Gay Marriage-was, Kerry in trouble with intern.
BillyG.
news:b179f726.04021...@posting.google.com...
> "BillyG." <william...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:<CD6Xb.23300$tD6....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com>...
> >
> > ..the purpose of sex is procreation.
> >
> Wrong. ONE OF the purposes of the sex act is procreation. It ALSO
> serves as the 'glue' that 'cements' two people together in a
> relationship.
Charlie Lutes use to say that as well, yes, it also functions in that
capacity, I agree.
That 'purpose' is just as important, from a
> cultural-success standpoint, as procreation. Keeping the two as a
> pair, regardless of their sex, has massive consequences in our
> culture.
Indeed!
> Preventing gays from vowing to stay together puts them in a position
> of infidelity and non-commitment, by law unable to bond to each other
> in the same way other couples can.
Yes, but short of *tyranny of the minority*, it will stay that way, as it is
better for the community at large. Gay marriage would only lead to gender
confusion for our little children growing up, not knowing whether to marry
Johnny or Susie, sexuality is fluid, to think it is set in stone is a
mistake, why do hetero prisoners engage in it? Democracy ensures the
greatest good, to the greatest number, no society will be completely happy
until all members are in harmony with natural law.
> > The generative force is the power of the Holy Spirit in man,
> >
> Wrong. The Holy Spirit doesn't give a squat about the generative
> force. The generative force is hormone driven, i.e. physical, not
> spiritual.
You speak with certainty, yet, without a source one would have to believe
you know from direct experience, which I doubt. My analysis comes from
scripture and conscience...and yours?
> > ...it can be used
> > for generation(procreation), regeneration (creativity), OR degeneration
> > (base sexual practices)....let's not go the way of Gomorra! Surely Unc,
you
> > must admit anal intercourse between men is a perverse use of the sexual
> > drive, yes? BillyG.
> >
> > P.S. Homosexuality is nothing more than a desperate attempt to find
> > happiness thru the senses which will never satisfy the mind, the Gay
> > community will ALWAYS be discontents,
> >
> LOL, you can say exactly the same for heterosexuality and the hetero
> community. Contentment doesn't come from a penis entering a vagina.
>
> > ...happiness does NOT come from SEX
> >
> Exactly, neither hetero nor homo.
>
> > ...it comes from harmony with Natural Law!
> >
> Actually, harmony with Natural Law comes along with Self knowledge and
> inner peace, no matter what is entering what.
If you are at peace with your penis entering another mans anus, perhaps
you're kidding yourself, and in fact, I believe this is the very reason gays
wish to change society to accept their behavior because they *can't* accept
it in themselves and think it's *because* of society, whereas, it's just a
natural reaction (guilt, shame) in someone when they engage in sexual
abominations. BillyG.
Mike Doughney
BillyG. <william...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>Yes, but short of *tyranny of the minority*, it will stay that way, as it is
>better for the community at large. Gay marriage would only lead to gender
>confusion for our little children growing up, not knowing whether to marry
You really are as stupid as a pail of exclamation points, aren't you?
BillyG.
"Mike Doughney" <mi...@mtd.com> wrote in message
news:c0nb9...@enews3.newsguy.com...
Unc already used that metaphor, much more effectively, sorry Doughnuthead,
try again! :-(
BillyG.
BTW Doughboy...aren't you one of the Initiators that betrayed MMY? BillyG
Mike Doughney
BillyG. <william...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>BTW Doughboy...aren't you one of the Initiators ...
I never advanced beyond the rank of "citizen meditator," and I've
never claimed otherwise.
> ...that betrayed MMY? BillyG
As if releasing his oh-so-secret special list of squeaks and oinks to
the public is "betrayal." That's pretty funny.
Mike Doughney
BillyG. <william...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>"Mike Doughney" <mi...@mtd.com> wrote in message
>news:c0nb9...@enews3.newsguy.com...
>>
>
>Unc already used that metaphor, much more effectively, sorry Doughnuthead,
>try again! :-(
I'm quite happy to admit that I don't obsessively read every word of
every post in this newsgroup. :-)
BillyG.
OK, but did you post anything on trancnet, or did anybody do it for you?
BillyG.
BillyG.
I can relate to that, when I get bored here, I go back and read my own posts
over again! :-) BillyG.
Mike Doughney
BillyG. <william...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>OK, but did you post anything on trancnet, or did anybody do it for you?
>BillyG.
I don't recall having "posted" on or otherwise having anything to do
with what's on trancenet.org.
My TM-related website is at minet.org; is that what you're upset about?
BillyG.
Ah-ha! Indeed! But you have a right to say what you wish, although by
providing a vehicle for traitors is almost as bad as being one yourself, you
understand that, right? BTW, why do you have that website? Are you a
born-again Christian? OR, what has MMY done to you that was so bad? BillyG.
Mike Doughney
BillyG. <william...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>"Mike Doughney" <mi...@mtd.com> wrote in message
>news:c0p0u...@enews4.newsguy.com...
>
>
>Ah-ha! Indeed! But you have a right to say what you wish, although by
>providing a vehicle for traitors is almost as bad as being one yourself, you
>understand that, right?
This is pretty damn funny, and another reason why the TM movement
stands little hope of ever being taken seriously again, with
hyperactive, hypersensitive nuts like you running around in public
ranting "traitor" at those who no longer care to repeat the "party
line." Last I checked, the TM technique isn't sold with the
requirement that the buyer sign a loyalty oath, and never has
been. All that "simple mental technique" and "not a religion" and "not
a lifestyle" happy horseshit never included anything about how to
avoid being branded a "traitor" by those who, still, after all these
decades of movement stupidity and empty-headed wishful thinking, hang
onto all this silly movement rhetoric. The requirements for teachers
still never qualified as such a requirement, and are unenforceable
anyway.
>BTW, why do you have that website? Are you a born-again Christian?
As I said, you really are as stupid as a pail of exclamation points,
or you haven't read any of my posts lately. No, I am not a Christian
of any kind.
> OR, what has MMY done to you that was so bad? BillyG.
In a nutshell, since it's been many years since I've talked about any
of this: let's just say, speaking from immediate personal experience,
that the TM techniques have sometimes been quite effective at making
one's wallet a little bit lighter, and at reforming young people and
even adults into babbling, obsessive-compulsive loonies. And the
"sidhis program," based on my observation, seems to have this
consequence of making people incapable of dealing rationally with
others, and provides nothing which could sensibly be labeled a
benefit. Fortunately, largely due to my circumstances at the time, I
got far away from anything to do with TM before taking the sidhis
course myself or getting involved any deeper than I did. I later
realized that I'd had something of a close call since I was at one
point considering getting heavily involved with the movement and maybe
moving to Fairfield.
Bob Hopeless
> ...the TM technique and the "sidhis program"...provides nothing which
could sensibly be labeled a benefit.
All honest objective people say without hestitation that TM and the sidhis
have no benefit whatsoever. Only self-deceiving liars like billyg, mcgurk,
english, marion continue to pretend they are getting some positive result
knowing in their heart that it isn't true. Objective measurements of the
various aspects of their lives would conclusively demonstrate no
improvements. Honest objective people deplore MMY's charade and speak out
strongly against it and its falseness. Only those who don't value honesty
continue to maintain the lie that TM has value. Strong minded people who
insist on total honesty and eschew wishful thinking like doughney, hopeless,
skolnick, are capable of accurately assessing the merits of TM and MMY. The
weak continue to cling to empty promises and obvious lies. TM has no
benefit. Abandon false hope right now.
Bob Hopeless
Mike Doughney
Bob Hopeless <des...@nohoper.com> wrote:
>
>... Honest objective people deplore MMY's charade and speak out
>strongly against it and its falseness. Only those who don't value honesty
>continue to maintain the lie that TM has value. Strong minded people who
>insist on total honesty and eschew wishful thinking like doughney, hopeless,
>skolnick, are capable of accurately assessing the merits of TM and MMY. The
>weak continue to cling to empty promises and obvious lies. TM has no
>benefit. Abandon false hope right now.
Wow. What a pompous-assed troll. And it sounds like you've been
hitting the Neo-Tech classics and stylebook way too hard. Take a break
and switch to decaf, okay?
Unknown
This is doughney's personal site :
AS you can see, he's, like, against things !
Steve Ralph
You were using 'oink' as a mantra? No wonder you ended up pig ignorant
SR
Steve Ralph
Using 'oink' as a mantra is not reccomended, as it tends to permanantly
damage the sense of humour
SR
Steve Ralph
> In article <DhUXb.25830$tY7....@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com>,
> BillyG. <william...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >
> >"Mike Doughney" <mi...@mtd.com> wrote in message
> >news:c0p0u...@enews4.newsguy.com...
> >
> >> My TM-related website is at minet.org; is that what you're upset about?
> >
> >Ah-ha! Indeed! But you have a right to say what you wish, although by
> >providing a vehicle for traitors is almost as bad as being one yourself,
you
> >understand that, right?
>
> This is pretty damn funny, and another reason why the TM movement
> stands little hope of ever being taken seriously again,
<oink> you take the TMO very serioulsy indeed, judging by your actions.
If you didn't take them seriously, you simply wouldn't bother. Turning into
an embittered obsessed looser and blaming TM is taking things far too
seriously imo.
<squeak>
with
> hyperactive, hypersensitive nuts like you running around in public
> ranting "traitor" at those who no longer care to repeat the "party
> line." Last I checked, the TM technique isn't sold with the
> requirement that the buyer sign a loyalty oath, and never has
> been. All that "simple mental technique" and "not a religion" and "not
> a lifestyle" happy horseshit never included anything about how to
> avoid being branded a "traitor" by those who, still, after all these
> decades of movement stupidity and empty-headed wishful thinking, hang
> onto all this silly movement rhetoric. The requirements for teachers
> still never qualified as such a requirement, and are unenforceable
> anyway.
>
> >BTW, why do you have that website? Are you a born-again Christian?
>
> As I said, you really are as stupid as a pail of exclamation points,
> or you haven't read any of my posts lately.
<oink>
> No, I am not a Christian
> of any kind.
<squeak>
That is blindingly obvious!
BillyG.
"Steve Ralph" <st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk> wrote in message
news:nG1Yb.3891$h44.6...@stones.force9.net...
Ha, ha, ha, ha.............SR, that comment is precious, using 'oink' NO
wonder Doughboy didn't get any results!! Ha, ha, ha, ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ohhhh, what a belly laught! :-) BillyG.
