posted August 08, 2006 07:08 AM         

Could I have one of those nice pics please....

Here is one for you....hope you like !!

posted August 08, 2006 07:43 AM         

I am so not with it, lol...

posted August 08, 2006 09:25 AM         

I'm at work now and all my best pics are on my home computer -- I'll see what I can do tonite.....

posted August 08, 2006 10:28 AM         

I think you are a wonderful person, God's Miracle to mankind!

posted August 08, 2006 11:28 AM         

Hi It's cool. Again, I must say that it was really considerate, kind and empathic of you to start this thread

I hope you're doing better these days. Take care

posted August 08, 2006 11:30 AM         

(Some kind of cyber glitches again, had to split my original post into two)

I would blame myself for poor time management, suspiciously over-self-absorbed and not active enough about IT courses...I've been wanting to view your other threads "Change" and "Do things happen for a reason?" (I may have incorrectly memorized the latter ), they look fascinating topics. I'll try.

posted August 08, 2006 12:52 PM         

I cannot post here or anywhere else. It has been acting up off and on for days now but it has gotten worse just as it did last time.

posted August 08, 2006 01:20 PM         

I read that thread. Thank you.
I appreciate your feelings,
and I can see how we all provoke one another.
I see stones being hurled from both sides of the fence.
I see fragile humanity,
and room for improvement for all concerned.

I dont think it is "hijaking",
to discuss the matters that come up.
Some might say we are hijacking this thread right now,
but I think we are just following the invisible "thread"
that runs through all threads.

If i may, I'd like to present a more or less detailed analysis
of the thread presented as evidence against lotus and in your favor.

Lotus began by lexigramming in her prefered method.

You then pointed out, respectfully,
that this was not in keeping with the rules of lexigraming,
as you understood them.
You were kind enough to say "Correct me if I'm wrong."

lotus respectfully replied, "Good Job D..you are right about the rules."
Then proceeded to express her view that they are more like guidelines,
and that she prefers a freer, more intuitive approach.

Fayte then expressed her own view that rules have supreme value,
and ought to be respected,
otherwise, we would end up following our own lights,
which can more easily be distorted by subjective concerns,
and the objective light provided by the lexigrammed words would be effectively lost.

(So far, I am finding reasons in favor of both views,
and take no definitive position on the matter, myself.)

Lotus then said, "Fayte is wrong."
She is entitled to this opinion,
just as fayte is entitled to think her wrong.

You then voiced your support of fayte's view,
that the rules have supreme value,
and ought to be honored.
BUT, you felt compelled to use the words
"wandering lost souls pondering NonSense"
to refer to anyone who would disagree.
It is a fine grey line, but,
if I had to say where the discussion turned personal,
I might suggest that it was when you used these words,
which seem to me rather personal.
Wouldn't you be a little offended,
if someone, to whom you had just said,
"you are right about the rules,
but I see them more as guidlines,
and prefer to give my intuition precedence,"
replied by calling you a
"wandering lost soul, pondering NonSense"?
I think you would take this personally, dont you?

Lotus, clearly offended,
then stated her reasons,
in a manner which implies that other methods are for unevolved types.
(Something you had just done yourself.)
She said something about going within,
and trusting one's self,
as to what rules one could and could not bend.
This is essentially no different from what you said,
when you suggested that some of what LG says is bunk,
and we ought to listen to ourselves,
and read between the lines.
Basically, you are saying the SAME THING here,
and, evidently, you were trusting your own judgement,
when you chose to accept LG's rules for Lexigramming,
just as Lotus was trust HER judgement, in rejecting them.
The only difference (which is actually another similarity)
is that you both inferred that whosoever
disagreed with your view was unevolved, or lost.
This is where it starts to get really confusing, lol.

Fayte then replied very maturely,
with a further exposition of her reasons
for supporting what she considers an objective approach,
as opposed to an approach based on subjective considerations;
essentially, because, as a Scorpio,
she is very aware of our ability to deceive ourselves,
and twist things into our own projected images of ourselves,
thereby inhibiting the growth of true self-awareness.

((At this point,
I myself am still finding value in both sides of the debate,
and have not come to any conclusion about which,
if either, has more benefits,
and which has more drawbacks, than the other.))

