Spirituality
02 Aug 17
On page 5 of the "Who Created Evil Thread"
You posted a snide little barb at me because I apparently ignored a post on the previous page by Checkbaiter. You seemed annoyed that I had ignored him, and you replied to him (but it was obviously aimed at me):
"It seems some people's eyes just don't see this post for some reason, I guess it doesn't fit their mind set so they ignore it."
I addressed this comment in the thread, but you ignored it! To be honest I'm fed up with your pious hypocrisy old chap, so here's your chance to show me how NOT to ignore another poster.
Maybe your eyes won't see this thread for some reason, because it doesn't fit with your mind...
Originally posted by @divegeesterCalling out a man who not talking to you ??: 😀
On page 5 of the "Who Created Evil Thread"
You posted a snide little barb at me because I apparently ignored a post on the previous page by Checkbaiter. You seemed annoyed that I had ignored him, and you replied to him (but it was obviously aimed at me):
[b]"It seems some people's eyes just don't see this post for some reason, I guess it doesn' ...[text shortened]... be your eyes won't see this thread for some reason, because it doesn't fit with your mind...
Originally posted by @chaney3In response to a thread about JWs wanting to let their child die so as not to [supposedly] disobey the Bible, the uncomplicatedly-conservative and anti-government KellyJay asserted the right of parents to be left alone by government so they can exercise their religious beliefs, in this case - unfortunately - meaning letting their children die for want of medical treatment in accordance with those religious beliefs, regardless of how tragic this was and how KellyJay would himself never do such a thing.
I think it would be pretty cool if you guys could find a way to bury the hatchet, mend whatever is causing the ignore issue, and continue to exchange posts in the future.
divegeester and I criticized this and I - calling a spade a spade, as I am wont to do from time to time - likened the 'exercise of their religious beliefs' in question to child sacrifice: i.e. arranging for the death of a child in order to please a god figure [or not to anger him/her].
I argued that the government cannot step aside while parents do such a thing. I argued that the right (and duty) of the government/society trumped the rights of parents in such cases and such children needed to be protected.
The only times KellyJay has posted in reply to me since then have been by accident.
He even lied [in a post addressed to someone else] about what the issue had actually been when he claimed that I had accused him of wanting the children to die, which of course I hadn't.
Furthermore, not so long ago, KellyJay expressed a new view that is now the same as mine (regarding government intervening to protect children from religious extremist parents) and yet he has been unable to swallow his pride and end his huff.
I have continued to respond to KellyJay's posts in the meantime and I never went into a huff simply because I saw the case of the JWs and their dying child in a starkly different way to KellyJay. That has been his - and not my - response to the dispute we had.
Originally posted by @chaney3Further to FMF's post which I fully concur with; KellyJay enjoys posting Christian platitudes about forgiveness, love, peace, the spirit, the good intentions of God, etc etc. However when it comes to living up to those ideals, even something as simple as the rudeness of ignoring other posters, it seems he is unable to get past his own obstinate hypocrisy.
I think it would be pretty cool if you guys could find a way to bury the hatchet, mend whatever is causing the ignore issue, and continue to exchange posts in the future.
The account above by FMF is spot on, he and I were defending the rights of the child, a real case in Australia when the state intervened to save the child's life from the JW parents who were going to let her die in observance of their relegious beliefs about receiving blood. KellyJay took offence at our position for some reason.
Originally posted by @divegeesterHe probably just misunderstood what was said and what it meant but, now, having tossed so many huff chips into the pot, he probably doesn't want to admit he's got nothing of any worth in the hand he dealt himself.
The account above by FMF is spot on, he and I were defending the rights of the child, a real case in Australia when the state intervened to save the child's life from the JW parents who were going to let her die in observance of their relegious beliefs about receiving blood. KellyJay took offence at our position for some reason.
03 Aug 17
Originally posted by @chaney3There is also the possibility he just has not as of yet, read this post.
So exactly what incentive would KellyJay have to resume a further dialogue with you two?
Are you seeking an apology from him? Are you requiring that he humble himself and admit he was wrong?
You're not making this easy for him.
03 Aug 17
Originally posted by @chaney3Apologize? Of course not. He's perfectly entitled to his point of view on government intervention and religious freedom. If he wants to continue his huff, it's his prerogative, and it's fine by me.
So exactly what incentive would KellyJay have to resume a further dialogue with you two?
Are you seeking an apology from him? Are you requiring that he humble himself and admit he was wrong?
You're not making this easy for him.
03 Aug 17
Originally posted by @divegeesterWell, your OP along with this thread suggests otherwise.
KellyJay is free to do exactly as he pleases.
Maybe if he sensed some middle ground here he would post in this thread?
03 Aug 17
Originally posted by @fmfMaybe if you didn't constantly remind him about the "huff" issue, and focused more on a willingness to move on, things would be different.
Apologize? Of course not. He's perfectly entitled to his point of view on government intervention and religious freedom. If he wants to continue his huff, it's his prerogative, and it's fine by me.
03 Aug 17
Originally posted by @divegeesterNot quite sure, but since he would never neglect the medical care of his children, and was possibly just trying to defend another person's faith, and perhaps wishes he didn't, this 'misunderstanding' is capable of being resolved.
Maybe he would. What would you suggest?
Without name calling of course, KellyJay does not like name calling.