>
BillyG.
I think SR was right, using 'oink' as your mantra won't get you very far,
too bad! BillyG.
BillyG.
"Bob Hopeless" <des...@nohoper.com> wrote in message
news:d4mdnfI0H5N...@look.ca...
>
> "Mike Doughney" <mi...@mtd.com> wrote in message
> news:c0p74...@enews4.newsguy.com...
> > ...the TM technique and the "sidhis program"...provides nothing which
> could sensibly be labeled a benefit.
>
> All honest objective people say without hestitation that TM and the sidhis
> have no benefit whatsoever.
Where are you studies?
Only self-deceiving liars like billyg, mcgurk,
> english, marion continue to pretend they are getting some positive result
> knowing in their heart that it isn't true.
Where are your studies?
Objective measurements of the
> various aspects of their lives would conclusively demonstrate no
> improvements. Honest objective people deplore MMY's charade and speak out
> strongly against it and its falseness.
Where are your studies?
Only those who don't value honesty
> continue to maintain the lie that TM has value. Strong minded people who
> insist on total honesty and eschew wishful thinking like doughney,
hopeless,
> skolnick, are capable of accurately assessing the merits of TM and MMY.
The
> weak continue to cling to empty promises and obvious lies. TM has no
> benefit. Abandon false hope right now.
I don't think so!
> Bob Hopeless
(..."I couldn't find it in the dictionary", why, I otta!@#)
BillyG.
snip
> This is pretty damn funny, and another reason why the TM movement
> stands little hope of ever being taken seriously again, with
> hyperactive, hypersensitive nuts like you running around in public
> ranting "traitor" at those who no longer care to repeat the "party
> line."
Initiators were specifically ask to recite a verbal oath of privacy
administered by Jerry Jarvis as early as 1972 in Fuiggi, Italy! You have
knowingly allowed ex-Initiators to violate that promise!!
Last I checked, the TM technique isn't sold with the
> requirement that the buyer sign a loyalty oath, and never has
> been.
All meditators were ask to keep the mantra *private*...did you agree? If
you did, you violated your word of honor! BillyG
snip
Mike Doughney
Haven't used mantras for over 15 years, so you're not talking to me.
> as it tends to permanantly damage the sense of humour
Never said the troll wasn't funny. Ha, ha, look, another silly troll.
Steve Ralph
> In article <_H1Yb.3892$h44.6...@stones.force9.net>,
> Steve Ralph <st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >Using 'oink' as a mantra is not reccomended,
>
> Haven't used mantras for over 15 years, so you're not talking to me.
LOL you've been posting them on the internet for 15 years!
<squoink>
Mike Doughney
Steve Ralph <st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk> wrote:
>
>you take the TMO very serioulsy indeed, judging by your actions.
And those actions would be, just what, exactly?
>If you didn't take them seriously, you simply wouldn't bother.
Lessee... do a little google search (what wonderful tools we have
online today)... 19 posts here on this newsgroup by me since Jan 1
2003. If you were paying attention, you might have even noticed that I
addressed the subject of TM in exactly zero of those 19 posts. Going
back a bit farther, I'm still having trouble finding where I've
last commented on TM directly, maybe as far back as September
'02. Even got a post here where I'm critical of a "critic."
So yes, as a matter fact, I can, unlike some here, walk away from this
the subject of TM on this newsgroup for over a year at a time. One
rather low-key and not even particularly critical post by me and the
shitstorm starts again full force, with all the same
accusatory language as before, as if the same can has been reopened.
Fascinating.
>Turning into an embittered obsessed looser
Embittered? Nothing bitter about it, just making a few statements of
fact, and seeing what happens. (What happens are the predictable
knee-jerk reactions of the long-term meditator, right on cue.)
Obsessed? See above.
"Looser?" Start by learning how to spell. Then we'll talk.
>and blaming TM
For what? I blame TM for *nothing* that has happened to me
personally. (It doesn't get any credit either.) I take full
responsibility for my own actions while involved with the TM
program. Live, and learn, and grow up to know better than the childish
fantasies and endless, even recursive, wishful thinking spewed by the
TM movement.
At the same time, one of the TM movement's purposes is to make people
run around spewing an enormous amount of sillyness, to among other
things, sell its products. That's what it is. Those of us that tire of
sillyness and things that don't work and make people say and do stupid
things might sometimes point that out, and watch all you hangers-on
for dear life get your panties in a bunch.
>is taking things far too seriously imo.
Y'know, it looks to me like I'm the one who's making at least a little
bit of an attempt to not... "take things far too seriously" and avoid
direct personal attack language, like exclamation point boy's use of
the word "traitor" to label those who simply found the TM movement and
its products lacking, and who moved on to something else (or nothing
else.)
>> No, I am not a Christian
>> of any kind.
>
>That is blindingly obvious!
Obviously it's not obvious to all. The assumption that critics are by
definition "born-again Christians" is pervasive in the TM movement,
and it doesn't apply to me. At all.
Mike Doughney
again!
In article <%36Yb.24447$GS5....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com>,
BillyG. <william...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>Initiators were specifically ask to recite a verbal oath of privacy
>administered by Jerry Jarvis as early as 1972 in Fuiggi, Italy! You have
>knowingly allowed ex-Initiators to violate that promise!!
Any whistle-blower is by definition "violating" some kind of
promise. Whoever provided me with those lists of mantras decided that
that "promise" or alleged "oath" wasn't worth keeping. I'd guess that
after years of hype about how special and complicated the mantra
selection process was supposed to have been, at least one initiator,
upon learning it's just based on age, began to suspect that this
"oath" was one silly thing in a mountain of silly, pointless things.
>All meditators were ask to keep the mantra *private*...did you agree? If
>you did, you violated your word of honor! BillyG
As far as meditators are concerned, there was nothing said to me
before, during or after initiation about "honor," and this isn't the
kind of thing you can apply decades after one has agreed to go through
an initiation. In particular, the program was sold as a simple
technique, nothing more, and certainly it was sold as including
nothing that might involve "honor" or anything about lifestyle or
"religion" that might imply that "honor" might be somehow involved. To
the contrary, the announced rationale to keep the mantra private was
solely based upon the idea that the program wouldn't work if you spoke
about or shared your mantra. Any other rationale is something you've
come up with after the fact, presumably because my violation of the
"mantra mystique" is something you find so personally
offensive. They're just noises. Get over it.
I haven't meditated for 15 years plus, so I certainly don't care
whether or not the technique works. So "ahemm" and "aing namah" to you
all!
Mike Doughney
Steve Ralph <st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk> wrote:
>
>LOL you've been posting them on the internet for 15 years!
It'll be 10 years on March 6. See:
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=2ld046%24a1q%40ss1.digex.net
Steve Ralph
even follow simple instructions!
SR
Steve Ralph
> In article <qT1Yb.3894$h44.6...@stones.force9.net>,
> Steve Ralph <st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >you take the TMO very serioulsy indeed, judging by your actions.
>
> And those actions would be, just what, exactly?
10 years of misuse of mantras - and a great deal of work put in
solely for the purpose of trashing TM.
You take it a lot more seriously than I do.
SR
BillyG.
> I know I must have had this argument online ten years ago. Here we go
> again!
> >All meditators were ask to keep the mantra *private*...did you agree?
If
> >you did, you violated your word of honor! BillyG
>
> As far as meditators are concerned, there was nothing said to me
> before, during or after initiation about "honor,"
Doughney-You can't be serious, NO ONE has suggested, but YOU, that honor was
mentioned during the initiation ceremony!
and this isn't the
> kind of thing you can apply decades after one has agreed to go through
> an initiation. In particular, the program was sold as a simple
> technique, nothing more, and certainly it was sold as including
> nothing that might involve "honor"
Poor Doughney-Can't you see that when you give your word and then, go back
on it, you compromise your honor?
or anything about lifestyle or
> "religion" that might imply that "honor" might be somehow involved. To
> the contrary, the announced rationale to keep the mantra private was
> solely based upon the idea that the program wouldn't work if you spoke
> about or shared your mantra.
D-And where did you find this teaching? There isn't any! Period! And the
only instruction I remember is, that by expressing your mantra to others it
could *weaken* it's effectiveness, that is all!
Any other rationale is something you've
> come up with after the fact, presumably because my violation of the
> "mantra mystique" is something you find so personally
> offensive. They're just noises. Get over it.
Well Mr. Doughney if, indeed, you were using the mantra, *oink* obviously
you didn't get any results, perhaps it's time for checking? :-) BillyG
BillyG.
Afterall, using *oink* for 10 years can really add up, you know what I mean!
:-) BillyG.
BillyG.
>
> "Mike Doughney" <mi...@mtd.com> wrote in message
> news:c0rdb...@enews4.newsguy.com...
> > In article <qT1Yb.3894$h44.6...@stones.force9.net>,
> > Steve Ralph <st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > >you take the TMO very serioulsy indeed, judging by your actions.
> >
> > And those actions would be, just what, exactly?
>
> 10 years of misuse of mantras - and a great deal of work put in
> solely for the purpose of trashing TM.
> You take it a lot more seriously than I do.
>
> SR
Yeah...but maybe no one ever told him that *oink* was NOT a mantra, buyer
beware!!! *Oink* as suggested by Mr. Doughney of minet.org is NOT a
mantra...alert, alert....*oink* is NOT a mantra! BillyG.
Mike Doughney
> Mike Doughney wrote:
>> Steve Ralph wrote:
>> >
>> >you take the TMO very serioulsy indeed, judging by your actions.
>>
>> And those actions would be, just what, exactly?
>
(cleans coffee off the flat panel) I don't take "misuse of mantras"
seriously. Who does, except for a handful of TM program defenders
who're still indulging an unthinking reflex at the thought of a stray
mantra?
> - and a great deal of work put in
>solely for the purpose of trashing TM.
Lessee... maybe an hour or two putting the mantra chart together, an
evening or three reformatting the TM-EX newsletter articles. Not much
else on the site, and I did all that many years ago. I don't call this
"work."
I get nuts writing me all the time about all the "work" I put into my
websites. They aren't something I put much effort into at all, and
usually the complainers, like you, are focused on something I haven't
thought much about in five years or more. So I'm still trying to
figure out where this image of me doing "work" comes from. The mere
presence of a website on the net usually means somebody paid someone to
put it there, and that's about it.
