Does any one else find these remarks both racist and personally abusive beyond the lines of acceptance. As this was aimed at you Linda, I'm sorry if you feel I shouldn't have brought it to other's attention, and maybe you feel you can defend yourself without intervention, but I find it disturbing and offensive. Can someone as sensible as you explain the expression" At least I''m white enough to be considered."

Quote from SoSick -

"But how long will it take you to figure out what it says is the million dollar question.

At least I''m white enough to be considered.
We were discussing Thomas Huxley here, not ToE.

"CTD and I were thinking of starting a Young Europeans Club. You are not invited. I don't like your curly brown hair and swarthy complexion. Is that a wig? " - This quote aimed at Linda <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" /> Still SoSick Jesus will forgive you?

Yes Jesus will forgive me. well, actually there isn;t anything to forgive.

I don't recall Jesus ever making you the judge of anyone else either.

Linda supports the ideas that make those statements possible Tracy so why don't you just sit back, take a deep breath and get over yourself and her too. Or go right ahead, think about it all day ... fume and work yourself up over me. The choice is yours.

Usually you know, when people have something to say about a post they make their comments in the same post.

Are you trying to use me for illicit purposes Tracy?

What do you care about Jesus anyway? Or is this suppose to be a Jesus joke?

Why don't you go find all the truly nasty things you have said in this forum about other people and make a big list? Occupy your time with something meaningful.

Funny SoSick that I've had private posts this morning saying it was about time someone stood up to you, cos they're all sick of you targeted personal insults. Nothing to forgive. You live in Fantsy land my friend. I don't need to relax, I am, you seem to be the one with the problems. Get the point I don't judge, just support, like most people on here. You however, as a lot of others seem to find that's a particular enjoyment of yours. I'd love to know your opinions on Homosexuality. Isn't that against God/Jesus. Should they all be shot?

Sure you have Tracy.

Like umm, one from Linda right? And she complained about who else?

Are you trying to pick a fight Tracy?

get yourself all worked up.

SoSick your not worth replying to, there is obviously something very wrong. I ain't wasting my time with someone as pathetic as you. Go read up on some more crap, so you've got something to talk about. Pick a fight, I feel sorry for you.

Judging Others

Did I call you stupid? Gosh I'm so sorry I don't recall calling you stupid, maybe you read my mind. Another remark made by SoSick, the Christian at someone with far more intelligence.

1 “Do not judge so that you will not be judged. 2 “For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. 3 “Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 “Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ and behold, the log is in your own eye? 5 “You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.
I have met and know a lot of beautiful people from all denominations and athiests alike, beautiful people from all nations, all with true good hearts. Labelling yourself as a believer, dosen't give you the right to sin and be sure you will be forgiven. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/imnotworthy.gif" alt="" />

Tracy, those quotes were taken from another forum. It was to do with certain beliefs connected to racism. Sosick was trying to make a point or give an example of this type of racism. I'm sure you had read the entire thing before pulling out those quotes?

Sorry, I had to clarify this, because I can see where this is going to lead.

I'm sorry the comment to Linda was stated the way it was! But I hope anybody here can see what the quotes were actually connected to also. It might have been better to address it on that very forum, rather than bring it up on here if you thought there was a problem. Or posting a link to the thread on here would have been better, so people could read it all and see where sosick was coming from. At any rate, if one is concerned enough, it's probably wiser to get in touch with the owner/moderator if you believe there is a serious reason for a complaint.



As a believer myself, I totally agree with that statement. I have to watch myself with sin all the time and being careful not to judge others as well, and getting my own house sorted out first. Thanks for the biblical quotes Tracy, a very sobering reminder!

Dear Bex I know you like to believe people only have good intentions and so do I most of the time, but I only chose to post on this part of the forum after abusive remarks to me from SoSick on a thread here. Also those remarks made to Linda were personally aimed at her, I wouldn't have said this if I hadn't checked with her first. Sorry but sometimes enough is enough.

My remark – “My Uncle is a lay preacher and my cousin a Vicar.”

SoSicks reply – “A vicar how impressive!” I read that as sarcasm and her implying that she would know more about religion than my uncle and that he is of no importance, judging someone of high intelligence and knowledgeable of religion, someone she doesn’t even know.

Following unjustified comments

“Yahshua may be a better spelling. he sent his son to his own. and they received him not. Just like Tracy received him not.” - How does she know?

“good to hear from you Tracy, glad to hear all is going so well” - You think she means this, I think more unchristian sarcasm.

“I can see Tracy is very upset that I do not care for vicars... Jinx, you do not need vicars or popes or fancy robes or cathedrals or ornaments of gold or seven hundred catechisms and works to give you religion. Just Jesus. Organized religion is mostly nonsense.”

Well I do care for my uncle, vicar or not and how can she justify “I do not care for vicars” - So SoSick only sees vicars as just vicars not people?

Icing on the cake, there are plenty of people on this forum, including you Bex, who have been prescribed medications by quack doctors without warnings or advice. So I guess this is aimed at all us addicts. Compassion, understanding, caring, unjudgemental and CHRISTIAN! Am I describing SoSick. I think not!

