![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 58. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 12, 2005, at 10:10:36
Dr. Hsiung,
I am requesting that you write a determination as to if the following is acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the faith forum.
The poster writes,[...Christ, God, since he is supreme...]
and,
[...I must compromise with him...].
Lou Pilder
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/20050111/msgs/469883.html
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 12, 2005, at 14:38:10
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-Crst,Gd,suprm?, posted by Lou Pilder on March 12, 2005, at 10:10:36
> Dr. Hsiung,
> I am requesting that you write a determination as to if the following is acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the faith forum.
> The poster writes,[...Christ, God, since he is supreme...]
> and,
> [...I must compromise with him...].
> Lou Pilder
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/20050111/msgs/469883.html
Dr. Hsiung,
In a reply from you to me could you consider the following?
In the above, the poster writes,[..Christ,God,since he is supreme...].
Let us look at the gramamtical construction. Since "God" is set off by commas, could not the statement have the potential to mean that it is Christ that is "supreme"? If so, could that not have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings or to have the potential to put down jews and those that do not consider Christ to be supreme?
Lou Pilder
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 12, 2005, at 15:32:15
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-Crst,Gd,suprm?, posted by Lou Pilder on March 12, 2005, at 10:10:36
> I am requesting that you write a determination as to if the following is acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the faith forum.
I did block him...
Bob
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 12, 2005, at 18:23:23
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on March 12, 2005, at 15:32:15
Dr. Hsiung,
You wrote,[...I did block him...]
I can not find the post for that. Could you post the URL?
Lou Pilder
Posted by SLS on March 12, 2005, at 20:02:28
In reply to request to Dr. Hsiung to consider in reply-suprm, posted by Lou Pilder on March 12, 2005, at 14:38:10
> Let us look at the gramamtical construction. Since "God" is set off by commas, could not the statement have the potential to mean that it is Christ that is "supreme"?
I believe this is precisely the foundation of Christendom and is part of the Trinity. Obviously, you do not have to agree with it. I don't see why this person should not be able to express their beliefs in such a way that is neither unsupportive nor coercive. It is true that people whom are dedicated to promoting hate and resentment often find fodder for accomplishing their goals by perverting the tenets of various religions. For example, are not the Jews the Chosen People? What about those whom God has not chosen? Shouldn't they feel extremely subjugated and put-down?
I don't know. That Faith board can be a minefield or a garden. Avoid the mines and enjoy the flowers.
- Scott
Posted by gardenergirl on March 12, 2005, at 20:05:01
In reply to Lou's reply to Dr. Hsiung- » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on March 12, 2005, at 18:23:23
Hi Lou,
I don't have the URL, but matt was blocked on the meds board.gg
Posted by SLS on March 12, 2005, at 20:10:16
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on March 12, 2005, at 15:32:15
> > I am requesting that you write a determination as to if the following is acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the faith forum.
>
> I did block him...
>
> BobBut what about the post that Lou cited. Is it or is it not acceptable. I am very confused.
- Scott
Posted by Phillipa on March 12, 2005, at 20:54:37
In reply to Re: Lou's request » Dr. Bob, posted by SLS on March 12, 2005, at 20:10:16
Poor Matt, He sounds as if he needs us more than ever. I recognize that he has upset other Posters. This brings us back to the question of what do we do when a Poster is suicidal, or now obviously Psychotic?In my opinion only. Fondly, Phillipa
Posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 2:51:13
In reply to Lou's reply to Dr. Hsiung- » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on March 12, 2005, at 18:23:23
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2005, at 7:05:49
In reply to Re: request to Dr. Hsiung to consider in reply-suprm, posted by SLS on March 12, 2005, at 20:02:28
> > Let us look at the gramamtical construction. Since "God" is set off by commas, could not the statement have the potential to mean that it is Christ that is "supreme"?
>
> I believe this is precisely the foundation of Christendom and is part of the Trinity. Obviously, you do not have to agree with it. I don't see why this person should not be able to express their beliefs in such a way that is neither unsupportive nor coercive. It is true that people whom are dedicated to promoting hate and resentment often find fodder for accomplishing their goals by perverting the tenets of various religions. For example, are not the Jews the Chosen People? What about those whom God has not chosen? Shouldn't they feel extremely subjugated and put-down?
>
> I don't know. That Faith board can be a minefield or a garden. Avoid the mines and enjoy the flowers.