>You take it a lot more seriously than I do.
I'm still trying to figure out where this insistence on my seriousness
comes from. Must be a stylistic thing or something, because what I'm
actually doing is showing zero (0) serious reverence to a list of
sounds that you oh so seriously insist must be treated with the utmost
care and pseudo-secrecy lest they be (ha ha ha) "misused," and
generally pointing out that the TM movement is a pretty silly thing
for middle-aged or better adults to be defending as if it's something
serious, like a religion or something. You're defending it as if it's
something serious, so you must be the one who's taking it
seriously.
I'm just pointing out the obvious, prodding you to again display in
public your oh-so-SERIOUS defense of something that looks even weirder
with every passing day and encourages the average, well-adjusted
person to run quickly in the obvious direction, thus insuring the
continued demise of the TM movement. Thank you for seriously
participating in this process, I couldn't do even half as much without
you.
Bob Hopeless
> Wow. What a pompous-assed troll.
Wow. What a humorless tit. Okay, your turn.
> And it sounds like you've been
> hitting the Neo-Tech classics and stylebook way too hard.
People who know what Neo-tech classics and stylebook are and suggest that
others have been hitting them too hard are a degraded and contemptible class
of people . Anyone with any sense knows this. People who have never heard of
the Neo-tech classics and stylebook, such as myself, are exalted beyond
measure. All sane people agree with this assessment.
Take a break
> and switch to decaf, okay?
I'm too sexy for decaf.
Bob Hopeless
willytex
> the announced rationale to keep the mantra private
> was solely based upon the idea that
Mike - It's no longer on-topic to dicuss mantras and intiations on
this forum. There's only one respondent left here who's still on the
TM program.
So, you don't know if your mantra worked or not, since you shared it
with others. If so, and the case seems pretty solid that you shared
it, then you haven't practiced TM nor were you ever a meditator.
> the program wouldn't work if you spoke about
> or shared your mantra.
It has not been established that you were ever on the program.
> I haven't meditated for 15 years plus,
How do you know? Meditation means to 'think things over' and surely
you've paused once or twice to take stock of your own thoughts.
> so I certainly don't care whether or not the
> technique works.
There's no such thing as "TM" - you made that up. Apparently, you were
in a trance-induced, self-hypnotic state for years. If I were you, I'd
think seriously about seeing a cult exit-counselor. If you're still
worried after all these years about your honor for sharing all those
"mantras", you may need professsional help.
mi...@mtd.com (Mike Doughney) wrote in message news:<c0red...@enews2.newsguy.com>...
Mike Doughney
Bob Hopeless <des...@nohoper.com> wrote:
>People who (x) are a degraded and contemptible class
>of people . Anyone with any sense knows this. People who (y),
>such as myself, are exalted beyond measure. All sane
>people agree with this assessment.
It might have been mildly funny the first time, but the humor doesn't
hold up after multiple showings. Yawn.
Bob Hopeless
Oy, everybody's a critic.
Unknown
>Mike Doughney wrote
>> the announced rationale to keep the mantra private
>> was solely based upon the idea that
>
>Mike - It's no longer on-topic to dicuss mantras and intiations on
>this forum. There's only one respondent left here who's still on the
>TM program.
Wrong !
Unknown
So your website attacking TM isn't serious ?? Or do you mean it's OK
to attack but not defend. That's a dodge. If you didn't take it
seriously you wouldn't have a website. Think about it.
>I'm still trying to figure out where this insistence on my seriousness
>comes from. Must be a stylistic thing or something, because what I'm
>actually doing is showing zero (0) serious reverence to a list of
>sounds that you oh so seriously insist must be treated with the utmost
>care and pseudo-secrecy lest they be (ha ha ha) "misused," and
>generally pointing out that the TM movement is a pretty silly thing
>for middle-aged or better adults to be defending as if it's something
>serious, like a religion or something. You're defending it as if it's
>something serious, so you must be the one who's taking it
>seriously.
Stop dodging. Irreverence to any tradition is a chidish way to attack
it. Grow up.
>
>I'm just pointing out the obvious, prodding you to again display in
>public your oh-so-SERIOUS defense of something that looks even weirder
>with every passing day and encourages the average, well-adjusted
>person to run quickly in the obvious direction, thus insuring the
>continued demise of the TM movement. Thank you for seriously
>participating in this process, I couldn't do even half as much without
>you.
Move on. When was your first post to this NG ?? You're getting too old
to be still stuck in this kind of rut. Let other people be without
your interfering.
Steve Ralph
> Steve Ralph wrote:
> > Mike Doughney wrote:
> >> Steve Ralph wrote:
> >> >
> >> >you take the TMO very serioulsy indeed, judging by your actions.
> >>
> >> And those actions would be, just what, exactly?
> >
> >10 years of misuse of mantras...
>
> (cleans coffee off the flat panel) I don't take "misuse of mantras"
> seriously. Who does, except for a handful of TM program defenders
> who're still indulging an unthinking reflex at the thought of a stray
> mantra?
>
> > - and a great deal of work put in
> >solely for the purpose of trashing TM.
>
> Lessee... maybe an hour or two putting the mantra chart together, an
> evening or three reformatting the TM-EX newsletter articles. Not much
> else on the site, and I did all that many years ago. I don't call this
> "work."
Only five hours altogether? Must be 'law of least action'!
> I get nuts writing me all the time about all the "work" I put into my
> websites. They aren't something I put much effort into at all,
Thats obvious, unimaginative design and layout, poor graphics, sloppy
organisation for a start
and
> usually the complainers, like you, are focused on something I haven't
> thought much about in five years or more. So I'm still trying to
> figure out where this image of me doing "work" comes from. The mere
> presence of a website on the net usually means somebody paid someone to
> put it there, and that's about it.
Ah, you got paid for it!
> >You take it a lot more seriously than I do.
>
> I'm still trying to figure out where this insistence on my seriousness
> comes from. Must be a stylistic thing or something, because what I'm
> actually doing is showing zero (0) serious reverence to a list of
> sounds that you oh so seriously insist must be treated with the utmost
> care and pseudo-secrecy lest they be (ha ha ha) "misused," and
> generally pointing out that the TM movement is a pretty silly thing
> for middle-aged or better adults to be defending as if it's something
> serious, like a religion or something. You're defending it as if it's
> something serious, so you must be the one who's taking it
> seriously.
You cannot be serious!!!
> I'm just pointing out the obvious, prodding you to again display in
> public your oh-so-SERIOUS defense of something that looks even weirder
> with every passing day and encourages the average, well-adjusted
> person to run quickly in the obvious direction,
Yes, your sites probably do have that effect on the well balanced
> thus insuring the
> continued demise of the TM movement.
Ah, I misunderstood! You are trying to be helpful!
willytex
> There's only one respondent left here who's
> still on the TM program.
Oliver Lyons wrote
> Wrong!
Oliver - I guess it all depends on what you mean by "on the program."
According to the Maharishi, discussing mantras and initiations on
public forums has nothing to do with being on the TM program.
Steve Ralph
"willytex" <will...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f53f3a73.04021...@posting.google.com...
It is very difficult to be 'on the program' while posting on a
newsgroup. I thaught you would have worked that out by now!
SR
Unknown
I'm discussing mantras and initiations ??
Mike Doughney
Oliver Lyons <> wrote:
>> Mike Doughney wrote:
>>>You take it a lot more seriously than I do.
>So your website attacking TM isn't serious ?? Or do you mean it's OK
>to attack but not defend. That's a dodge. If you didn't take it
>seriously you wouldn't have a website. Think about it.
There's a website because at the time, way back in the mid-90's, few
people had the technical facilities to put up a website, while I did,
so I went ahead and did that. And back then, as a matter of fact, I
did take the TM movement considerably more seriously than I do
today. Now the movement looks to me like just a bunch of old farts
well past middle age looking back at the good old days, and not a
whole lot else except an occasional rerun of one of their scams,
schemes or publicity stunts. And yeah, some of them got rather wealthy
in the meantime, and a bunch of hangers-on in this newsgroup are still
scratching their heads wondering how they and the TM movement ended up
in what's basically nowhere. (Cue "Nowhere Man," somebody.)
>>I'm still trying to figure out where this insistence on my seriousness
>>comes from. Must be a stylistic thing or something, because what I'm
>>actually doing is showing zero (0) serious reverence to a list of
>>sounds that you oh so seriously insist must be treated with the utmost
>>care and pseudo-secrecy lest they be (ha ha ha) "misused," and
>>generally pointing out that the TM movement is a pretty silly thing
>>for middle-aged or better adults to be defending as if it's something
>>serious, like a religion or something. You're defending it as if it's
>>something serious, so you must be the one who's taking it
>>seriously.
>
>Stop dodging. Irreverence to any tradition is a chidish way to attack
>it. Grow up.
Dodging... what? And as a matter of fact, a little irreverence, far
from being "chidish" [sic], provides a remarkably effective test of
whether or not the "tradition" is or isn't just a house of cards
that'll blow over from a gust of a few irreverant words. Clearly
that's the kind of "tradition" the TM movement provides, since I
really haven't said a whole lot about the "tradition" at all, and
you're babbling something about an "attack" and flailing in every
direction about something I'm doing. Just a few irreverant comments;
what was it they kept insisting, over and over, about TM not being a
religion? Sure looks like one when you start babbling like that.
>Move on. When was your first post to this NG ?? You're getting too old
>to be still stuck in this kind of rut.
This is way too funny. I've been effectively off this newsgroup for
months if not years, not saying much of anything about TM itself,
unlike all these people here who are "too old" to be, from time to
time, obsessively posting multiple messages a day in support of a
busted used-up movement and/or its products; a movement that can only
make a laughingstock of itself nowadays with stories of washed-up
stars throwing millions of dollars of their money away on some guru's
family businesses under the facade of "creating whirled peas." Talk
about being stuck in a rut!
>Let other people be without your interfering.
(How many times have I heard THIS?) Last I checked, this is a public
newsgroup and I'm "interfering" with nothing. As a matter of fact, for
a change I'm actually posting messages that are squarely on-topic,
unlike most of the traffic here. The only thing I'm interfering with
are the assumptions in your head.
willytex
>> I guess it all depends on what you mean by "on the program."
>>
> It is very difficult to be 'on the program' while posting on
> a newsgroup. I thaught you would have worked that out by now!
Ralph - It all depends on what you mean by "on the program."