”Tracy needs to take her pill.”

To be honest I’m sick of reading this hypocritical nonsense, especially from somebody like SoSick who seems to put herself on a pedestal, above some of us on here, she alone is enough to make the strongest of believers doubt.

Just off to bed to take a pill, whoops forgot haven’t taken them for six months. I might remain open minded and if I don’t get my place in Heaven at least I haven’t been a hypocrite on Earth. Tracy (ex pill popper) <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ineeddrugs.gif" alt="" /> LOL

Tracy, I don't think this post is going to be healthy for anyone. It doesn't help our health to be getting worked up, and it's not worth it.

From what I remember about the words you chose for your opening post here, SoSick was being sarcastic. She's trying to claim in the creation/evolution forum that because Darwin, his friends, his family, friends of friends, most white European people at the time had racist beliefs, that therefore the theory of evolution is invalid. All of the evolutionists are getting tarred with the same brush at the moment. If you'd like to express an opinion on that then you're welcome to do so in the thread over there, but I wouldn't honestly recommend it.

I'm used to being spoken to like that by some people here, I know Russ will never do anything about it, and I talk to them with that understanding. Their words speak a lot about their own thoughts and feelings.

Be secure in the knowledge that you're doing what's right for yourself. How can some anonymous person on a forum pass any kind of valid judgement on someone you know? It's obviously a remark which just reflects a person's prejudice.

I suggest we stick to talking about mercury and alt med here. It's better for the adrenals <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Tracy, I'm sorry I was so casual in my earlier response about this. Just trying to keep things at a minimum and hope things settle down. I'm not overlooking what was said to you, you are right to be offended. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Well Bex, I thought so too and it's my nature to speak up for others, but in the past always been someone to keep the peace. Can't seem to win either way. Heard you loud and clear Linda, true and honest friend. Your right about one thing, this forum is not doing my Adrenals any good. Going to say farewell and peace and good luck to you all. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/byebye.gif" alt="" />

Sorry to hear about all the distress here. I really don't believe it's necessary as people create their own reputation and reputability based on how they conduct themselves in the sight of others. To cut people off would only be censoring them, and then people get upset about "censorship".

Is it a no-win situation?

No, not if you look at it a different way.

My position is:

(1) that all of you deserve freedom, and
(2) that there are two sides to freedom that we all need to learn to respect:
- (a) Our side, and
- (b) The other guy's side.

We have to realize that there are nearly always two kinds of things at play:

(1) Opinions, and
(2) Statements of Fact.

If we are offended by someone's opinion, then we have a fear that we would do well to resolve within ourselves. That fear may or may not have something to do with what was spoken, or it may have more to do with what we think others will believe is true as a result. This is where statements of fact come into play.

Statements of fact are exampled by someone saying something like, "Sally cheated on her test." This is not a statement of opinion. It is a statement of fact, or at least it is presented as a fact. Whether or not it is true—we don't know. No evidence was provided.

We should not take offense to people stating opinions. If we do, we have a fear that is being brought to our attention by the emotions that fear invokes. We are designed this was for a reason.

For this reason, I do not threaten to ban people for stating opinions.

I do threaten to ban people for:

(1) Making false statements of fact, and
(2) Provoking emotion without reason, i.e. "content" (a.k.a. "trolling").

Making false statements is actually harmful to others because it can affect your reputation (which all civilized people should value). If your reputation is damaged, than you have been damaged indeed, and this is ground for banning.

This is why I warned LindaLou on the Creation/Evolution forum recently. She made false statements of fact about me, which is an action that is harmful to my reputation.

On the other hand, if someone is being bantered or answered sarcastically, it is really a reflection of the person doing the bantering, not the person receiving it. Over time, the person doing the bantering will probably lose reputation among people, but since this loss is of their own accord, they have indeed harmed no one but themselves.

Now here is where most people cannot tell the difference between the two.

If someone says something to us that hurts our feelings but is not a statement of fact (meaning that anyone can recognize that it is only their opinion), it does is no actual harm. There only may be the perception of harm because we may experience emotions that have been improperly trained to react to someone else's opinion.

It should not be offensive to anyone that I state that our emotions are improperly trained. This is true of all of us. As we mature, it is up to us to bring our emotions in line with reality. If we continue to allow our emotions to dictate our stance, we are slaves to them, and this only creates a climate of illogical reactions (a "reactionary" person).

For this reason, we have different kinds of people in the world. Some are gentle. Some are rough around the edges. Both types refine a different part of the other. The gentle become impermeable. The rough become considerate. This is the way of things if we allow it to be.

Of course, the key phrase in this concept is "if we allow it to be".

-- This system works well if we believe that it is logical and reasonable not to give into our emotions, but rather to make (discipline) our emotions to be subject to logic and reason.

-- This system does not work so well if we believe (perhaps by upbringing) that our emotions actually provide a means to logically discern. They do not, but this belief system is being thrust upon us by the emerging one-world socialistic ideology because it works to the advantage of globalists and bankers (material for a different book).

