23 Oct 11
Originally posted by josephwYou're negative.
Your olfactory is saturated.
Our dharmas are a breath of fresh air if understood properly and practiced (not preached).
If one embarks on their spiritual path (dharma), "God" would be happy with him/her for they would be a servant to "God" and furthuring "His kingdom".
23 Oct 11
Originally posted by FMFNo.
So if he is "sometimes" 90% positive, does that make him 90% positive overall?
Whatever man. I really dont know why you pursue this stuff - it's not like you've ever taken anything positive that I've said to you, and I have tried several times.
And anyway, it's upto the reader whether they see words as positive or negative.
So, IMO, his OP's are 90% positive.
23 Oct 11
Originally posted by josephwI'd normally ignore an outburst like this, but since you quote my post I'm going to assume you're aiming this primarily at me, and as such I shall respond directly.
Yes, I'm a rabble-rouser.
And a demagogue, revolutionary, exciter, firebrand, fomenter, incendiary, inciter, instigator, kindler, provocateur, among other things.
You hypocrites. I said some positive things about my intentions toward Dasa in another thread and you all ignored it. But as soon as you see a way, you go out of your way to vilify me.
You ...[text shortened]... co-conspirators along with Dasa to hijack this forum. For that you should be all be banned.
You hypocrites. I said some positive things about my intentions toward Dasa in another thread and you all ignored it. But as soon as you see a way, you go out of your way to vilify me.
I deny your charge of hypocrisy. I ignore most posts, especially those by zealots such as yourself. And it is almost unbelievably arrogant of you to imagine that there are people waiting for a chance to vilify you. If you try to whip up feeling against somebody whose posting behaviour is not dissimilar to your own, albeit to a considerably greater degree, you must expect to encounter a certain amount of opprobrium.
Your intentions are thinly veiled. Wasn't Dasa banned once along with taco and lettuce? Haven't you all been in collusion in all these threads bashing Dasa?
My intentions are not veiled at all. I don't recall that Dasa was banned along with taco&lettuce, but if he was I'm sure it was a decision made by moderators based on his behaviour, not on antipathy from other posters.
I think Dasa should be banned. Not because anyone should be banned because we don't agree with their religious beliefs or philosophy of life, but because he's filling these threads with anything but debate.
The terms of service on this site are pretty clearly delineated. I don't think stinking up the spirituality forum with errant nonsense and refusing to debate according to somebody else's preferences qualifies as infringement.
You are all co-conspirators along with Dasa to hijack this forum. For that you should be all be banned.
You really imagine there is a conspiracy? Really? Do you know what a conspiracy is?
23 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by avalanchethecat"I'd normally ignore an outburst like this, but since you quote my post I'm going to assume you're aiming this primarily at me, and as such I shall respond directly."
I'd normally ignore an outburst like this, but since you quote my post I'm going to assume you're aiming this primarily at me, and as such I shall respond directly.
[b]You hypocrites. I said some positive things about my intentions toward Dasa in another thread and you all ignored it. But as soon as you see a way, you go out of your way to vilify
You really imagine there is a conspiracy? Really? Do you know what a conspiracy is?
No outburst. Just a reasoned reply to the vitriol of those who make personal attacks against me because they are in denial.
"I deny your charge of hypocrisy. I ignore most posts, especially those by zealots such as yourself. And it is almost unbelievably arrogant of you to imagine that there are people waiting for a chance to vilify you. If you try to whip up feeling against somebody whose posting behaviour is not dissimilar to your own, albeit to a considerably greater degree, you must expect to encounter a certain amount of opprobrium."
I'm not a "zealot". You know next to nothing about me except what I tell you I believe. Obviously to someone such as yourself, who believes in nothing, someone like me, who believes in something, is a zealot. That's bigotry in case you haven't noticed.
I didn't "whip up" anyone's feelings about banning Dasa. Obviously feelings play a large role in the minds of those who accuse me of doing so. Not that I don't have feelings, but I try to approach this debate as objectively as I can. But since I'm only human like the rest of you I make mistakes, but that is no justification for reprisal.
"My intentions are not veiled at all. I don't recall that Dasa was banned along with taco&lettuce, but if he was I'm sure it was a decision made by moderators based on his behaviour, not on antipathy from other posters."
I'll concede to a degree of antipathy. I hear it from everyone else too. You hate Christianity. Don't deny it.
"The terms of service on this site are pretty clearly delineated. I don't think stinking up the spirituality forum with errant nonsense and refusing to debate according to somebody else's preferences qualifies as infringement."
Ya, so what's your point? Are all debate opponents always allowed into a debate everywhere?
"You really imagine there is a conspiracy? Really? Do you know what a conspiracy is?"
Don't be so obtuse. Those two questions are reflective of your presumptuous self important attitude.
23 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by josephw[/b]Be bold my friend.
[b]"I'd normally ignore an outburst like this, but since you quote my post I'm going to assume you're aiming this primarily at me, and as such I shall respond directly."
No outburst. Just a reasoned reply to the vitriol of those who make personal attacks against me because they are in denial.
"I deny your charge of hypocrisy. I ignore most pos ons are reflective of your presumptuous self important attitude.