Legion
What's wrong with "oink" as a mantra? As the mantras are all
invocations of pagan Hindu gods, what's wrong with invoinking Legion?
Much better than this $400 mantra: "shirim-shirim, shirminey, shirim,
shiroo, when I shake hands with Yogi, he always takes a buck or two."
This reminds me of one of the lies of Judy Stein. Since the mantra list
is age based, designed for administration by simple simons, er,
"teachers", it is easy to determine someone's mantra if you know their
age. Somewhile back,in one of my chronically malicious posts, I
referenced Judy's mantra. Rather than ignore the self evidently true
statement, Judy choose to deny it.
So, either even the frauds of TM are fraudulent, or Judy was lying.
Either about her mantra. Or her age.
Are we sure the harridan of amt isn't dead?
Perhaps she is just haunting amt.
Scaary. (I'd use an exclamation point, but billyg has cornered the
market on them. Pails and pails full of it, er, them.)
Legion
Unknown
Contrast with "showing zero (0) serious reverence "
far
>from being "chidish" [sic],
you went to college, huh ?
provides a remarkably effective test of
>whether or not the "tradition" is or isn't just a house of cards
>that'll blow over from a gust of a few
irreverant (sic)
maybe you didn't go to college
words. Clearly
>that's the kind of "tradition" the TM movement provides, since I
>really haven't said a whole lot about the "tradition" at all, and
>you're babbling something about an "attack" and flailing in every
>direction about something I'm doing. Just a few irreverant comments;
>what was it they kept insisting, over and over, about TM not being a
>religion? Sure looks like one when you start babbling like that.
Babble ? Can you read ?
>
>>Move on. When was your first post to this NG ?? You're getting too old
>>to be still stuck in this kind of rut.
>
>This is way too funny. I've been effectively off this newsgroup for
>months if not years, not saying much of anything about TM itself,
>unlike all these people here who are "too old" to be, from time to
>time, obsessively posting multiple messages a day in support of a
>busted used-up movement and/or its products; a movement that can only
>make a laughingstock of itself nowadays with stories of washed-up
>stars throwing millions of dollars of their money away on some guru's
>family businesses under the facade of "creating whirled peas." Talk
>about being stuck in a rut!
OK -- you're not too old to be stuck in this rut ! Relax.
>
>>Let other people be without your interfering.
>
>(How many times have I heard THIS?) Last I checked, this is a public
>newsgroup and I'm "interfering" with nothing. As a matter of fact, for
>a change I'm actually posting messages that are squarely on-topic,
>unlike most of the traffic here. The only thing I'm interfering with
>are the assumptions in your head.
Mike, with the greatest respect, you can't know what's in my head.
You're assuming things. I'm new here. How can you know ?
I'll tell you. I'm a meditator for nearly 29 years. I'm a sidha for
nearly twenty years. Regular. Rarely miss a program. I don't do what I
do to create world peace or to hop. It could only look like that to
someone who's never done the program. I don't do it to gain health
benefits. I don't even do it to gain enlightenment, whatever that is.
I do it because it's a good thing to do. It's improved and continues
to improve my life in incalculable ways. It's enabled me to do things
I could never have dreamt of doing years ago. It also enables me to
grow from experience. And as I grow from experience, I like to think
that I become a better human being.
There's nothing wrong with what I do, and I'm not stupid. Maybe you
think I'm under the spell of some religion, fine, you can think that.
But I'm not. Maybe you think it's all a kind of self hypnosis. Again,
you can think that if you want. But it's nonsense. I do what I do and
it's most decidedly not what you assume it to be. The reason you have
those assumptions is because you don't experience the world like I do.
And maybe you don't want to -- that's fine by me. What I don't
understand is your negative attachment to TM. What I don't understand
is your motivation. Do you want to stop people being fooled ?? Do you
want to show how smart you are ? What ? I don't understand. If you
don't want to say, OK -- but think about it.
Judy Stein
<snip>
> This reminds me of one of the lies of Judy Stein. Since the mantra list
> is age based, designed for administration by simple simons, er,
> "teachers", it is easy to determine someone's mantra if you know their
> age. Somewhile back,in one of my chronically malicious posts, I
> referenced Judy's mantra. Rather than ignore the self evidently true
> statement, Judy choose to deny it.
>
> So, either even the frauds of TM are fraudulent, or Judy was lying.
> Either about her mantra. Or her age.
Not surprisingly, the above are more lies from Legion. Never happened.
Steve Ralph
> In article <4cp330l0fal1b2ir9...@4ax.com>,
> Oliver Lyons <> wrote:
> >> Mike Doughney wrote:
>
> >>>You take it a lot more seriously than I do.
>
> >So your website attacking TM isn't serious ?? Or do you mean it's OK
> >to attack but not defend. That's a dodge. If you didn't take it
> >seriously you wouldn't have a website. Think about it.
>
> There's a website because at the time, way back in the mid-90's, few
> people had the technical facilities to put up a website, while I did,
> so I went ahead and did that. And back then, as a matter of fact, I
> did take the TM movement considerably more seriously than I do
> today. Now the movement looks to me like just a bunch of old farts
> well past middle age looking back at the good old days, and not a
> whole lot else except an occasional rerun of one of their scams,
> schemes or publicity stunts. And yeah, some of them got rather wealthy
> in the meantime,
>and a bunch of hangers-on in this newsgroup are still
> scratching their heads wondering how they and the TM movement ended up
> in what's basically nowhere.
Wrong.
SR
Steve Ralph
"Legion" <Leg...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:25704-403...@storefull-3254.bay.webtv.net...
>
> What's wrong with "oink" as a mantra? As the mantras are all
> invocations of pagan Hindu gods, what's wrong with invoinking Legion?
>
> Much better than this $400 mantra: "shirim-shirim, shirminey, shirim,
> shiroo, when I shake hands with Yogi, he always takes a buck or two."
Doesn't scan properly. Try again!
SR
Steve Ralph
True. I take it to mean doing your program. Not easy to type/read at the
same time!
SR
BillyG.
> invocations of pagan Hindu gods, what's wrong with invoinking Legion?
>
> Much better than this $400 mantra: "shirim-shirim, shirminey, shirim,
> shiroo, when I shake hands with Yogi, he always takes a buck or two."
Works for me!.......You idiot :-) !
willytex
>> I guess it all depends on what you mean by "on the program."
Steve Ralph wrote
> I take it to mean doing your program.
Ralph - Which one?
> Not easy to type/read at the same time!
You're only supposed to be practicing for 20 minutes, twice a day, Steve!
What program are you on?
Pedro
> invocations of pagan Hindu gods, what's wrong with invoinking Legion?
>
> Much better than this $400 mantra: "shirim-shirim, shirminey, shirim,
> shiroo, when I shake hands with Yogi, he always takes a buck or two."
Now whadd'veya done. Next time I see that movie again I will think of
mantras. :-)
Mike Doughney
>>that's the kind of "tradition" the TM movement provides, since I
>>really haven't said a whole lot about the "tradition" at all, and
>>you're babbling something about an "attack" and flailing in every
>>direction about something I'm doing. Just a few irreverant comments;
>>what was it they kept insisting, over and over, about TM not being a
>>religion? Sure looks like one when you start babbling like that.
>
>Babble ? Can you read ?
Yes. You are babbling something about my lack of reverance for aspects
of an alleged "tradition" called "the TM program," which is just
something I don't do, the reverence part that is. And something about
a "childish way to attack" something, when it's far from clear that
I'm attacking much of anything. All of these kinds of objections I am
very used to hearing when dealing with religious persons.
>>>Let other people be without your interfering.
>>
>>(How many times have I heard THIS?) Last I checked, this is a public
>>newsgroup and I'm "interfering" with nothing. As a matter of fact, for
>>a change I'm actually posting messages that are squarely on-topic,
>>unlike most of the traffic here. The only thing I'm interfering with
>>are the assumptions in your head.
>
>Mike, with the greatest respect, you can't know what's in my head.
>You're assuming things. I'm new here. How can you know ?
Well, what you've been saying - objections you're bringing up to my
presence here, the same kind of objections I've heard over and over
for years - are dependent on a bunch of assumptions on your part. One,
that TM and irreverance are incompatible, and that there is something
inherently wrong with what I'm posting on this newsgroup, or with my
mere presence here as a critic. These are clearly assumptions on your
part; otherwise, why would you be replying to me. I generally
associate assumptions with one part of the body, usually but not
always the head.
>I'll tell you. I'm a meditator for nearly 29 years. I'm a sidha for
>nearly twenty years.
<predictable personal testimony omitted, having heard it all before in
numerous contexts>
>There's nothing wrong with what I do, and I'm not stupid.
Never said there was, or that you were. You get to figure that out for
yourself.
>Maybe you
>think I'm under the spell of some religion, fine, you can think that.
The argument that "TM is a religion," often brought forward by other
religions that see TM as competition or fertile ground for recruits,
is not one that I participate in. What I do see, over and over again,
is that many long-term participants in the TM program adopt the same
bad habits that religious people often have when dealing with
skeptics, apostates, critics, and generally, people like me. Namely,
insisting upon secrecy and an unhealthy degree of information control
over aspects of the program, *and* applying that insistence to those
of us who aren't, or ever were, "on the program." Your complaints
about my "irreverance toward [the] tradition" I interpret as attempts
to shame others into complying with that underlying insistence on
information control. Whether you see them as such or not doesn't
matter to me,since that is the function that they serve in practice,
and some people quite naturally often aren't all that aware of the bad
habits they might have picked up from hanging around such
movements. I've seen this dozens of times by now, and perhaps I have
little patience left for it.
>But I'm not. Maybe you think it's all a kind of self hypnosis. Again,
>you can think that if you want. But it's nonsense.
I wouldn't necessarily call it self hypnosis. It is more likely
different things for different people, and different depending on how
long they've been doing it. For a lot of people - and from my own
experience - it eventually becomes an excuse for taking a nap and
thinking you're actually doing something important, for yourself
and/or as a badge of being involved in some world-changing global
movement. Woo-hoo. My guess (this is a GUESS, people) is that MMY
himself and his immediate circle haven't done any part of the program
in years; they don't need to, since they're not the people they're
selling the program to.
>I do what I do and
>it's most decidedly not what you assume it to be. The reason you have
>those assumptions is because you don't experience the world like I do.