I have myself been virtually-slapped by LindaLou enough times to know that the only difference between her and SoSick is that LindaLou slaps with the back of her hand and SoSick with the front.

Well, that's OK. It's their right and perogative, and far be it from me to take their right away from either of them. For this reason, I don't mind getting slapped around if the hand is the hand of opinion, but when the hand becomes one posing as deliverer of statements of fact, then the rules are different, and if someone slanders someone else on this forum, I'd like to hear about it because I will consider banning them.

The short of it is this: The precious thing for which you are responsible always has been and always will be under your control, and that is, your reputation.

If someone offends you, they have actually provided you with an opportunity to gain reputation by contrasting the offense to your graceful response. Both the unrefined and the gentle provide each other with opportunity to become better people through offenses, and therefore should—when offenses are experienced with a proper understanding—drive us in an upward spiral; and this is—after all—what we are here for.

God does not need to get to know us. He is simply letting us get to know ourselves. Only then can we understand how He sees us, and only then can be begin to understand our relationship with Him.

Yes, a deeper look reveals that both the unrefined and the gentle provide opportunities for us to shine and to grow, and if this sounds idealistic, it certainly is. After all, the entire universe is designed by an Idealist with a plan.

With a proper understanding, we can safely conclude:

Be kind to each other, and if someone is unkind to you, be kind anyway. It will be good for both of you regardless of how it feels.


[color:"brown"]"Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good."[/color]

—Romans 12:19-21


Bear in mind that in this context, the heaping of coals is for the eventual benefit of the recipient of the coals, for fire both burns (hurts) and purifies.


Know thyself.

I understand and accept your reply Russ, but unfortuantely I can't agree with one thing. Society is changing for the worst. I'm not just talking about within the church, but on a whole. Both my partner and I have worked in schools for years. It is a huge concern that the vast majority of students do not respect staff, each other and parents, in fact any authorative figure. When the priest comes into school, he is mocked. Similarily the respect for police and other figures of authority has diminished rapidly. As I said we are not talking about a minority here, but the majority. You can point out the error of their ways and some individuals are still able to look inside themselves, recognize their errors and change, but not without someone bringing their misconduct to attention and guiding them along the right path. Some individuals will never be able to do this and I have had experience of these people continually 'feeding' off other's misery for the whole of their lives. So where do we draw the line. Continue to turn the other cheek, until society is living with no rules and guidelines until things are beyond endurance, watch our children grow and adapt to this kind of society or try and change things. Yes everybody has a right to their own opinions, but it is not always right to state them. We often say to our children, you have a right to your own opinion, but think about it, question it. If it needs stating, do it in a unoffensive manner with considration for the other person's feelings. If you can't do this, say nothing and do a lot of thinking. Everybody sometimes needs to be reminded that they are acting in an unacceptable way. Best Wishes Tracy x

I'm glad you're OK with opinions Russ. I see what you are saying here but I respectfully disagree with some of it.

It has been very difficult to achieve discussions of any substance in the creation/evolution forum because of the many distractions that are happening. These include ignoring/dodging valid questions and ad hominem attacks which the perpetrators see as perfectly valid. None of these things facilitates a useful discussion. Bex, bless her, has actually posted a detailed response to a question I asked about creationism and I was surprised at how thankful I was, because others there were point-blank refusing to engage.

I've been called stupid, racist, a liar, a conspirer, a bad teacher, a hate-filled Christian-basher, and goodness knows what else. I try to ignore it but it gets tedious.

I belong to another forum where this sort of thing is not tolerated from anyone, no matter which "side" they are on, and I feel that makes it a safer place for everyone to be, where you don't have to worry about someone using character-assassination techniques on you to push their point. Some of the rules there include:

Avoid any form of misrepresentation.

Keep discussion civil and avoid inflammatory behavior that might distract attention from the topic. Argue the position, not the person.

Things can get heated at times and if a moderator felt I needed to be reminded of these kinds of rules, I'd accept that. It's also helpful when others are called to task as well.

You might have noticed that I said I missed your input at that forum because all that was occurring there was mudslinging. It's been very difficult to try to focus things.

By the way, I think the most inappropriate comment that Tracy cited was where she was attempting to give some support to Jinx, and SoSick entered the conversation with derrogatory remarks about Tracy's uncle, the vicar. Tracy and Jinx are very poorly and such a remark in such a situation was at the very least, rather unhelpful, do you not think? It's OK for her to carry on in that vein wherever and whenever she likes, is it, even when someone is ill and simply wanting some support?

Those are some very thoughtful comments Tracy; and being a teacher myself, I have to agree. Increasingly, part of a teacher's job is to help shape behaviour as well as to teach a subject. I point out all the time where I think someone has overstepped a mark, either with someone else or with me, because they don't always see that for themselves, and they also need to understand what the rules are and why they are there. I get abuse at school, I get it on forums . . . I ought to just go join someplace vacuous where people don't think much about things and there's nothing to argue about, LOL. Somehow it doesn't appeal though.

ummm, excuse me, LindaLou and Tracy... but since the two of you seem to enjoy throwing insults at me at every turn... most of which I do ignore btw and every now and then do toss one back at you... I have a couple things to say if you don't mind... if I am not interrupting your discussions of me...

