a person could hop around on one leg, certainly a deviation from societal norms, but hardly an evil act.
What I said was selfishness that deviates from societal norms. If that person's hopping on one leg were to cause (somehow) the death of someone, and the person continued to hop anyway, it would be a selfish act of his that caused the death of someone else -- an evil act, for society would condemn it.
I guess that gets into the question, if society doesn't condemn it, is it evil? I tend to think there are certain acts that are universally condemned, but if they weren't, I suppose to that society it wouldn't be evil, would it? We would think so, with our societal norms, but to them it would be normal and natural.
Maybe evil isn't universal, but depends on the point of view of the observer, and that gets us right back to what you said, Jan, isn't it?
my discussion group recently debated this topic.. i am interested in everyone's thoughts on these questions:.
why is there evil?.
what motivates those who perpetrate it?.
Those are valid thoughts, Jan, and you're right, what I said didn't go far enough. Evil may come from selfishness, but on a high enough level so does eating breakfast come from selfishness.
Maybe I should ammend my thought to: Evil comes from a selfishness that goes beyond societal bounds.
Society isn't bothered by the fact that you eat breakfast to, selfishly, look after your body's needs. It views that selfishness as normal and needed. Yet evil can be viewed even here, if you are a vegetarian and you decry that piece of bacon as an act of evil against pigs...
Moving further down the evil scale, you have forms of selfishness that are recognized as truly selfish, even mean and harmful, but not quite evil. The father who insists on having the best portions of the meal for himself, leaving his wife and children to have the leftovers, is an example of something truly mean. Some would even call this man evil, but most would say it is just an example of a selfish pig.
Moving further down the evil scale, you have the father who locks his children in the basement and doesn't let them eat until they die of starvation. Universally recognized as evil.
What's the difference between these three examples? The actions grow more and more starkly wrong, and more and more universally viewed as evil.
my discussion group recently debated this topic.. i am interested in everyone's thoughts on these questions:.
why is there evil?.
what motivates those who perpetrate it?.
My theory:
Evil comes from selfishness. A person wants something, and is willing to hurt others in the process of getting it. How can that person look themselves in the mirror while rejecting the idea of evil within themselves? By rationalization. Since they are acting on selfish impules, and since selfishness can be rationalized as something needed, the needs of the injured party can be discounted or forgotten about.
Examples:
1. The WTS allows babies to die from lack of blood. This is evil. Do they view it as evil? No, they view it as a necessary, if sad, event, and for a higher cause. That higher cause, of course, is ultimately a selfish one: the preservation and maintenance of the WTS, even if the individual JW never catches on to this. Thus this evil comes from sefishness, but is not viewed as evil by the perpertrator.
2. The Jewish holocaust during and leading up to WWII. This was evil. Was it viewed as evil by those in charge? Ultimately, when they were forced to face the facts, but for a long time it was rationalized away by demonizing Jews and attributing all sorts of bad things to them. Was selfishness the cause here? Yes, for the Aryans selfishly wanted a 'pure' society for themselves. One thing led to another and the end result was horrific.
That last point is important to emphasize. Evil acts don't always begin as evil. Peaceful protestors have all the right motives in the world. A few hours later, as the crowd is whipped into a frenzy of violence, you wonder where THAT came from. It came step by inexorable step until peaceful people were influenced to do evil things that would not normally have come into their head. The crowd principle in action.
One final thought: Don't forget about mental illness. Societal restraints can be thrust aside in an instant when a person's brain chemistry goes haywire. Evil can result.