The debate then continues civily between lotus and fayte for a few brief posts,
until you said,
"Following my soul is not the same as having dellusory beliefs about God
and allowing oneself to overindulge in his/her delusions
and wandering here and there and basically getting him/her S-elf NOWHERE,
and possibly ending up in the trash."
So, from this, we can logically infer that you are calling lotus,
"deluded about God, overindulgent in delusions,
lost, nowhere, and possibly trash."
Those are pretty strong words,
and, at this point,
there is no denying that the debate has turned personal.

((I am not judging you, D,
I am just setting out, in sequence,
the facts of the case, as they unfolded.
If I am missing something, please inform me.))

lotus then, clearly offended,
and no doubt considering herself justly provoked,
consented to join in the personal digs,
and inferred something about your "level".

((I do not think it is necessary to continue my analysis of these exchanges,
as, at this point, you have all consented to
relinquish the discussion in favor of personal attacks,
and they continue that way for the remainder of the thread.
Words like "toxic", "perverted", "sinner", "liar", and "inhuman"
are tossed around as if they were confetti.
When any of you does make an attempt to return to the discussion of lexigrams,
you do so only after having delivered the latest personal attack,
and with the expectation that,
just because you say "let's drop it",
you yourself should be accorded the last word.
I think this is unrealistic.
I hope you do not take it personally that I disagree with you
in your assessment of the nature of this thread.
I see room for improvement on all sides,
and, for the record, I think we are all human.))

HSC

------------------
'Would you know your Lord's meaning in this thing? Know it well. Love was his meaning. Who showed it to you? Love. What did he show you? Love. Why did he show it? For love. Keep yourself therein and you shall know and understand more in the same. But you shall never know nor understand any other thing, forever.'
- Julian of Norwich

posted August 08, 2006 09:39 PM         

quote:

---

"let's drop it",
you yourself should be accorded the last word.I think this is unrealistic.

---

>>>>>>I do not give a fig about getting the last word. I have noticed a few Scorpios who think I being one too, should think the way they do. Jealousy, having the last word, and other negative Scorponic traits.
Well being a Scorpio does not mean I am completely like other Scorpios in my outlooks on things or feelings. Perhaps that is why I do not get along with Scorpios easily. I do not personally feel very Scorponic.
To continue, not as in getting the last word, but to clarify things.
That was just one of many times of Lotus following a few of us from US/GU and elsewhere just to preach in non sequeters and to force threads off topic.
It ruins it for those trying to stay on topic. So by the time she hit LM we had already had it with her of late.
Examples: http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/002147.html
She came in very nice. I replied very nice.
Then suddenly, as she usually does..this nonsense totally unprovoked, insulting and preaching! I tried to divert her and calm her, but she kept going.[/quote] http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/002147-2.html
Then again: http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/002147-3.html http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/002147-3.html http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/002147-4.html http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/002147-6.html

As for Lotus insulting me at lexigramming...she has known over a year now my views on them. There is no reason to keep going at me with insults especially unrelated to lexigramming at LM..

I do not care about last word games.
So go ahead....you can have it, she can have it. I really couldn't care less.

posted August 08, 2006 10:25 PM         

I guess this site does not have enough moderators to delete accusatory remarks, insults and namecalling. *sigh* wish I cud volunteer but indeed busy. I think people must own up to their part really.

posted August 08, 2006 10:42 PM         

I am working on a few more but again I doubt they will be recieved warmly except by a few. But hey, I am doing them because I enjoy them! Keeps my brain from rusting!

