stockticker
|
posted on April 2, 2001 12:53:43 PM new
Stusi: I made no anti-semitic posts on a Networker thread. I remember one post to James. I remember having some fun trying to interact with Manny when he was trolling one of the threads. I am 100%I never interacted with you. I avoided you after you taunted me in the Moderator's Corner in response to my post which simply said "Threats, Stusi?". You quickly asked for that thread to locked before I could respond to your taunt. That gave me quite a clue to your chararter which is being reinforced here.
Irene
|
Zazzie
|
posted on April 2, 2001 12:58:00 PM new
Stusi---are you angling for a Piffle???
|
stusi
|
posted on April 2, 2001 01:00:30 PM new
jamesoblivion- i never said, stated or implied that quoting from the Torah was anti-semitic. someone said that the Jewish God was Jehovah or something like that and i questioned it. is that an accusation of anti-semitism? krs- what the heck are you babbling about? you stated that i said religion was a thing of the past and i asked you where i said that. is that a nonsensical question? hoagy/as time goes by? you are showing your age! but i guess that anyone getting the reference is too! smiley!
|
Zazzie
|
posted on April 2, 2001 01:03:40 PM new
my kids know Hoagy Carmichael songs--
|
stusi
|
posted on April 2, 2001 01:12:46 PM new
stockticker- as you should be able to tell by now that i do not shy away from debate and any request to lock a thread shortly after one of your posts was coincidental. however it is not necessary to directly "interact" with someone as we are now doing to attack or otherwise disagree with someone. just ask krs. i would like to end this now.
|
stockticker
|
posted on April 2, 2001 01:17:28 PM new
You want to end Stusi? Check through your print-outs. Then come back here and apologize to me.
Irene
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on April 2, 2001 01:32:59 PM new
Hi stusi....by organized, I mean a group of people that follow a certain interpretation of the Bible (let's say).
For instance, I watched a documentary on the Church of Scientology and couldn't believe how stupid it sounded! (just my opinion), but they sure have alot of followers!?!? Their power seems to be in their numbers, but do any of them really believe this L. Ron Hubbard thing??
Other religious groups are just as fanatical about their teachings, so I wonder if (like Zazzie said), any of them actually understand what they're believing in?
Terry
|
pattaylor
|
posted on April 2, 2001 01:46:39 PM new
Stusi,
Your comments to stockticker are combative and insulting. Please take a step back and remember to discuss the topic not the individual.
Consider this a warning. The use of basic etiquette is a requirement of posting here. Please keep that in mind.
Pat
[email protected]
|
stockticker
|
posted on April 2, 2001 01:49:33 PM new
Pat, I prefer to fight my own battles.
|
pattaylor
|
posted on April 2, 2001 01:53:08 PM new
Stockticker,
I understand and appreciate that. But a CG violation is a CG violation. Just doing my job. 
Pat
[email protected]
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on April 2, 2001 02:20:45 PM new
Stusi, I was referring to your attempt to rake Spazmodeus over the coals a few weeks ago.
|
stusi
|
posted on April 2, 2001 03:43:36 PM new
the thread you are referring to did not contain the statement or inference you attributed to me. pattaylor- please be specific.
|
toke
|
posted on April 2, 2001 03:58:38 PM new
stusi...
Good grief. I agree with you that Jesse Jackson is (beyond any question) anti-semitic.
How do you extend that POV to that of liking Jackson makes one anti-semitic?
I like and admire & VOTE for Barney Frank. That does NOT make me a Democrat. Trust me...I don't even approach being a Democrat. Your logic is non-existent.
Therefore...you are full of excrement regarding anything Stockticker may...or may NOT have said regarding her disgust at the stigmatizing as anti-semitic, anyone who might (mistakenly, god knows) like Jesse Jackson.
|
MartyAW
|
posted on April 2, 2001 04:03:08 PM new
Hi stusi,
Discussion regarding moderations now happens via email.
Therefore, you need to send an email. Pattaylor will respond when he returns.
Thanks,
Marty
[email protected]
|
toke
|
posted on April 2, 2001 04:19:31 PM new
So, stusi...
How do you respond to Stockticker? I optimistically assume you have the courage of your emphatically stated positions.
Don't disappoint.
|
maddienicks
|
posted on April 2, 2001 04:23:56 PM new
kraftdinner - what a great topic! I'm sorry it got so derailed, tho - let's try to get it back on track to civil discussion!
I also live in small town America - mainly Lutheran up here, with Catholic and Baptist sprinkled in every couple of towns, and Assembly of God every three towns or so. Do the churches here "thrive"? I dunno about thrive...some do, and many are just hanging on by a thread with the support of the older folks who were baptized, married, and will be buried from that same church.
I don't attend Church regularly since we moved up here. I did for a while, but I am not Lutheran, nor do I consider myself to be a member of any "organized" religion. If I could find a solid non-denominational church up here where I could worship in joy, I'd be there.
I do consider myself a Christian. I pray. I believe. I am teaching my children to believe and to pray. But I admit to being a Christmas and Easter attendee.
I worked as a secretary for one of the Lutheran churches when we first moved here. Unfortunately, it turned me further than ever against "organized" religion. It's not about bringing people to God. It's about money. I prefer that my tithe goes to those who truly need it, not to a pastor who is constantly whining that he needs more money, despite all his housing costs (including insurance and repairs) and his car and his car insurance and his medical insurance and his pension is all being paid by the church in addition to his annual salary which is more than most folks up here will ever make. I donate time and money to local charities, like the battered women's shelter and the food pantry, both non-denominational organizations.
