"Perhaps it has to do with misdirected sexual energy?" If you had any evidence to support the claim I was challenging then you wouldn't need to make degrading personal comments. Casting aspersions on me personally doesn't help your cause, it just reveals your own limitations in a discussion of ideas.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Gimbel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > (snip) > "This kind of spiritual oneupmanship certainly isn't > > restricted > > > to MMY's tiny group. Think of the spiritual arrogance at the > > basis of > > > huge factions of Christianity believing that they alone will go to > > > heaven while people believing a slightly different version of the > > same > > > myth will suffer in hell for their lack of growing up in > > the "right" > > > version. > > > > > > But they all fall in the category of pretending to "know" things > > that > > > you couldn't possibly know. It is a self inflation of value > > > relegating poor Yogananda to fluffer status in this spiritual > > > regeneration skin flick. > > > > > So, you are saying that I have at least a 50 percent chance of > being > > completely correct? And you have an equally 50% chance of being > > completely wrong, right? > > > > > And where did you get this notion that what I said is anything > > remotely like the TM folks go to heaven and the rest go to hell? > > That implied exclusivity is something Turq brought up also. I don't > > get it. I have never implied or assumed anything like that. :-) > > Well, I guess you could declare that the -Ego~ made me do it. > > -Take a perfectly good explanation, and somehow polarize it. > In a way, we are so used to polarization, these days. > -Karl Rove, who guided the Bushes into the WH, is a master of this > type of thing... > -Perhaps it has to do with misdirected sexual energy? > Who knows, but if you asked Sigmund??, you know what he would say... > So, who knows? > > > > >