First of all Linda, I am not responsible for your behavior. You did this exact same thing just a short 2-3 weeks ago. SoSick SoSick SoSick.. it's always SoSick that makes you do something or say something... Linda, That is a bit difficult to believe. Quit seeking out people to do your dirty work. Grow up.

And Tracy, if you do not like my replies to you then I suggest you stop running at me with knives. It should be evident that you fall on your own knife. Mind your own business. Why on earth you continually burst into the midst of a thread whenever you show up to accuse me or someone else of whatever you accuse of, is a very good question. You see a type of behavior that you don't like, but you have never acknowledged the knife in your hand. Vicar schmicar. That is my reply to you Tracy. After you insulted me. I did not insult you Tracy. I replied to you in regard to your accusations of my faith.

You both need to grow up, quit blaming others for your problems or bad moods, and take responsiblity for yourselves.

And now, since you have accused, tried me and passed judgement of your own accord, I was also wondering... have you set a date for the crucifixion?

Excellent post SoSick, confirmed what people have said about you. Been advised by many don't answer any more of her posts. Shes's obviously slightly unbalanced.

"Quit seeking out people to do your dirty work"

Linda doesn't need help to respond to your crap, sounds like you think we're conspiring, it's called PARANOIA.

"Vicar schmicar" intelligent descriptive rhyming, my 2 year old says things like that.

"I did not insult you Tracy. I replied to you in regard to your accusations of my faith" Hmmm, your interpretation of an insult is a little disturbing. Look at the dictionary.

"You both need to grow up, quit blaming others for your problems or bad moods, and take responsiblity for yourselves" Your describing yourself SoSick, keep delving and you may finally find the answer to why people have a problem with you. I suggest you read these last two posts and try your hardest to learn the truth from them.

Don't think we need any more proof. Good luck with your quest for normality. It may be a long and lonely one.

Looking back at the thread in question, then in all fairness, there was some provocation aimed at SoSick, in response to some religious comments she'd made. What she did in turn was to retaliate with escalating insults. I honestly believe we need some more active moderation to defuse these kinds of situations before too many people wind each other up too much.

Problem is, you started it by emailing her looking for help with just another of your smear campaigns.

It's obviously just another of your underhanded tricks to try to use me to make Christians look bad. Not that I am the only one you do it to but anyway... Considering the fact that we have all been bearing with this behavior of yours for months and months Linda... considering that every single thread almost you turn up in turns into a fight about your feelings... about how christians don't treat you right. As though Christians are a different species.

gee whiz honestly... I hope you both are happy with the outcomes.

There's more to life than bickering. Lots more.

To put the record straight SoSick I haven't received any E-mails from anyone. Am I happy with the outcome, definately not. I feel like I've been added to the none beliver party, when I've always made it clear I remain open minded. Do I feel used, yes I do now. I certainly won't go down that road again. I'll leave you two to get on with it.

Oh, I see, so it's your private smear campaign. With everyone else here being used in an effort to support your private smear campaign.

Indeed, very Christlike of you.

Any other insults you'd like to toss at me today or can we close the door on this for a week or two till your next get up on the wrong side of the bed day?

SoSick you don't get it do you I'm the one that's been used. Private posts yes E-mails no. You and Linda can battle on forever as far as I'm concerned. Seems you both like to use and target people. Well you'll have to find someone else now, I won't be fooled again. Enjoy your private battle, and the rest of us will be fine. Nobody has started any sort of campaign against you, not to my knowledge, you seem to feel so threatened and paranoid. Not an enjoyable thread, but alesson learnt by me, don't get dragged into other's wars. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/peacesign.gif" alt="" />

No, how can I possibly get it if I'm being lied to from both ends?

I see, she did email you, this is her smear campaign effort, as usual.

Well, my apologies.

Rest assured you are not the only friend she has lost trying to do the same thing.

I am not threatened. I guess that is the whole problem Linda is running into and why she needs help with it. It appears someone is a threat to her.

I actually find it rather amusing the way she does this over and over. She has tried every which way to silence Christians here.

but you know throwing insults left and right just hoping to catch a nice one back to complain about isn't a real good way to play. tends to leave ya kind of bloody.

have a nice day Tracy. be well.

Wow you two have got me so confused! I said she didn't E-mail me didn't I? I'm not taking sides, cos I have no idea what's going on between you two. Let's leave it at that.

Gosh, what's going on here?

SoSick, do you really think I'd write to Tracy and ask her to attack you for me? Why would I do that?

You think I'm on some kind of hate-fuelled crusade. Didn't I just say that I agreed there'd been some provocation here for you? And this is your response?

None of this is helping anyone here. Please stop the fighting.