>
>
> - ScottFriends,
If we look at the post above, there is the aspect of what the poster writes as ,[...people dedicated to {promoting hate}....by {expletive} the tenants of...religions...]. For example,are not {the Jews} ...?].
As a spokesperson here for Jewery, I am requesting from anyone here to comment as to how they think of the jews, after reading the above, so that I can post a response.
Lou
Posted by SLS on March 13, 2005, at 7:51:19
In reply to Lou's response to an aspect of this thread-thejws, posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2005, at 7:05:49
> As a spokesperson here for Jewery, I am requesting from anyone here to comment as to how they think of the jews, after reading the above, so that I can post a response.
Why not just post a response? It seems that you already have.
Sorry, Lou, but I do not consider you a spokesman for Jewery.
I would like to see you respond to the previous statement. What qualifies you to speak for an entire nation?
I can guarantee you that you do not speak for me.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on March 13, 2005, at 8:35:07
In reply to Lou's response to an aspect of this thread-thejws, posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2005, at 7:05:49
> > > Let us look at the gramamtical construction. Since "God" is set off by commas, could not the statement have the potential to mean that it is Christ that is "supreme"?
> >
> > I believe this is precisely the foundation of Christendom and is part of the Trinity. Obviously, you do not have to agree with it. I don't see why this person should not be able to express their beliefs in such a way that is neither unsupportive nor coercive. It is true that people whom are dedicated to promoting hate and resentment often find fodder for accomplishing their goals by perverting the tenets of various religions. For example, are not the Jews the Chosen People? What about those whom God has not chosen? Shouldn't they feel extremely subjugated and put-down?
> >
> > I don't know. That Faith board can be a minefield or a garden. Avoid the mines and enjoy the flowers.
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
> Friends,
> If we look at the post above, there is the aspect of what the poster writes as ,[...people dedicated to {promoting hate}....by {expletive} the tenants of...religions...]. For example,are not {the Jews} ...?].
> As a spokesperson here for Jewery, I am requesting from anyone here to comment as to how they think of the jews, after reading the above, so that I can post a response.
> Lou
>Is it your intention to actually take a poll?
Why not argue your case on its merits. This is something you do often as a lone dissenter.
As a lone dissenter, your taking a poll would yield not a single dissenter, in which case it would be a majority rules scenario.
Let's poll the entire world making sure we include members of every religion and non-religion. In this way, we can be sure that there be no person who feels put-down by the Jew's self proclaimation as being God's Chosen People.
I guess we could invest our time and effort to take such a worldwide poll in order to determine whether my hypothetical analogy was at all realistic. I wish not to participate in its administration.
My vote: I do not feel put-down by the phrase "Chosen People" as it pertains to Judaism.
You only have 6 billion people left to go!
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2005, at 8:46:30
In reply to Re: Lou's response to an aspect of this thread-thejws » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on March 13, 2005, at 7:51:19
Scott,
Let us look at an aspect of this thread.You wrote,[...For example,are not the Jews the Chosen People? What about those whom God has not chosen? {Shouldn't} they feel extremly subjugated and put-down?...].
Could you clarify why you wrote the word,"shouldn't" in your statement?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2005, at 9:27:28
In reply to Re: Lou's response to an aspect of this thread-thejws » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on March 13, 2005, at 8:35:07
Scott,
You wrote,[...Is it your intention to ...take a poll?...].
It is not my intention to take a poll.
You wrote,[...Why not argue...?]
I do not want to argue.
You wrote,[...the Jews self procamation as being God's chosen people...]
Could you elaborate on that?
Lou
Posted by SLS on March 13, 2005, at 9:41:46
In reply to Lou's reply to Scott- » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2005, at 9:27:28
> Scott,
> You wrote,[...Is it your intention to ...take a poll?...].
> It is not my intention to take a poll.
> You wrote,[...Why not argue...?]
> I do not want to argue.
> You wrote,[...the Jews self procamation as being God's chosen people...]
> Could you elaborate on that?
> LouWhat is there to elaborate?
- Scott
Posted by Phillipa on March 13, 2005, at 10:03:39
In reply to Re: Lou's reply to Scott-, posted by SLS on March 13, 2005, at 9:41:46
Boy, I'm glad I don't make a practice of Posting on this Board? It's almost like being in Freudian psychoanalysis. Why not just let people be people, be free to practice their religion, and now I know why it is not recommended that people discuss politics and religion. Everyone is right, noone can be wrong. After all we are all entitled to choose to believe what we choose to believe. I don't believe anyone can argue with this. Most but not all believe in a "Higher Being". It is their choice who or what that is. Fondly, Phillipa
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2005, at 10:06:30
In reply to Re: Lou's response to an aspect of this thread-thejws » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on March 13, 2005, at 8:35:07
Scott,
You wrote,[...lone dissenter...majority rules scenario...].