Will organized religion be phased out? I doubt it. It serves important purposes. Socially, spiritually. But for many people, myself included, it is increasingly difficult to find an organized religion that I am comfortable with. Too many expect blind devotion to their denomination - not to God or to Christ - and I can't buy into that.
Looks like I'm not the only one.
Kris
[email protected]
|
maddienicks
|
posted on April 2, 2001 04:26:16 PM new
toke -
Kris
[email protected]
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on April 2, 2001 05:42:15 PM new
Hi maddie.....actually, I was trying to figure the whole thing out....who's involved...who said what to who.....I think I'll call that Jamaican psychic chick on TV and get her angle on the situation.....
Kris, you sound like a great person . You bring up a good point about the money issue and churches. Take the TV ministers....they were like kids in candy stores with other people's money. What gets me, is they didn't even have the brains to PRETEND they weren't gold-diggers!??
Don't you think that's when people started to question religion? (people our ages)
T.
|
jt-2007
|
posted on April 2, 2001 06:09:55 PM new
Kris, I agree with you. I think if varies from church to church as I have attended a number of them in my life (Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian). I don't do Sunday School. I like some of the people who do and have very interesting discussions...on the grass at the picnic or in the kitchen during ball practice. At another church Sunday School was very different with vastly mixed ages, on topic, Biblically grounded. (This church was racially mixed, Methodist, big AA NA following...and they also had a biker club.)
When I went to Sunday School at my current particular church, much more "traditional", I found that there was more discussion of who was getting a divorce or having a baby, job complaints, etc. I do not get into social hour in that respect. I do my Bible study alone mostly though I wish for a partner more often than I have. I try to get in a "worship" mindset when I go to worship service. I try to focus on Christ, reflect on myself, and ignore the rest...to hear the scripture, the message (God can use any circumstance to teach) and worship in song. My "group" tends to be friends that happen to be Christians but don't usually attend my church. I also read some boards, particularly end of times stuff.
I am vague on where the "organized line" is drawn. Where is that line?
I think it is about the heart and spirit, and not about affiliation. T.
|
stusi
|
posted on April 2, 2001 07:35:27 PM new
toke- i didn't know that stockticker has legal representation! however, i do not remember it being a question of "liking" someone. i distinctly remember being ridiculed by her several times for my questioning anti-semitic posts. voting for Barney Frank would cause some to think that if someone attacked his sexual preferences that voter might come to his defense. likewise if someone has a problem with my criticism of a supporter of a known anti-semite, or child molester or spousal abuser for example, then i tend to think they condone those actions which take precedence over any political platform. BTW- be careful with "excrement" and other veiled comments, toke, as the mods are getting ornery.
|
toke
|
posted on April 2, 2001 07:49:24 PM new
I didn't think of the word excrement as obscure in any way. I really think the mods are well aware of its meaning...don't you?
If Stockticker questioned your labeling of another poster as anti-semitic for liking Jesse Jackson...more power to her. You can do the semantic bop all you want...that's what it boils down to. Liking Jackson does not = anti-semitic. Period.
|
stusi
|
posted on April 2, 2001 07:52:10 PM new
kraftdinner- people either ridicule scientology or are devout followers. i have absolutely no problem with any religion that doesn't proselytize or preach religious intolerance.
|
stusi
|
posted on April 2, 2001 07:56:47 PM new
toke- i didn't say obscure, i said veiled. do you know the difference? hate takes precedence over political agendas unless they are the same.
|
toke
|
posted on April 2, 2001 08:03:47 PM new
"hate takes
precedence over political agendas unless they are the same."
Would you mind telling me what in the world you're talking about? Are you just filling space...or do you have a point here?
|
stockticker
|
posted on April 2, 2001 08:11:42 PM new
Stusi says:
i distinctly remember being ridiculed by her several times for my questioning anti-semitic posts.
Back it up Stusi.
Everyone else: Do simple site search of the message center with the words "stockticker stusi".
Irene
|
krs
|
posted on April 2, 2001 08:18:48 PM new
No need for that search, Irene. You are completely inept at ridicule which makes stusi's claim false. Everybody knows that.
|
stockticker
|
posted on April 2, 2001 08:20:49 PM new
Stusi owes me an apology and I'm going to keep at this until get one.
Irene
|
stusi
|
posted on April 2, 2001 08:27:29 PM new
stockticker-your comments were made on the mod's board. does this jog your memory? can a search still be done there? if so do it. toke- if the political agenda itself is one of hate then precedence is not an issue. is that hard to understand?
[ edited by stusi on Apr 2, 2001 08:29 PM ]
|
stockticker
|
posted on April 2, 2001 08:29:07 PM new
Stusi: You're throwing the mud. Back it up. The Networker threads were not in the Moderator's Corner.
Irene
|
stusi
|
posted on April 2, 2001 08:34:24 PM new
my threads WERE on the mod board and so were your comments. the threads were regarding the mod's failure to deal with networker's insulting comments about the Jewish God and other comments he made during his Jackson anti-semitism denial posts. now is your memory jogged?
|