What happened was that Tracy PM-ed me about a completely different subject, as people here sometimes do. Eventually during the exchange, Jinx's thread was mentioned. Tracy is obviously upset about your religious comments there SoSick, and I agreed that I've not been happy about some of your past posts to me either. Everyone here knows about that anyway and I was not posting public comments about it. I did not actually ask her to do anything on my behalf. That is the truth.

Russ are you going to do anything to end this?

Private post, not email to your isp, excuse me.

Private message.

Which she denies. ^

look, this really does not have all that much to do with me, that is evident. You two can sort out which one of you is lying.

talk about me all you like, hope it's fun for you, i'll just return as was and ignore you.

Linda I don't think it matters how clear we try to make things, she's just reading into anything what she chooses to, she keeps saying she wants it to stop, but when I try she still continues. She's playing silly games. I think we should just pretend she dosen't exist. She knows perfectly well what's gone on and who personally attacked who, like I said previously in this thread, there will always be some people who can never look inside themselves and face the truth. She's best left alone with no replies, she's enjoying it all and I bet she'll think we're conspiring against her again. I'm not biting to her stupidness any more. Tracy

Greetings Tracy.

I certainly have to say that I agree with most of your post. You make sense in what you say and obviously want to have respectful dialog with others. That's good. I respect that.

I have a particularly warm attitude towards respectful people. In the U.S., you find some of the warmest subcultures in the mid-west and in the south. Great people. Warm and friendly. I call them "quality people". I also have had equally warm and friendly contact with people from other countries like England, Scotland, and Ireland. But like you, I see a decline, especially among young people.

Also, you said that sometimes people need to be reminded that they are acting in an unacceptable way, and I could not agree more. "Spot on" as I've heard the Brits say.

Where I may see things a little differently is in the psychology involved in law and respect.

I read your post carefully and have detected that there seems to be an assumption throughout. To the best of my ability, it seems that the assumption is that law can bring respect, that is, if you implement and enforce the right law, than people will be respectful. Hopefully I'm on target here.

What I've learned is that law only brings about the facade of respect (through fear). Law is a guardrail for those who have the tendency to drive off the road. Those who don't drive off the road don't need the guardrail. Also, to some degree, law is also a source of protection for those who don't drive off the road.

Evidence of this principle can be found in the fact that nearly all countries in the world have more laws today than they have ever had in history, yet, the decline you mention continues. Law clearly is not the answer. Yes, it is necessary, but it does not produce respect.

True respect is earned, but true respect is like communication in that it has a sender and a receiver, and unfortunately, whenever you involve two people in a process, the process complicates significantly. Nevertheless, with this in mind, the problem of a lack of respect is rooted in something other than a lack of law, and this "something" is a deep subject indeed.

First, let's talk about the respect "sender".

A "sender" "sends" respect to another person based on their "perception of power". For example, if a person's perception of power is physical strength, then they tend to "send" respect to those who are physically powerful. If a person's perception of power is intellectual power, then they will tend to act respectfully towards those who have intellectual power. We can concluded that (a book could easily be written on this subject alone) a person's perception of power is foundationally rooted in what they believe.

So, the real culprit in this dilemma related to people acting disrespectfully towards one another is based in their belief system, and with this in mind, you can imagine what myriad of things combine to form a person's tendency to (or not to) act respectfully.

Let me start with an example I've very familiar with.

As a Christian (one who truly believes that Christ is exactly who He said He was), I believe that people have the potential to become children of God. I also believe that it is hard for us to discern whether people will or will not (perhaps later in life) accept this honorable office, so it is important to think of them as such at all times, regardless of their current demeanor.

If a person accepts this gift of life from God, they are "grafted into" the family of God and become brothers and sisters. So naturally, as someone who believes this, and someone who believes you need to treat your family well, I have a tendency to act respectfully towards strangers believing that I may spend eternity with them and them with me as "brothers" and "sisters".

With this belief system, there is little need for law for me. I don't do things that bump into that guardrail often. The Bible speaks about this in very interesting and revealing (about human nature) ways.

In contrast, if someone is raised without an understanding of God's plan, and if perhaps they were raised with a belief that we all "evolved" from apes and lower primates, then there is no logical reason (no motive) for people to have respect for others. Other can easily be viewed as competition for resources or jobs or others needful things. This kind of a belief system can lead to an extremely self-centered and self-focused personality that may even justify harming someone else for their own survival, or in some cases, their own pleasure.

Of course, this kind of self-focused personality does not emanate from all who believe in evolution because of emotions. Emotions are the great balancer in some cases. In other cases, they do a great deal of harm. Either way, they are designed in such a way that helps to balance and moderate society in a natural way. Of course, there is a lot more to this and I'm covering a lot of ground here, but I'm trying not to write a book.

So, here was have the sender.

Now, let's talk about the respect "receiver". This is the person who is or is not acting in such a way that will cause another to respect them.

Of course, keeping in mind the complex array of perceptions of power out there embraced by "senders", there will be a complex interaction determining who "gets" respect from whom, so again, a book could be written on this subject (many have been).

