--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > Barry, you're far and away the most consistently > > > uptight person on this forum. You simply cannot > > > tolerate disagreement with your views. > > > > Yeah, right, Judy. Like the "discussion over > > wine" I had with Curtis the other day, the one > > in which we held completely opposite viewpoints > > on karma, but in which there was no uptightness > > or intolerance. Or, at least there wasn't until > > you tried to barge into the discussion and turn > > it *into* an argument, calling my opinion "a > > 'false reading' of what karma as determinism > > implies. You probably noticed that we both > > ignored you, because we were having a mutually > > respectful discussion, and you wanted to turn > > it into something else. :-) > > Let's have a look at the comment of mine > Barry refers to: > > ------ > > [Barry wrote:] > > Someone > > who believed in a (IMO) false reading of karma as > > determinism would never even *try* to come up with > > technologies to ease the suffering of those born > > with birth defects; they'd think somehow that the > > kids "deserved" them. > > FWIW, this is *by no means* a necessary consequence > of a reading of karma as determinism. It's a "false > reading" of what karma as determinism implies. > > ------ > > This is what Barry perceives to be "uptightness > or intolerance" on my part. In fact, I was simply > *making a correction* to Barry's misunderstanding > of karma as determinism. No "argument" was > involved or necessary, just acceptance of the > correction by him.
You've just proved my point, Judy. You believe that you were making a "correction" of my "misunderstanding." I made no such "correction" of Curtis' position on karma, nor did I suggest it was based on any kind of "misunderstanding." I fully accepted the legitimacy of his position, and presented a counterpoint to it based on my understanding. I made it very clear that that's what I was doing in my first post to him, and he expressed his appreciation of that fact. You don't discuss, Judy, you "correct" other people's "misunderstandings." That's just what you are, and why you chose the profession you did. In that profession, it makes you valuable. On this forum, it only makes you a fanatic.