Good night folks!
Had some some folks in my non LL life, who needed help alot today; so forgive me for not posting here much today.

posted August 08, 2006 11:00 PM         

Per your request Thanks for the pretty blue Goddess of the Mountain.....

posted August 09, 2006 12:39 AM         

Fayte is right about Lotus and I'm not just saying that because she is my friend. I speak from my own experiences with Lotus. I wish I had a dollar for every time that Lotus called me a liar, told me that I did not know God, told me that I did not go within. Go look at Lotus's threads in GU and if you still call that just speaking with conviction and not judging the souls of others and their relationship to God then all I can say is it basically boils down to you waiting your turn if you say something spiritually that Lotus disagrees with, HSC. I have seen her turn on others in a heartbeat if they did. In my case it is the fact that I told her once in one of her sermons to me that I did not believe in reincarnation. Since Lotus does, the fact that I don't means I don't know God and do not go within I guess. Tough. I have no problem with Lotus or anyone else believing in reincarnation. I just can't reconcile the belief in reincarnation with my belief in Jesus as the Christ. We all have our paths to walk in life, our own unique journies and I have chosen Christianity as mine. I don't think that others have to believe as I do regarding Jesus nor do I have to believe as they do regarding reincarnation or anything else. I would never say they had to believe as I do about anything and I expect the same consideration in return.

You saw what Lotus said to me on your thread, HSC. That was not speaking with conviction. She out and out told me after my post that I did not know anything about God, about reincarnation and something else that I forgot because I only half pay attention to what she says anyway. At GU whether you are Godless or not in Lotus's eyes is based on whether you are a Republican neo-con or not. She attacks all the liberals, calls us all liars, and questions our relationship with God. Only the neo-cons are holy and good and tell the "truth." Liberals all lie.

That was judging me on your thread, HSC and my relationship with God. It can't be candy coated or whitewashed to be anything else. The only conviction that Lotus speaks is that she is favored and much more enlightened spiritualy than the rest of mankind. The rest of mankind does not know God and never, ever, goes "within" as she does. That latter is a mantra of hers. Of her spirtual superiority over all others is something that Lotus definitely says with conviction. So I guess you can, if you choose, say she speaks with conviction of those things and that her judgments of how the rest of us are dung in comparison to her is also a conviction of hers.

But we don't have to take being talked to like that from anyone. We would lack self-respect if we did take it.

Edited this after going back and catching up on some of the posts.

posted August 09, 2006 08:17 AM         

And at the risk of making HSC think I want the last word....when I say..."can we drop it NOW?".......
That is what I would like Please.
I have more counselling from yesterday to attend to in my offline life. I do not feel well, but it is important I help.
So forgive me if I do not get back here until late or tomorrow. Will see how the day goes.

PS:
Quote:
Why is it that I can't post anything past a paragraph and HSC can write novels on the threads?

>>>>I have wondered the same thing.

posted August 09, 2006 08:30 AM         

You are Christian. I am not.
You do not believe in reincarnation, yet I do.

We have other differences.
But we are respectful of each other. You do not preach at or condemn me, nor I you.

When you talk about what you believe I do not mind. You are not insulting me.
When I talk about things I do not like about Christianity or the Bible, you do not take it as a personal attack on you.

Your tolerance and acceptance of our diversities and our finding common ground with each other is why we are friends.
And we both recognize in each other a true relationship with GOD and even though our approach is not the same, you and I most certainly go within and understand very well the presence of God in our lives.
With God anything is possible.
God is always with us.

posted August 09, 2006 11:37 AM         

I had not seen the judgemental things that lotus wrote until yesterday, and then I apologized to fayte. But she was not blaming me, as she knew that I was unaware of them. As for what lotus said to you on my thread... What if Jesus had told you that you do not understand God? Would you have called that self-righteous and judgemental? Or would you have thought that maybe, just maybe, it is possible for someone to have a clearer perspective on these matters than yourself? I am not saying that lotus does. In fact, I would suggest that many of lotus' conceptions of God are wrong. Does that make me judgemental? Or, do you perhaps agree with me, now that it is not yourself who is under discussion?

You suggest that there is room for all our beliefs. But, is this really what you think? You do not believe in reincarnation, and cannot reconcile it with your beliefs, but you still want to say that a belief in reincarnation is not mistaken? Can you have your cake and eat it too? If you really believe reincarnation is a false belief, then say so, dont just pay lip-service to other people's beliefs. That is disingenuous.

"O! while you live, tell the truth,
And shame the devil!"

- William Shakespeare

hsc

posted August 09, 2006 11:47 AM         

Believe it or not,
I even think that a person who believes that they are right
can get along with a person whom they believe is wrong,
and still be honest enough to tell them so.