So, once you remove a belief from a culture that sincerely values individual persons (and their rights), you now move into what I call an emotionally-based society. This type of society is guided in their actions more by emotions than logic because the true nature of an individual's purpose becomes ambiguous. Purpose is self-determined and therefore chaos (to some degree or another) ensues. Emotions rule and logic and reason dissipate. Society declines in most areas.

When this happens, you move into a society of positivistic law. This is a type of law that controls everything you do, usually for the safety of others. An emotionally-based society requires this kind of overbearing system of law just to keep the appearance of civility.

Unfortunately, no matter how much law you impose, you don't create respect. There will continue to be a decline of respect and therefore a decline in the quality of life until the system degrades into a police state, because this is the only state (a play on words) that continues to appear civil (safe). People then trade freedom for security because there is so much fear generated from the increasing chaos.

Of course, a police state is a great place if you're an international banker or international trader (a "merchant of the Earth" as the Bible calls them), and so it is in the bankers' and traders' best interest to shape each individual's belief system to exclude God and to include self-determination (selfishness in purpose).

With all this in mind, we can only conclude one thing.

The only way to return to a respectful society is to restore a belief that people are fundamentally valuable, and the only way to give people true value is the understand that they are potentially eternal and forever to be in your presence as family.

I conclude (as have the founders of the U.S., which sadly is moving quickly to becoming a non-Christian nation, and will sadly soon see the consequence of it) that the best way to implement a social system that works is to make sure that law is thin, and that the real force behind profound change is social pressure.

Social pressure can profoundly change a person. Law cannot.

Social pressure is expressed and exerted by our interactions with others. The hope of acceptance (carrot) or fear of isolation (stick) we may feel from someone else through their actions and attitude is an emotional force that is understood by nearly everyone regardless of belief system, culture, race, and hence, part of the reason that I call emotions the great balancer, and in part, specifically designed as such.

If we are unhappy with the way someone is treating us, the most effective thing we can do is respond in a way that displays the quality of our person. Observers will see this interaction and will respond in a way that creates social pressure in favor of the self-controlled and respectful and disdain for the objectionable. The objectionable then experiences feelings of isolation and either (1) changes (a good thing and the reason this system is designed this way, or (2) goes somewhere else and does the same thing until the same result occurs, giving the objectionable yet another opportunity to change.

We may not want the objectionable to have another chance to change. We may just want to zap them off the face of the planet, but God is patient and gives even the objectionable plenty of opportunity to change, and He expects us to do the same, for even they may become our brother or sister at some point as they grow and change and (hopefully) humble themselves and learn to treat others in a way that brings honor to themselves and inspires others to do the same, perhaps though their interaction with other objectionable persons.

As for those who won't change, well, that's not my business. So long as they don't violate God's law ("natural law" or "the law of nature" as the Bible calls it), then they will have to answer for themselves in the end and be socially isolated in the mean time.

(I truly wish I could go into much about on this subject because it is so important, but there are so many underlying principles to build upon that the time it takes is prohibitive in this venue. Each principle must be built upon another until you eventually have a well-rounded understanding about how things work. This foundation for me was gained from reading the Bible. I hope others will do the same. It's not always easy to understand the deeper things, but with some work, it's well worth it.)

So, this is a very thin explanation about why I allow people to express themselves without too much interference from me on this system; in short, because it (human interaction) is a self-balancing system through the design of our emotions and how we interact with each other.

I certainly don't want people to feel offended, but when they do, it's only because there is a fear, and God does not want us to have fear unless it reveals a lie we are believing. If we didn't have some way to realize that we have fear, or better yet, some motivation to get rid of it (emotional pain), then how would we be able (or why would we be driven) to resolve and eliminate that fear and hence the flaws in our belief system.

When I feel offended by someone, the first thing I do is locate the fear that I have. The then find the lie behind the fear (yes, every fear except the fear of God is based on a lie), and replace it with the truth. Then, the fear just goes away. This is the pattern laid out in Genesis, but few ever see it (perhaps more later), but for now, it is this: (1) That a lie was told, then (2) fear ensued, then (3) suffering followed.

In this life, we get to know our fears by our emotional pain (suffering). Feeling offended is one of these valuable ways we get to know our fears, and thereby resolve them; becoming stronger. If I shield people from being offended, I am doing them a disservice by being a party to preventing them from getting to know their fear and thereby preventing them from having the opportunity to overcome their fear.

I have used this principle for much of my life (I discovered it in the Bible in my 20s) and have used it to change from one of the most fearful people I knew into a person of (some degree of) courage. It takes work and is not easy, but it's well worth it; and it all came through the process of:

(1) suffering (feeling emotional pain)
(2) identifying the fear behind the pain
(3) identifying the lie behind the fear
(4) replacing the lie with the truth
(5) experiencing the freedom (from fear) I now enjoy

This process is not possible without those in my life that made me feel fearful or offended. Now I see each offense as an opportunity to grow in strength and courage. Indeed, it is.

If I implemented "law" on this forum to prevent people from feeling offended (fearful), I have cheated them out of the opportunity to grow as well as the opportunity to shine in contrast to the offense suffered. I would not want to cheat anyone in that way.

