Posted by Lou Pilder on May 15, 2015, at 16:36:49
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-in refference to your concerns, posted by Lamdage22 on May 15, 2015, at 14:17:27
> > > Lou,
> > >
> > > what is the anti-semitic perspective and who has posted it?
> >
> > Lamdage22,
> > I was wondering if you could post here to show that you could be more informed or not by any contents in this thread in reference to your questions to me here. If you could post such, then I could have the opportunity to clarify further.
> > Lou
>
>
> Lou,
>
> are you saying that it is antisemitic that christians think (and say) that only christians go to heaven?
>
> Lamdage22,
There is no denying by Mr. Hsiung that his rule here is to not post anything that could lead one to feel that their faith is being put down. And their is no denying by Mr. Hsiung that one of the definitions of what is anti-Semitic here is that if a statement puts down Jews, it is an anti-Semitic statement.
But it is much more than that. For if a {policy} by a state, country, school, business, restaurant, hotel, ect deprives a Jew of equal protection of its rules, then the policy could be thought to be an anti-Semitic policy. And by extension then, the state, country, business, school ect that has an anti-Semitic policy, could be deemed to be an anti-Semitic state, country, business, school, ect. and then by extension, the policy drafters could be deemed to be anti-Semitic and also all those that are in collaboration with the drafters of those rules.
Your question involves the rule here drafted by Mr. Hsiung that states that the use of the word, "only", can exclude all others. So in your example, the word "only", excludes Jews, since the statement is {only Christians }. Your example also excludes Islamic people, which could lead a subset of Islamic people to feel that Mr. Hsiung is allowing Islam to be insulted by not posting a repudiation to a statement where it is originally posted, like your example, and all other faiths that have in their religion that they can enter heaven without being a Christian.
But it is worse than that. For Mr. Hsiung states that being supportive takes precedence and that posters are to be civil at all times here. So readers that see your example where it is originally posted standing un sanctioned by Mr. Hsiung or a deputy of record, they could think that the statement is supportive. And worse, that Mr. Hsiung says to try and trust him in what he does here. This could seriously mislead a vulnerable reader to accept hatred toward the Jews here as being validated by Mr. Hsuing and his deputies of record here where it is originally posted and act out violence toward Jews and have hatred infused into them from this site to be vomited up in the real-world community where they reside to spread the hatred to others that craw out of their holes to be delighted to see that a psychiatrist is allowing anti-Semitic propaganda to be seen as supportive. And even worse, anti-Semitism could then be created and developed by Mr. Hsuing and his deputies of record and the members in concert with them. All it takes to do that is to have people here easily persuaded by Mr. Hsiung and his deputies of record. And as Mr. Hsiung states that there are people here that he calls {less-confident people}, there could also be people here that are {easily persuaded}. Those people are generally un informed. And it's so easy to persuade the un informed. It's so easy.
Lou
>
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:1077523
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20150407/msgs/1078996.html