TWK: The Aelf dilemma

Chris · 05 Dec 2005, 23:32 · from 2005-December.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: rasputin_ at hotmail.com (Chris)
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 23:32:45 +0000
Subject: (urth) TWK: The Aelf dilemma
In-Reply-To: <20051205214936.78032.qmail at web34613.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY102-F14BAC133448752D7EE0C1B86410 at phx.gbl>

I suggest you take a step back and reflect on this for a second. You threw 
out a one-liner to a mailing list which was either meant to make a point 
(the one that Dan'l criticized) or else contentless. It does not make a lot 
of sense to throw out a contentless one-liner to "interject" some levity in 
the discussion when you know that it's going to offend a sizable portion of 
readers with any religious inclinations at all. It's like going to a mixed 
gathering with people you don't know and breaking the ice by saying "How 
many single mothers does it take to change a light bulb?" - any even 
remotely observant person will know that this is not likely to lighten the 
mood, even if there happen to be no single mothers at the table.

In a way I think Dan'l was being generous by assuming that you actually 
*meant* something.

Stiltskin said:
>Dan'l, you're the arrogant one around here.  You don't
>know me from Adam, yet "in your superiority" presume
>to diagnose my soul from a flippant remark of nine
>words in which I conveyed no disrespect for anybody's
>position or beliefs, just attempted to interject some
>levity into the discussion.  And then, on top of it,
>you arrogate to yourself the right to judge me and
>attempt to smear me as a racist -- once again failing
>to realize that you are only holding the mirror up to
>yourself.
>
>
>
>--- Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 12/5/05, stilskin <acronus at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >>Worship isn't primarily a matter of seeking
> > > > >> supernatural reward.
> > > >
> > > > >It's a matter of seeking to avoid supernatural
> > > > >punishment.
> > > >
> > > > Don't parade your arrogance.
> > >
> > > I fail to see any arrogance in my statement, Dan'l
> >
> > That is a sign of the arrogance I'm speaking of.
> >
> > I mean the arrogance of assuming that you can make
> > broad
> > statements like that about worship, as if all
> > worshippers worship
> > for the same (rather craven) reason and you, in your
> > superiority,
> > have diagnosed it. It really isn't all that
> > different from seeing a
> > black guy walk into a restaurant and assuming he's
> > going to
> > order chicken and watermelon. It is bigoted, and
> > bigory is
> > always arrogant.
> >
> > --Dan'l
> >
> > --
> > I do not fear Satan half so much as I fear those who
> > fear him.
> >                         -- St Teresa of Avila
> > http://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer
> > _______________________________________________
> > Urth Mailing List
> > To post, write urth at urth.net
> > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
> >
>
>
>http://www.sff.net/people/stilskin
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
>http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>_______________________________________________
>Urth Mailing List
>To post, write urth at urth.net
>Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net