However, I receive no pleasure in seeing people offended, but I do receive pleasure in seeing people grow and become better and stronger, something we all could certainly stand to do.

So, I will happily ask that people treat each other in a civil way on this forum. I do wish all people would do that, and I do hope this statement is a source of social pressure on anyone who would treat someone else harshly. But I also appeal to those who are challenged by someone else, that they would rise to the occasion and allow themselves to grow. I would feel an even greater reward seeing someone grow in this way. They will also be a blessing and inspiration to others in so doing (growing).

I have a great respect for those who face adversity gracefully, and I know that the common emotional values that most of us share cause most to feel the same way. I know that this form of "natural law" protects us as well as teaches us, if we allow it.

So, let's be kind to each other, but let's also be brave enough to respectfully stand up to those who are not. Let's also not impose law (rules) that protect us from that ever-important responsibility we have to know ourselves, and hence, to grow.

I'm not sure I understand this Russ.

Are you saying that the person being insulted deserves the insult because there is something to be learned from not having the person's respect in the first place? Or that we should be patient because invetiably there will be social pressure on them to stop behaving in such a way?

I'm not a passionate believer in law for law's sake, but I think rules can be helpful. As a teacher I am not allowed to discipline students physically, nor would I want to if I were allowed to. I want to have a relationship with my students that is based on respect and not fear. It's the same with my daughter. Having said that, then I would never earn their respect if I let them do what they wanted to all the time, hoping they'd simply learn from their mistakes. If I imposed your kind of system in my classroom there would be anarchy. The previous teacher I took over from never bothered to discipline the kids and they've been very resistant to turn their MP3 players off, stop chatting, and pay attention to me.

I don't believe that the people who have written objectionable things to me here are going to learn anything while this behaviour is condoned here, nor do I think any kind of pressure is being put on them to change. You seem to think that those of us at whom it is aimed should ignore it in the knowledge that we are setting the better example. That is ideal, but do you really think it's pleasant to carry on conversations where the other person is deliberately trying to provoke? Their cognitive dissonance in the creation/evolution forum is such that if information is presented which challenges certain people's religious views, they will reject it and attack the sender of the information instead. You say know thyself; I say look deep down and ask yourself if you're happy to let people do this to me and others there because perhaps you also engage in this way of thinking sometimes.

Bottom line: I don't think it's OK to let people insult each other on a forum, and the vast majority of site owners of other forums have rules about this. It's obviously your call but it makes for unfortunate situations here at times.

Thanks for the post Russ and I must admit brain fog is a bit bad today, but I understand the meaning of the post. I can verify the changing of individuals behaviour by respect by the work I did. I spent years working in schools with children, who for a number of reasons, behaved in a very challenging way. They saw punishments as more of a challenge and fight and so the behaviour was almost fed. Along with another colleague we found that to change this mode of behaviour was to understand each individuals problems, build up confidence and self-esteem and show them that by changing and following a different path, they can take responsibility for changing their own lives. So this way can work, as long as there are still some rules and guidelines that have to be followed at the same time. Proof of this came to me when I left a school with a high ratio of ' problem' children and they had taken so much time and trouble to make me cards and individual letters of sincere thanks. Tracy

A fine post Russ. Bit long, but all came together for a fine conclusion indeed.


I don’t think Russ meant that Linda.

Life is not fair, never was, never will be and that we must learn to stand up for ourselves.

Stand tall and not let anyone trample on us.

Turn the other cheek and be strong enough to not care about what others think. Not allow ourselves to be diverted from what we believe. Learn to take the punches we receive in life, not let them get us down. To learn from them and allow the injustices in our lives be used positively and allow our personalities to grow and be strong.

Shielding people just leads to weakness. Standing up, defending your corner, leads to power, fulfilment and good health!

Thanks all for the good conversation and for bearing with the length of my posts. I didn't mean to dominate it with enormously-long posts, but I guess that's what it took for me to get some of these ideas into type.


Tracy, you said this...



This is a tremendously profound statement, and I believe it demonstrates a powerful principle. There are four key things you mentioned here in relation to the process of fundamental change in a person:

(1) "understand...problems"
(2) "build up [self] confidence"
(3) "build up...self esteem"
(4) "take responsibility"

The Bible makes this profound statement that parallels yours:

[color:"brown"]"For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind."[/color]

--2 Timothy 1:7

What's really interesting about your statement is that it echoes this Biblical principle almost exactly, and the concepts are even in the same order.

This Bible verse is speaking about the process used by God to build and strengthen people.

The first item mentioned in the Bible verse is that God has not given us a spirit of "fear". The first item you mention in this process is to "understand each individuals problems". Interestingly, if you break down the "problems" that each individual experiences in life, they are always rooted in fear. I know this idea may not be apparent at first, but if you analyze it long enough, you will be amazed at how true it is.