Yup, that's definately the case, though I would not say my position is
based only on assumptions. I've had considerable direct personal
experience with the TM movement and others who were more involved than
I, along with exposure to a lot of inconvenient facts that many in the
TM community tend to explain away or avoid. A walk across the MUM
campus and an afternoon in Fairfield also help.
>And maybe you don't want to -- that's fine by me. What I don't
>understand is your negative attachment to TM. What I don't understand
>is your motivation. Do you want to stop people being fooled ?? Do you
>want to show how smart you are ? What ? I don't understand. If you
>don't want to say, OK -- but think about it.
Oooh, there's another one of those bad religious habits -- "but think
about it." As if I haven't spent more than a decade considering the
subject, and lately having spent some time away from it.
In past years I would have been quick to say that it would be
important to me that the general public be informed about TM in a way
which I wasn't and couldn't have been at the time I took up the
program. Having spent some time as a volunteer at the local level, and
with two Maharishi Awards in my collection, I've worked to introduce
people to the program. Having come to a somewhat different
understanding of the TMO, as it's since been called here, I've felt
somewhat of a need to demystify the movement's products to prospective
meditators who I've assumed have always lurked on this newsgroup, and
some concern that under certain circumstances the movement might gain
some kind of a resurgence.
Today, I would assess my interest quite a bit differently. The TM
movement is effectively dead, and it's not coming back. While in
recent years a few new meditators or prospective meditators have
passed through this newsgroup, as far as I can tell there are no more
than a handful of new people entering the movement in the Western
world every year. The only real threats that could be posed by the
movement, if they can even be called threats, were the ongoing efforts
to mix politics, government and the TM program, which are also pretty
much dead. We live in a more cynical time, where the kind of claims
that were historically made by the TM movement for its products are
not taken all that seriously, or are made by thousands of cheaper,
accessible, easier to deal with competitors - and I don't think that's
going to change much in my lifetime. Future developments in India
might be interesting though as the movement attempts to gain status
and legitimacy there in a modernizing culture.
So why am I here? Probably not for reasons much different than anyone
else's here. To get a sense of where things movement wise are going
(slowly downhill.) To see if anything changes. To see if my point of
view is even explainable to other people. To give some people who
might be looking for it a sense of history. No big reason, just a
bunch of little reasons, and to satisfy my own curiosity.
Steve Ralph
Obviously you are not on the program! This is just one part of it. Duh!
SR
Pedro
> I generally
> associate assumptions with one part of the body, usually but not
> always the head.
>
And that from Mr. Assumption himself. Why does Black Pot spring to mind?
willytex
> You're only supposed to be practicing for 20 minutes,
> twice a day, Steve!
Steve Ralph wrote
> Obviously you are not on the program!
Ralph - The program I'm on is TM twice a day, for about twenty
minutes, with regular checking.
> This is just one part of it. Duh!
What is the other part?
Pedro
Send your money to Vlodrop.
willytex
>>> Obviously you are not on the program!
>>>
>> Ralph - The program I'm on is TM twice a day, for
>> about twenty minutes, with regular checking.
>>
>>> This is just one part of it. Duh!
>>
>> What is the other part?
>>
Pedro - That's not part of the TM program - you made that up.
Bob Hopeless
<Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
news:qhe630htpsb4cnrg4...@4ax.com...
> I do it because it's a good thing to do. It's improved and continues
> to improve my life in incalculable ways. It's enabled me to do things
> I could never have dreamt of doing years ago. It also enables me to
> grow from experience. And as I grow from experience, I like to think
> that I become a better human being.
Bear in mind, when you spout testimonials, that the people you're spouting
off to, have all done TM and know exactly what TM does. Bear in mind too
that the problem with personal testimonials is that a lot of people say
their meditation is working for them even when it isn't.
Bob Hopeless
Unknown
<des...@nohoper.com> wrote:
>
><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
>news:qhe630htpsb4cnrg4...@4ax.com...
>> I do it because it's a good thing to do. It's improved and continues
>> to improve my life in incalculable ways. It's enabled me to do things
>> I could never have dreamt of doing years ago. It also enables me to
>> grow from experience. And as I grow from experience, I like to think
>> that I become a better human being.
>
>Bear in mind, when you spout testimonials, that the people you're spouting
>off to, have all done TM and know exactly what TM does.
1 Doughney accused me of babbling -- you accuse me of spouting --
there's nothing unreasonalbe in what I'm saying and you should be
aware that spouting is a pejorative term.
2 You say you know exactly what TM does -- this is you in a previous
post --"Everyone with an ounce of sense knows without question that
Transcendental
Meditation is invalid and produces no results."
I have an ounce of sense, and I say you're wrong !
Bear in mind too
>that the problem with personal testimonials is that a lot of people say
>their meditation is working for them even when it isn't.
How do you know this ? Prove it. Show me where you caught someone
lying. And then show me where I'm lying.
Dream on !
>
>Bob Hopeless
>
>
Pedro
<Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:34:44 -0800, "Bob Hopeless"
> <des...@nohoper.com> wrote:
>
> >
> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> >news:qhe630htpsb4cnrg4...@4ax.com...
> >> I do it because it's a good thing to do. It's improved and continues
> >> to improve my life in incalculable ways. It's enabled me to do things
> >> I could never have dreamt of doing years ago. It also enables me to
> >> grow from experience. And as I grow from experience, I like to think
> >> that I become a better human being.
> >
> >Bear in mind, when you spout testimonials, that the people you're
spouting
> >off to, have all done TM and know exactly what TM does.
>
> 1 Doughney accused me of babbling -- you accuse me of spouting --
> there's nothing unreasonalbe in what I'm saying and you should be
> aware that spouting is a pejorative term.
>
ROTFLOL. Can you say full circle?
> 2 You say you know exactly what TM does -- this is you in a previous
> post --"Everyone with an ounce of sense knows without question that
> Transcendental
> Meditation is invalid and produces no results."
>
> I have an ounce of sense, and I say you're wrong !
Back to the old religious faith level. The roles have reversed and he does
not even see it. He puts up both fists as to strike out....
Pedro
It used to be a joke, but I am sure even you can find their websites with
their bank account #'s for : "direct deposit"
Steve Ralph
"Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote in message
news:WJrZb.2399$0B5....@news01.roc.ny...
Is that truth level 1,2 or 3?
> The roles have reversed and he does
> not even see it.
Actually, you just got stuck in the morror
>He puts up both fists as to strike out....
He called you an idiot. So do most others here.
SR
>
>
>
Steve Ralph
"Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote in message
I guess you spend a lot of time looking for them. Hey folks, PETRUS IS A
SECRET
DONOR!
SR
>
Unknown
Pedro
<Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> You must be getting bored !!
The fact that you bore me should not distract from the facts that I pointed
out to you. :-)
Unknown
>
><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
>news:nfnb30l2tvln1hvvl...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:34:44 -0800, "Bob Hopeless"
>> <des...@nohoper.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
>> >news:qhe630htpsb4cnrg4...@4ax.com...
>> >> I do it because it's a good thing to do. It's improved and continues
>> >> to improve my life in incalculable ways. It's enabled me to do things
>> >> I could never have dreamt of doing years ago. It also enables me to
>> >> grow from experience. And as I grow from experience, I like to think
>> >> that I become a better human being.
>> >
>> >Bear in mind, when you spout testimonials, that the people you're
>spouting
>> >off to, have all done TM and know exactly what TM does.
>>
>> 1 Doughney accused me of babbling -- you accuse me of spouting --
>> there's nothing unreasonalbe in what I'm saying and you should be
>> aware that spouting is a pejorative term.
>>
>
>ROTFLOL. Can you say full circle?
I'm genuinely glad you're having a good laugh as it most be so
difficult dealing with sinners all the time !
>
>
>
>> 2 You say you know exactly what TM does -- this is you in a previous
>> post --"Everyone with an ounce of sense knows without question that
>> Transcendental
>> Meditation is invalid and produces no results."
>>
>> I have an ounce of sense, and I say you're wrong !
>
>
>Back to the old religious faith level. The roles have reversed and he does
>not even see it. He puts up both fists as to strike out....
You've a vivid imagination if you perceive any anger.
I'm not talking about BB here -- it's something else. You call it
religious belief, I call it talking about my everyday experience. I
can talk about going to the toilet and you'd term that religious faith
level. It's not. There isn't anything religious about it. I'm talking
about how and what ....... not why !
Better luck next time :-]
>
>
Pedro
<Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 17:46:30 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
>
> >
> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> >news:nfnb30l2tvln1hvvl...@4ax.com...
> >> On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:34:44 -0800, "Bob Hopeless"
> >> <des...@nohoper.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> >> >news:qhe630htpsb4cnrg4...@4ax.com...
> >> >> I do it because it's a good thing to do. It's improved and continues
> >> >> to improve my life in incalculable ways. It's enabled me to do
things
> >> >> I could never have dreamt of doing years ago. It also enables me to
> >> >> grow from experience. And as I grow from experience, I like to think
> >> >> that I become a better human being.
> >> >
> >> >Bear in mind, when you spout testimonials, that the people you're
> >spouting
> >> >off to, have all done TM and know exactly what TM does.
> >>
> >> 1 Doughney accused me of babbling -- you accuse me of spouting --
> >> there's nothing unreasonalbe in what I'm saying and you should be
> >> aware that spouting is a pejorative term.
> >>
> >
> >ROTFLOL. Can you say full circle?
>
> I'm genuinely glad you're having a good laugh as it most be so
> difficult dealing with sinners all the time !
Nope, I deal with all day long. Do you really think you are going to
become Christ?
> >
> >
> >
> >> 2 You say you know exactly what TM does -- this is you in a previous
> >> post --"Everyone with an ounce of sense knows without question that
> >> Transcendental
> >> Meditation is invalid and produces no results."
> >>
> >> I have an ounce of sense, and I say you're wrong !
> >
> >
> >Back to the old religious faith level. The roles have reversed and he
does
> >not even see it. He puts up both fists as to strike out....
>
> You've a vivid imagination if you perceive any anger.
>
> I'm not talking about BB here -- it's something else. You call it
> religious belief, I call it talking about my everyday experience.
It is faith. But do you know which? That must be why you are so confused.
You can't mix hinduism with theosophy. See if you never get enlightened,
you might come back as an cow and end up in Mickey D's
ROTFLOL
> I
> can talk about going to the toilet and you'd term that religious faith
> level. It's not.
You were not talking about the WC. You were talking about perceived
benefits from TM. Those are part of your religious faith whether you admit
to it or not. That is what Mike was talking about.