Just as someone can get along
with someone who tells them they are wrong.

Judgement is when we refuse to get along with someone,
not when we say they are wrong,
or when they say we are wrong.

If you refuse to get along with someone
just because they tell you you are wrong,
then perhaps it is you who is being judgmental?

Just something to consider.

hsc

posted August 09, 2006 01:26 PM         

Its very apparent to me that Lotusheartone went defendent of her theories and those of LG.

I'm not the best person to comment on Linda but I believe she once must have said "Her job is only to bring information to her readers." That is bring knowledge (sometimes even secret) she had access to.

I don't think if she was alive today, she wud have said Fayte's method is wrong. If she did I wud consider her less evolved.

In my experience, when someone starts defending their theories, its like they have locked themselves in a house permanently.

Jesus never went in an defensive mode. He also never lied when asked.

Anyway my 2 cents if anyone wud care

Oh.. Before I go, I do see lot of respect between Mirandee and Fayte, even when they differ. How cud people with eyes miss that

posted August 09, 2006 01:33 PM         

quote:

---

Mirandee,
Who told you you could not write more than a paragraph? It was not me. I am sorry you resent my "novels".

---

I think I'm the only one who's been admonished and chastised for posting my thoughts and "adding fuel to the fire".....

Mirandee ~

I'll find a really apropos pic for you in my collection at home tonite (lunchtime at work right now)..... until then, howzabout this to tide you over??

My, he looks fierce, doesn't he?!?!?

posted August 09, 2006 03:20 PM         

If memory serves me well (and it usually does), Linda said that the Pythagorean Numerological system is wrong, when she offered the Chaldean system as an alternative. People say things are wrong all the time. Are we really so defensive, that we need to question people's level of evolution, if ever they make a distinction between what is right (i.e. correct, valid, workable, in keeping with the facts), and what is wrong (i.e. incorrect, invalid, unworkable, and not in keeping with the facts)? Why do people take contradictions to their belief systems so personally? Perhaps it is because they are unsure themselves, and resent having to give more than a passing thought to their customary views of God and the universe? I think its a little ironic that the same people who are so defensive of their belief systems, refuse to defend them. They would rather pile up accusations of arrogance and judgment, when expected to offer reasons to support their claims, than offer a single logical justification for their views. I think this is very telling. But what do I know, right? I'm sure its just me. (note sarcasm)

In my experience, when someone starts defending their theories,
its like they have locked themselves in a house permanently.

That's very profound. In my experience, when someone REFUSES TO defend their theories, its like they lock themselves in a house permanently.

On the other hand, when someone offers actual reasons for what they believe, and requests reasons from others in support of others' beliefs, it is like they are coming out of their house, in order to dialogue with their neighbors, invite them in to have a look around, and accept any invitations to visit their neighbor's houses.

Jesus never went in an defensive mode.

Jesus CONSTANTLY dialogued, and did his utmost to open dialogues with the religious authorities of his time. He asked questions. He even made ironic comments, when others refused to answer, or gave responses which revealed their lack of insight. He offered plenty of instruction and expainations (i.e. defenses) in support of his own views. He did not sit back, twiddle his thumbs, and say, "This is what I believe, that is what you believe. I will not give reasons for what I believe. Can we please change the subject." Jesus did little else than offer and demand reasons in support of our beliefs about God, Nature, and Man.

He also never lied when asked

I dont know how this relates to the topic at hand.
Could you be more direct?

I do see lot of respect between Mirandee and Fayte, even when they differ. How cud people with eyes miss that

I was trying not to point the finger at any individuals, but, for the record, the reflections I shared were inspired by the relationship between Mirandee and Lotus, and not Mirandee and Fayte.

I spoke of how, even people who believe each other's views to be mistaken, and are honest enough to say so, directly, in no wish-washy terms, can still get along with each other.

Clearly, this does not refer to Mirandee and Fayte, both of whom, it seems to me, are far too busy playing "nice" to get real, and confess that, if they are right, someone else HAS to be wrong. How could people with eyes miss that?

Sincerely,
HSC

posted August 09, 2006 03:22 PM         

Thanks, I hope you are right.