The second item mentioned in the Bible verse is that God gives us "power". The second item you refer to is to "build up [self] confidence". The "power" the bible if referring to expressed by the Greek word dunamis. This means the ability to do things, particularly to do "mighty works". Of course, this is exactly what "self-confidence" enables us to do.

The third item mentioned in the Bible verse is that God gives us "love". The third item you refer to is to "build up self-esteem". Self esteem is usually referring to the realization of one's value which is directly associated with ones ability to love and to accept love. By God giving us love, we realize our value and hence, our self-esteem will grow.

The fourth item mentioned in the Bible verse is that God gives us a "sound mind". The fourth item you refer to is to "take responsibility". The term "sound mine" is expressed in the Bible verse by the Greek word "sophronismos" which is better translated "self control". Not surprisingly, self control is the foundation of personal responsibility. When we begin to have self control in our own lives, we begin to realize (believe and have confidence that) we can take responsibility (and therefore control) of and for our own lives.

I have a personal love for bits of wisdom packed into few words, so I was struck by the wisdom in the phrase you shared about the process for transforming lives, and by the parallels I see of it in Biblical wisdom.

So basically, I just thought it was cool so I wanted to point it out.


Tracy also said...



I totally agree. This is why I follow the Biblical principle of a minimum of rules ("negativistic" law). Again, they are there as guard rails while we are still growing in case we get way out of line. Rules do not change us. Social pressure (or more precisely, how social pressure affects us emotionally) is what changes us (among other things), and providing social pressure for each other is all of our responsibility. But rules are certainly important.


[color:"brown"]"Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.[/color]

--Proverbs 27:17


Tracy also said...



That's awesome. It sounds like you're really making a difference. It must be rewarding for you.

Two thumbs up <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/twothumbsup.gif" alt="" />


Linda said...



I defer to Sunshine's post. I could not have said it better. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/yeathat.gif" alt="" />

I think it's possible that I've been too reactive. Apparently one of the symptoms of adrenal exhaustion is not handling ordinary stresses as well as usual, because the body's coping mechanisms are shot. I've been known to burst into tears when I've found myself in a traffic jam, or for no reason at all. I'm not very well and I hope I'll be able to start healing soon.

I don't regret saying what I did above; I think it helps to engender respect when people follow the rules of good conversations or debates and refrain from insulting each other. But under the conditions here, I'll do my best to put up with such comments with more grace.

Linda I can sympathise with any mood swings. I also know my emotions are totally out of sink big time and they change so rapidly. I can blow up over the most stupid of things, be in floods of tears the next, anxious, It's never ending. I know I also am letting my youngest daughter get away with far too much because I just don't want the confrontation. It's a nightmare. To me it's like having pre-menstrual syndrome, when you know your emotions are blown up out of proportion, but even though your aware of it, you don't have much control. I'm sure Hormone imbalances are playing a big part in my illness, having looked at the symptoms and having similar problems after my first childbirth. Did you say Dr. Peatfield does a Hormone screening test and did you have on? I still can't get hold of his secretary, been trying almost all week none stop. Best Wishes love Tracy x

I know what you're saying Tracy. I think Dr. Peatfield was going to suggest a hormone panel, but the fact that I was already taking progesterone cream probably would have skewed the results. On its own, it doesn't seem to be doing much for me so far. Have you tried any?

Yep, it can be like having permanent PMS. Not very nice. I can't remember the last time I really wanted to visit anybody, or even write emails. Passing messages back and forth on forums seems to work for me OK though, but it has to be said it doesn't help things when I get grief on them.

Good luck with contacting Dr. Peatfield. He will be in his office by this Wednesday at the latest, because that is when I have an appointment to call him.

Yeah it's difficult, I used Progesterone when I was ill before, but all female members of my family have started the Menoppuse early, late thirties/early fourties and my sister was screened and was high on Progesterone and low on Estrogen, so I don't want to really try anything till I know for sure. It's weird I get spates of wanting to visit and socialize and then sometimes no interest at all. Thanks for letting me know about Drl Peatfield, hope I can get hold of somebody there. Love Tracy x

this is a great site for the use of progesterone.
www.progesterone.co.uk

I understand about your daughter, Tracy. I feel like mine got way out of control. I knew they were, and there was nothing I could do about it, especially when I got divorced and was doing it alone. When I didn't feel good, I let them do too much, so they'd leave me alone. It was disasterous and still is. I try not to do it as much, but it frustrates me so, because I am aware of it, but the hassle is so hard and I usually don't feel well enough to put up a fight. It makes me so sad, like I've failed many ways as a parent.

I know totally where your coming from, cos on top of everything else you get the guilt and know you won't get another chance. I was lucky in a way because my eldest is 25, 18 and almost fourteen and up until four years ago I was that happy mother that could do everything with them. In another way it makes it more frustrating, cos you can't understand why it just couldn't continue that way. I now of course have my 2 year old grandaughter and my daughter is going back to work, so I have agreed to look after some full and half days. As much as I want to at the same time I'm dreading it, in case I don't feel good. Fortunately we have a summer room in the garden and this has become her house. It's so hard for us mother's, we just want ouselves back. Love to you Tracy x