> There isn't anything religious about it. I'm talking
> about how and what ....... not why !
>
> Better luck next time :-]
Maybe you will actually learn something sometime.
Love ya.
PS I take back that you are boring, you have actually turned it around (or
was that Mike) and you are quite entertaining now.
Unknown
But it must be so frustrating for you when you have all the answers
and no-one seems interested ? BTW, what church are you in now ? Is the
Elk Grove thing finished or what ?? The website is down -- what
happened ??
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> 2 You say you know exactly what TM does -- this is you in a previous
>> >> post --"Everyone with an ounce of sense knows without question that
>> >> Transcendental
>> >> Meditation is invalid and produces no results."
>> >>
>> >> I have an ounce of sense, and I say you're wrong !
>> >
>> >
>> >Back to the old religious faith level. The roles have reversed and he
>does
>> >not even see it. He puts up both fists as to strike out....
>>
>> You've a vivid imagination if you perceive any anger.
>>
>> I'm not talking about BB here -- it's something else. You call it
>> religious belief, I call it talking about my everyday experience.
>
>It is faith. But do you know which? That must be why you are so confused.
>You can't mix hinduism with theosophy. See if you never get enlightened,
>you might come back as an cow and end up in Mickey D's
>
>ROTFLOL
>
>> I
>> can talk about going to the toilet and you'd term that religious faith
>> level. It's not.
>
>You were not talking about the WC. You were talking about perceived
>benefits from TM. Those are part of your religious faith whether you admit
>to it or not. That is what Mike was talking about.
But if you believe it whether I "admit it or not " I'm kind of at a
disadvantage because it doesn't matter what I say, does it ?
>
>> There isn't anything religious about it. I'm talking
>> about how and what ....... not why !
>>
>> Better luck next time :-]
>
>Maybe you will actually learn something sometime.
>
>Love ya.
In a Christian way I hope ! I wouldn't want any funny stuff, know what
I mean ?
>
>PS I take back that you are boring, you have actually turned it around (or
>was that Mike) and you are quite entertaining now.
I'm chuffed.
>
>
Unknown
>
><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
>news:eeqc30t8hldprl1vp...@4ax.com...
>> You must be getting bored !!
>
>The fact that you bore me should not distract from the facts that I pointed
>out to you. :-)
I think you've been living in the US long enough now to understand
sociolinguistic competence.
Pedro
<Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:56:09 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
>
> >
> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> >news:eeqc30t8hldprl1vp...@4ax.com...
> >> You must be getting bored !!
> >
> >The fact that you bore me should not distract from the facts that I
pointed
> >out to you. :-)
>
> I think you've been living in the US long enough now to understand
> sociolinguistic competence.
No I am not that smart, but I am smart enought to tell when people are
avoiding the subject. And then you become boring again.
Pedro
<Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 21:18:50 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
>
> >
> >Nope, I deal with all day long. Do you really think you are going to
> >become Christ?
>
>
> But it must be so frustrating for you when you have all the answers
> and no-one seems interested ?
Au contraire.
> BTW, what church are you in now ? Is the
> Elk Grove thing finished or what ?? The website is down -- what
> happened ??
Boy you must have a lot of time on your hand to go down the rabbit trails
don't you? Are you unemployed?
>
> But if you believe it whether I "admit it or not " I'm kind of at a
> disadvantage because it doesn't matter what I say, does it ?
Does not matter what you are willing to admit. What matters is what
society says about your beliefs.
Unknown
>
><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
>news:u2vc30lt1bfcprcgk...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 21:18:50 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Nope, I deal with all day long. Do you really think you are going to
>> >become Christ?
>>
>>
>> But it must be so frustrating for you when you have all the answers
>> and no-one seems interested ?
>
>Au contraire.
Oh good -- I'm happy you're happy.
>
>> BTW, what church are you in now ? Is the
>> Elk Grove thing finished or what ?? The website is down -- what
>> happened ??
>
>Boy you must have a lot of time on your hand to go down the rabbit trails
>don't you? Are you unemployed?
Au contraire. But I am curious about what has happened or is happening
with the Elk Grove thing. It must be bad or you would have answered
the question -- did it fall apart ? Is it still going ?
Unknown
>
><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
>news:mcvc30dqeu7ilb02n...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:56:09 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
>> >news:eeqc30t8hldprl1vp...@4ax.com...
>> >> You must be getting bored !!
>> >
>> >The fact that you bore me should not distract from the facts that I
>pointed
>> >out to you. :-)
>>
>> I think you've been living in the US long enough now to understand
>> sociolinguistic competence.
>
>No I am not that smart, but I am smart enought to tell when people are
>avoiding the subject. And then you become boring again.
>
>
Just so you know, sociolinguistic competence has nothing to do with
being smart -- it's to do with how a person whose first language is
not English integrates into an English speaking culture, and to use
language with the appropriate social meaning for the communication
situation.
When I said you must be bored, I didn't mean you must be bored. I
meant I'm surprised you didn't have something better to do.
BTW Do you read the Bible in English or in your native language ? I
assume it's Dutch though I still get a vague Germanic feel from the
way you write. Maybe you had German teachers, or maybe your parents ?
Or maybe you were raised near the German border ?? I work in the area
of language acquisition, so this kind of stuff interests me. If you
don't want to answer, that's fine -- you're entitled to your privacy
and I won't rate it as a dodge.
Mike Doughney
Oliver Lyons wrote:
>"Pedro" wrote:
>>Oliver Lyons wrote:
>>
>>> BTW, what church are you in now ? Is the
>>> Elk Grove thing finished or what ?? The website is down -- what
>>> happened ??
>>
>>Boy you must have a lot of time on your hand to go down the rabbit trails
>>don't you? Are you unemployed?
>
>Au contraire. But I am curious about what has happened or is happening
>with the Elk Grove thing. It must be bad or you would have answered
>the question -- did it fall apart ? Is it still going ?
Presumably you're referring to the anonymous missionelkgrove.org,
which went away some time ago. The conventional wisdom/assumption by
some who post here is that he goes to Radiant Life Church in
Sacramento. http://www.radiantlifechurch.org/. Looks like this site
has been stripped of most information about the church recently.
http://web.archive.org/web/20030211153843/http://radiantlifechurch.org
has more details.
Petrus has as far as I know never ever disclosed his church affliation
here, so good luck asking. He certainly helps reinforce the image of
today's Christian as a nameless, faceless, placeless weasel, which is
what some of their Pentecostal leaders have been teaching
lately. Which is to say it's not just his personal preference but an
attempt at organized anonymity.
Unknown
>>Au contraire. But I am curious about what has happened or is happening
>>with the Elk Grove thing. It must be bad or you would have answered
>>the question -- did it fall apart ? Is it still going ?
>
>Presumably you're referring to the anonymous missionelkgrove.org,
>which went away some time ago. The conventional wisdom/assumption by
>some who post here is that he goes to Radiant Life Church in
>Sacramento. http://www.radiantlifechurch.org/. Looks like this site
>has been stripped of most information about the church recently.
>http://web.archive.org/web/20030211153843/http://radiantlifechurch.org
>has more details.
>
>Petrus has as far as I know never ever disclosed his church affliation
>here, so good luck asking. He certainly helps reinforce the image of
>today's Christian as a nameless, faceless, placeless weasel, which is
>what some of their Pentecostal leaders have been teaching
>lately. Which is to say it's not just his personal preference but an
>attempt at organized anonymity.
Thanks for the info -- I'm in Europe and we don't have the same kind
of fundamentalism here. It does exist, but it's not at all strong, so
the aggressive fundamentalism that characterises some NG's is a
novelty to me.
I'm not sure about Petrus being part of a conspiracy -- he seems to me
(and I'm fairly new at this) to be a troll who has nested in this NG
for some karmic reason and refuses to be dislodged. Like a cuckoo
stealing a nest. Eventually, he's tolerated, and even liked -- the
black sheep of the family.
willytex
> Do you read the Bible in English or in your native language?
Mr. Lyons - Apparently, Pedro refers to the Catholic Bible in English
quite often. He also seems to make up his own interpretations based on
his own personal ideology. However, he's not too fond of the King
James Version of the Bible. He's made some pretensions about being
able to read the Greek New Testament and some Hebrew.
But Pedro's linguistic claims pale in comparison to Mr. Perino, who
claims to be able to quote the Hindu scriptures from Sanskrit sources!
Fact is, there's only one person around here that is actually a
religious studies student taking courses at a major university, and
they drove her off about three months ago! Go figure.
Oliver Lyons <> wrote in message news:<2mee30h1856ablkch...@4ax.com>...
Bob Hopeless
<Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:34:44 -0800, "Bob Hopeless"
> <des...@nohoper.com> wrote:
>
> >
> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> >news:qhe630htpsb4cnrg4...@4ax.com...
> >> I do it because it's a good thing to do. It's improved and continues
> >> to improve my life in incalculable ways. It's enabled me to do things
> >> I could never have dreamt of doing years ago. It also enables me to
> >> grow from experience. And as I grow from experience, I like to think
> >> that I become a better human being.
> >
> >Bear in mind, when you spout testimonials, that the people you're
spouting
> >off to, have all done TM and know exactly what TM does.
>
> 1 Doughney accused me of babbling -- you accuse me of spouting --
> there's nothing unreasonalbe in what I'm saying and you should be
> aware that spouting is a pejorative term.
I am aware the term is pejorative. That's why I chose it.
>
> 2 You say you know exactly what TM does -- this is you in a previous
> post --"Everyone with an ounce of sense knows without question that
> Transcendental
> Meditation is invalid and produces no results."
>
> I have an ounce of sense, and I say you're wrong !
If you have an ounce of sense you're certainly not using it.
>
> Bear in mind too
> >that the problem with personal testimonials is that a lot of people say
> >their meditation is working for them even when it isn't.
>
> How do you know this ? Prove it.
It's interesting that you choose to challenge my argument -- which,
incidentally, simply points out the sheep like behavior of people in groups
and is well known -- by a demand for proof. I would suggest that this is an
unwise path to pursue. My argument, don't forget, is in response to your
unproven and unprovable testimonial about the incalculable ways that TM
improved and continues to improve your life. So if some necessity of proof
falls on me then it must first and foremost fall on you.