I had requested that any other community members post their input about your post in regards to the Jews after the had read your post. I am not asking for any type of vote to do anything. My request was so that I could have others write so that I could be better able to post a response to what you wrote because it is not clear to me as per your gramattical structure of the statement in question as to how others could interprwet the statements in question. In a mental-health forum, the population could interpret your post , perhaps, in several ways. I would like to post a response to how, if anyone responds to my request, they interpret your statements in your post.
Other community members could see what you wrote differently, in particular but not limited to,[...people whom are... promoting hate...] and your use of the word,"perverting" in relation to the tenants of various religions and the use of the word "shouldn't" in relation to,[...are not the Jews the Chosen People? What about those whom God has not chosen? shouldn't they feel {extremly}subjugated and put-down?...].
Lou
Posted by SLS on March 13, 2005, at 10:29:24
In reply to Lou's reply to Scott- » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2005, at 10:06:30
Hi Lou.
As a spokesman for Jewry, how do you account for why the Jews commonly refer to themselves as "The Chosen People"?
Do you not find that this self proclaimation is exclusionary? Wouldn't such presumed exclusion have the potential to put down those whom Jews do not consider chosen? How different is this than a Christian stating that one must go through Jesus Christ to arrive at the Kingdom of God everlastingly?
- Scott
Posted by Phillipa on March 13, 2005, at 11:33:17
In reply to Lou's reply to Scott- » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2005, at 10:06:30
It never ends does it?Fondly, Phillipa
Posted by gardenergirl on March 13, 2005, at 13:07:54
In reply to Re: Lou's request » Dr. Bob, posted by SLS on March 12, 2005, at 20:10:16
> > > I am requesting that you write a determination as to if the following is acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the faith forum.
> >
> > I did block him...
> >
> > Bob
>
> But what about the post that Lou cited. Is it or is it not acceptable. I am very confused.
>
>I agree. The block on the meds board had nothing to do with Lou's request. It seems not to have been answered yet.
gg
Posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2005, at 14:55:36
In reply to Re: Lou's reply to Scott-, posted by Phillipa on March 13, 2005, at 11:33:17
Phillipa,
You wrote,[...It never ends does it?...].
Could you clarify or identify what you are referring to as {it}?
Lou
Posted by Phillipa on March 13, 2005, at 17:24:13
In reply to Lou's reply to Phillipa's post-clarfyit » Phillipa, posted by Lou Pilder on March 13, 2005, at 14:55:36
The microscopic examination of every word a person says. If I had to examine every word before I uttered it, I would never say anything. I just think it's "petty". What ever happened to a good conversation without fear of being picked apart. Yes, I agree, the person in question needed a timeout so to speak. He was blocked. To do so twice is redundant. He can't Post on any Board. I'll be honest Lou, I haven't taken the time to examine the Post in question on the Faith Board. For that i am guilty, and admit it. I just hate conflict! Fondly, Phillipa
Posted by Phillipa on March 13, 2005, at 17:29:07
In reply to Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-Crst,Gd,suprm?, posted by Lou Pilder on March 12, 2005, at 10:10:36
Poor Matt, To me it's obvious that he is "sick" right now. I believe we need to be a little tolerant. He doesn't know what he's saying, he admits that himself. He seems to be reaching out for some help in clarifying what must be to him some frightening feelings, and thoughts. This and the previous Post are in my opinion only. Fondly, Phillipa
Posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 18:05:18
In reply to Re: Lou's reply to Phillipa's post-clarfyit » Lou Pilder, posted by Phillipa on March 13, 2005, at 17:24:13
I don't think saying 'in my opinion' offsets calling the enterprise 'petty'.
I think it is fair to ask whether the post is acceptable or not.
It is interesting to know with respect to making sure that ones own posts are within civility guidelines.
Asking a question doesn't have to lead to conflict...
Posted by alexandra_k on March 13, 2005, at 18:06:54
In reply to Re: Lou's request to Dr. Hsiung-Crst,Gd,suprm?, posted by Phillipa on March 13, 2005, at 17:29:07
I think quite a bit of tolerance has been shown already. He received a number of warnings before being blocked. Clearly the warnings didn't have much affect. 'Reaching out for help' is one thing. Uncivil remarks to other posters is another...
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.