There is the problem TMers face when asked how TM benefits them, of coming
up with something that sounds really glowing and at the same time isn't a
complete lie. Words like 'incalculable' are just the ticket because
certainly the benefits the TMer enjoys are 'incalculable'. I think it's fair
to say that all TMers have doubts about TM. This is natural since what MMY
claims for TM and what the TMer actually experiences are very different. It
eventually comes down to who you're going to believe: MMY or yourself.
Bob Hopeless
Pedro
<Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:21:51 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
>
> -- I'm happy you're happy.
Well we can all be happy, happy, happy....
> >
> >> BTW, what church are you in now ? Is the
> >> Elk Grove thing finished or what ?? The website is down -- what
> >> happened ??
> >
> >Boy you must have a lot of time on your hand to go down the rabbit trails
> >don't you? Are you unemployed?
>
> Au contraire. But I am curious about what has happened or is happening
> with the Elk Grove thing. It must be bad or you would have answered
> the question -- did it fall apart ? Is it still going ?
What in the world are you talking about? Please make some sense.
Pedro
<Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:17:39 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
>
> >
> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> >news:mcvc30dqeu7ilb02n...@4ax.com...
> >> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:56:09 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> >> >news:eeqc30t8hldprl1vp...@4ax.com...
> >> >> You must be getting bored !!
> >> >
> >> >The fact that you bore me should not distract from the facts that I
> >pointed
> >> >out to you. :-)
These were his lack of understand of logic. A Mike showed him.
> >>
> >> I think you've been living in the US long enough now to understand
> >> sociolinguistic competence.
> >
> >No I am not that smart, but I am smart enought to tell when people are
> >avoiding the subject. And then you become boring again.
> >
> >
> Just so you know, sociolinguistic competence has nothing to do with
> being smart
I did not say that, read it again.
> -- it's to do with how a person whose first language is
> not English integrates into an English speaking culture, and to use
> language with the appropriate social meaning for the communication
> situation.
>
> When I said you must be bored, I didn't mean you must be bored.
Well some people say what they mean and mean what they say. I guess you are
not one of them.
> BTW Do you read the Bible in English or in your native language ?
Right now in Spanish.
Unknown
>
><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
>news:heae305cgtprdlne0...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:21:51 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
>>
>> -- I'm happy you're happy.
>
>Well we can all be happy, happy, happy....
Glad to hear it.
>
>> >
>> >> BTW, what church are you in now ? Is the
>> >> Elk Grove thing finished or what ?? The website is down -- what
>> >> happened ??
>> >
>> >Boy you must have a lot of time on your hand to go down the rabbit trails
>> >don't you? Are you unemployed?
>>
>> Au contraire. But I am curious about what has happened or is happening
>> with the Elk Grove thing. It must be bad or you would have answered
>> the question -- did it fall apart ? Is it still going ?
>
>
>What in the world are you talking about? Please make some sense.
>
Petrus : stop playing around. You know what I'm talking about. Google
yourself and Elk Grove.
"From: Back by popular demand (Nos...@Nono.Nothere)
Subject: Re: LIES About TM: a research project
Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental
Date: 2003-07-10 17:14:38 PST
JRM : Petrus didn't answer the question about the story of his Radiant
Life
Church located in an old bowling alley.
Petrus : Actually, he did more than twice. Another hint I am a member
of a church in
Elk Grove."
If you don't want to answer just say so.
Unknown
<des...@nohoper.com> wrote:
Check out http://www.tm.org/ for research -- you know this. When
someone gives an account of personal experiemce it is of course
personal and not scientific. That's why I gave it. Wake up !
I suggest you take some lessons in trolling from Petrus who is
actually quite good at it.
Unknown
>
><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
>news:2mee30h1856ablkch...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:17:39 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
>> >news:mcvc30dqeu7ilb02n...@4ax.com...
>> >> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:56:09 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
>> >> >news:eeqc30t8hldprl1vp...@4ax.com...
>> >> >> You must be getting bored !!
>> >> >
>> >> >The fact that you bore me should not distract from the facts that I
>> >pointed
>> >> >out to you. :-)
>
>These were his lack of understand of logic. A Mike showed him.
I didn't answer Mike's post. There's no point. Mike is one of those
people who is against things -- he defines himself through negative
association. Discussing matters with him just feeds the negativity. To
quote Willytex : Don't feed it !
I do recall Mike waxing you on more than one occasion. He hates
fundies more than TMer's. Be careful !
>
>> >>
>> >> I think you've been living in the US long enough now to understand
>> >> sociolinguistic competence.
>> >
>> >No I am not that smart, but I am smart enought to tell when people are
>> >avoiding the subject. And then you become boring again.
>> >
>> >
>> Just so you know, sociolinguistic competence has nothing to do with
>> being smart
>
>I did not say that, read it again.
O : I think you've been living in the US long enough now to
understand
sociolinguistic competence.
P : No I am not that smart,
??????
>
>> -- it's to do with how a person whose first language is
>> not English integrates into an English speaking culture, and to use
>> language with the appropriate social meaning for the communication
>> situation.
>>
>> When I said you must be bored, I didn't mean you must be bored.
>
>Well some people say what they mean and mean what they say. I guess you are
>not one of them.
You need to understand the intention behind the statement.
>> BTW Do you read the Bible in English or in your native language ?
>
>Right now in Spanish.
Muy Bueno, Pedrito ! Are you moving to Mexico ?
>
Mike Doughney
Oliver Lyons <> wrote:
>
>Thanks for the info -- I'm in Europe and we don't have the same kind
>of fundamentalism here. It does exist, but it's not at all strong, so
>the aggressive fundamentalism that characterises some NG's is a
>novelty to me.
>
"Conspiracy" is the wrong word. The fact is that you can find people
who are widely scattered across the U.S. who do exactly the same
peculiar things like this. I've dealt a number of times with this
phenomenon of aggressive Christians, particularly online, who won't
under any circumstances disclose what church they're going to; this
can also be seen sometimes in media reporting here on the actions of
individual Christians. It is those churches in which these habits are
taught, and these churches have their own, not particularly visible,
communication network among their leadership. There is also a huge
Christian media infrastructure here that also plays a role. Because of
the communications, these habits, along with doctrine and other
methods, become very similar across a huge body of people.
He won't say what church he goes to because the model he uses for
himself is as an independent missionary unconnected to anyone -
remember, anything other than a missionary Christian is an impostor to
him. This is to perpetuate the fiction that, when he approaches a
prospect, the dynamic is just one person to one person, when it's
not. It's actually an enormous institution to one person, with Petrus
as self-appointed representative of that institution; what he does as
a "missionary" would be pointless without the institution that's
trained him to do these things exactly this way.
>-- he seems to me
>(and I'm fairly new at this) to be a troll who has nested in this NG
>for some karmic reason and refuses to be dislodged. Like a cuckoo
>stealing a nest. Eventually, he's tolerated, and even liked -- the
>black sheep of the family.
He's not a troll because trolls are pointless. He's a missionary, and
missionaries of this flavor clearly have a point. It doesn't matter if
it seems that he doesn't succeed, because eventually they succeed with
enough people that their churches have people in them.
Mike Doughney
Oliver Lyons <> wrote:
>I didn't answer Mike's post. There's no point. Mike is one of those
>people who is against things -- he defines himself through negative
>association. Discussing matters with him just feeds the negativity. To
>quote Willytex : Don't feed it !
Well, isn't this cute. How many times have I heard this same thing?
You also have this bad habit, common around here, of pontificating
about the motivations of those who simply disagree with you, without
presenting any evidence at all that your conclusions have anything to
do with the people involved. You just stamp your feet, close your
eyes, put your fingers in your ears and insist over and over that it
must be so.
It's a learned habit that seems to correlate, for some, with
involvement with the TM program. It matches up with the jargon and
bogus explanations for how the world works that get taught in the
movement, using words like "negativity."
As a matter of fact, my self-definition has a lot to do with putting
forward the idea that there is life outside these movements that
people sometimes have a problem walking away from. Just a mere
suggestion that a perfectly happy life is possible outside the TM
movement is consistently met with responses like yours.
> I do recall Mike waxing you on more than one occasion. He hates
>fundies more than TMer's. Be careful !
As with the TM movement, so it is with the stuff that people often
call "religious fundamentalism." You and Petrus have a lot in common,
which I'm sure you'll eventually discover: similarities in language,
similar phobias, and above all, the same way of dealing with those who
disagree with you and who aren't afraid to come out in public and say
so. The reflex of falsely attributing "hate" as the motivation of
people like me as part of your coping mechanism says a lot about the
landscape inside your mind, which again has little to do with me.
Perhaps if you lived in a country where "fundies" (and their
neocon/atheist running dogs) were doing their best to take over the
government and a broad swath of institutions to the detriment of
pretty much everyone else, maybe you'd have a little more clue why my
posts aren't just full of the bogus sweetness and light that you would
prefer to see.
Unknown
>In article <16fh30dbjs8sn7sa1...@4ax.com>,
>Oliver Lyons <> wrote:
>
>>I didn't answer Mike's post. There's no point. Mike is one of those
>>people who is against things -- he defines himself through negative
>>association. Discussing matters with him just feeds the negativity. To
>>quote Willytex : Don't feed it !
>
>Well, isn't this cute. How many times have I heard this same thing?
Mike
Given your previous explanations as to why you still post here I'm
surprised you're still around. See what you wrote below here :
>
>You also have this bad habit, common around here, of pontificating
>about the motivations of those who simply disagree with you, without
>presenting any evidence at all that your conclusions have anything to
>do with the people involved. You just stamp your feet, close your
>eyes, put your fingers in your ears and insist over and over that it
>must be so.
That's what you're doing with me. You don't know me. Have we met ?
Yet you're making statements about my life and my motivations because
I don't agree with you.
>
>It's a learned habit that seems to correlate, for some, with
>involvement with the TM program. It matches up with the jargon and
>bogus explanations for how the world works that get taught in the
>movement, using words like "negativity."
What you've written above is bogus -- you don't know what involvement,
if any, I have with the TMO. "Negativity" is used in many areas of
life, not just the TMO. "Negative association" comes from psychology
-- I visited your website and saw that you're against things. You're
not proposing anything. You're knocking.
>
>As a matter of fact, my self-definition has a lot to do with putting
>forward the idea that there is life outside these movements that
>people sometimes have a problem walking away from. Just a mere
>suggestion that a perfectly happy life is possible outside the TM
>movement is consistently met with responses like yours.
Of course it's possible -- who said it's not ? I never said that, I
don't recall MMY saying that, I don't recall anyone else posting here
saying that. Where's the evidence ? If I go to your website I don't
see any links to sites to help people who might be unhappy. I spoke
about my own experience -- you seem to think I'm lying. I'm not. I'm
just stating what I feel to be true. I'm not looking to convert
anyone. You are.
>
>> I do recall Mike waxing you on more than one occasion. He hates
>>fundies more than TMer's. Be careful !
>
>As with the TM movement, so it is with the stuff that people often
>call "religious fundamentalism." You and Petrus have a lot in common,
>which I'm sure you'll eventually discover: similarities in language,
>similar phobias, and above all, the same way of dealing with those who
>disagree with you and who aren't afraid to come out in public and say
>so. The reflex of falsely attributing "hate" as the motivation of
>people like me as part of your coping mechanism says a lot about the
>landscape inside your mind, which again has little to do with me.
OK -- maybe hate is too strong a word but I was speaking to Petrus,
not to you. Regarding similarities in phobias and languages, I really
can't agree. You don't know what's going to happen with Petrus and
myself. You're guessing. You're assuming I'm some kind of TM
fundamentalist. I'm not.
Bear in mind also that I'm disagreeing with you in public -- and I
find that you're assuming a lot about my mental landscape. At the same
time you say that it's wrong for me to do that. Do you think that's
fair ?
>
>Perhaps if you lived in a country where "fundies" (and their
>neocon/atheist running dogs) were doing their best to take over the
>government and a broad swath of institutions to the detriment of
>pretty much everyone else, maybe you'd have a little more clue why my
>posts aren't just full of the bogus sweetness and light that you would
>prefer to see.
The world as sweetness and light ?? You're putting words in my mouth
again.
Just as you see the "fundies" (and their
neocon/atheist running dogs) as your enemy, they see people like you
as their enemy. None of this is new. Every society has competing,
opposing forces. You're not the first to see this. Transcending ( if I
can use that word) divisions is how society progresses. T S Eliot has
a nice line : " united by what divides us". I think that the only way
in which enmity can be resolved is by the recognition of common
humanity. Dealing with Petrus is not easy, delaing with you is not
easy, but we are humans, and we share the same needs and fears.
Everyone is trying to be happy. Every action that each person performs
is an attempt to find happiness. That's the context in which I view
these things.
Unknown
I take your points, Mike. Thanks.
willytex
Mike - So, I was correct - Petrus is attempting to recruit for his own
Jesus cult. Therefore everything he has said is suspect.
Mike Doughney wrote
> "Conspiracy" is the wrong word. The fact is that you can find people
> who are widely scattered across the U.S. who do exactly the same
> peculiar things like this. I've dealt a number of times with this
> phenomenon of aggressive Christians, particularly online, who won't
> under any circumstances disclose what church they're going to; this
> can also be seen sometimes in media reporting here on the actions of
> individual Christians. It is those churches in which these habits are
> taught, and these churches have their own, not particularly visible,
> communication network among their leadership. There is also a huge
> Christian media infrastructure here that also plays a role. Because of
> the communications, these habits, along with doctrine and other
> methods, become very similar across a huge body of people.
>
> He won't say what church he goes to because the model he uses for
> himself is as an independent missionary unconnected to anyone -
> remember, anything other than a missionary Christian is an impostor to
> him. This is to perpetuate the fiction that, when he approaches a
> prospect, the dynamic is just one person to one person, when it's
> not. It's actually an enormous institution to one person, with Petrus
> as self-appointed representative of that institution; what he does as
> a "missionary" would be pointless without the institution that's
> trained him to do these things exactly this way.
>
Pedro
<Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
For any sleuth out there, I gave you two hints up there. All the info you
need to figure out if I attend Radiant Life.
Pedro
<Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 18:20:54 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
>
> >
> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> >news:2mee30h1856ablkch...@4ax.com...
> >> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:17:39 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> >> >news:mcvc30dqeu7ilb02n...@4ax.com...
> >> >> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:56:09 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere>
wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> >> >> >news:eeqc30t8hldprl1vp...@4ax.com...
> >> >> >> You must be getting bored !!
> >> >> >
> >> >> >The fact that you bore me should not distract from the facts that I
> >> >pointed
> >> >> >out to you. :-)
> >
> >These were his lack of understand of logic. A Mike showed him.
>
> I didn't answer Mike's post. There's no point. Mike is one of those
> people who is against things
Can you figure out what logical fallacy you used there?
<snip>
> >>
> >> When I said you must be bored, I didn't mean you must be bored.
> >
> >Well some people say what they mean and mean what they say. I guess you
are
> >not one of them.
>
> You need to understand the intention behind the statement.
Forgive me for not being able to read you mind. Forgive me for not assuming
things as you like to do.
Pedro
"Mike Doughney" <mi...@mtd.com> wrote in message
news:c1bs3...@enews4.newsguy.com...
> In article <9khe30t2dcdk96cnq...@4ax.com>,
> Oliver Lyons <> wrote:
> >
> >Thanks for the info -- I'm in Europe and we don't have the same kind
> >of fundamentalism here. It does exist, but it's not at all strong, so
> >the aggressive fundamentalism that characterises some NG's is a
> >novelty to me.
> >
> >I'm not sure about Petrus being part of a conspiracy ...
>
> "Conspiracy" is the wrong word. The fact is that you can find people
> who are widely scattered across the U.S. who do exactly the same
> peculiar things like this. I've dealt a number of times with this
> phenomenon of aggressive Christians,
Now Mike, you consider me agressive? ROTFLOL And LOL .
> particularly online, who won't
> under any circumstances disclose what church they're going to
What in the world does that have to do with the discussion at hand? You
know what fallacy in logic you committed there don't you? If you lik eto
know what I believe, why don't you ask? As you can tell I have never been
hiding or shy about my beliefs.
> ; this
> can also be seen sometimes in media reporting here on the actions of
> individual Christians. It is those churches in which these habits are
> taught, and these churches have their own, not particularly visible,
> communication network among their leadership. There is also a huge
> Christian media infrastructure here that also plays a role. Because of
> the communications, these habits, along with doctrine and other
> methods, become very similar across a huge body of people.
Are you afraid of the dark also?
>
> He won't say what church he goes to because the model he uses for
> himself is as an independent missionary
Yes pretty much so. As I am on the record here already, I believe that even
in the Protestant churches, there are many that teach false gospels. Narrow
is the road... and few find it.
> unconnected to anyone -
> remember, anything other than a missionary Christian is an impostor to
> him.
Actually that is not my own, I think that was the prince of preachers' You
like the quote then.
> This is to perpetuate the fiction that, when he approaches a
> prospect, the dynamic is just one person to one person, when it's
> not.
No absolutely not it is Holy Spirit to one person, I'm jus the messanger...
> It's actually an enormous institution to one person,
Yeah you do get it. That enormous institution, is the Kingdom of God.
> with Petrus
> as self-appointed representative of that institution;
Nope not self-appointed, Christ appointed. I am an ambassador for Christ.
Are you sure you are studying the Christian church? You are awfully
mistaken on some of the most basic points of Christianity.
> what he does as
> a "missionary" would be pointless without the institution that's
> trained him to do these things exactly this way.
Say what? That would be obvious to anyone. With out the Kingdom of God
behind the efforts, it would be pointless. What *are* you trying to say?
>
> >-- he seems to me
> >(and I'm fairly new at this) to be a troll who has nested in this NG
> >for some karmic reason and refuses to be dislodged. Like a cuckoo
> >stealing a nest. Eventually, he's tolerated, and even liked -- the
> >black sheep of the family.
>
> He's not a troll because trolls are pointless.
Well, thank you.
> He's a missionary, and
> missionaries of this flavor clearly have a point.
Thank you. That may be the nicest thing you have ever said to me.
> It doesn't matter if
> it seems that he doesn't succeed,
See that is where you are way off base. I have succeeded every time I
present the gospel. God is responsible for the conversion. You sure you've
studied up on this stuff?
Unknown
You also were involced with missionelkgrove.org and
unstress4less.org -- I was curious as to what happened to the
Missionelkgrove.org as it's gone -- and I'm wondering what happened.
People moved on to better things ? Faction fight ? You seem to like
games so give a hint.
>
Unknown
>> >
>> >These were his lack of understand of logic. A Mike showed him.
>>
>> I didn't answer Mike's post. There's no point. Mike is one of those
>> people who is against things
>
>Can you figure out what logical fallacy you used there?
Yes, and you can see what's happened since -- I get the feeling that
maybe Mikey isn't so fond on you ! And there's you sending all those
people to his website ! I thought you were on some kind of commission.
>
>
><snip>
>> >>
>> >> When I said you must be bored, I didn't mean you must be bored.
>> >
>> >Well some people say what they mean and mean what they say. I guess you
>are
>> >not one of them.
>>
>> You need to understand the intention behind the statement.
>
>Forgive me for not being able to read you mind. Forgive me for not assuming
>things as you like to do.
Where did you study sarcasm ? Or were you born that way ?
>
Pedro
<Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> On 23 Feb 2004 06:07:20 GMT, mi...@mtd.com (Mike Doughney) wrote:
>
> >In article <16fh30dbjs8sn7sa1...@4ax.com>,
> >Oliver Lyons <> wrote:
> >
> >>I didn't answer Mike's post. There's no point. Mike is one of those
> >>people who is against things -- he defines himself through negative
> >>association. Discussing matters with him just feeds the negativity. To
> >>quote Willytex : Don't feed it !
> >
> >Well, isn't this cute. How many times have I heard this same thing?
>
> Mike
>
> Given your previous explanations as to why you still post here I'm
> surprised you're still around. See what you wrote below here :
> >
> >You also have this bad habit, common around here, of pontificating
> >about the motivations of those who simply disagree with you, without
> >presenting any evidence at all that your conclusions have anything to
> >do with the people involved. You just stamp your feet, close your
> >eyes, put your fingers in your ears and insist over and over that it
> >must be so.
>
> That's what you're doing with me. You don't know me. Have we met ?
> Yet you're making statements about my life and my motivations because
> I don't agree with you.
Falls on deaf ears my friend. His mind has the consistancy of concrete,
thoroughly mixed up and permanently set. It does not matter that you don't
fit his mold, he will shuff you into it regardless. And BTW don't complain
about him making assumptions, you did the same with me.
> >
> >It's a learned habit that seems to correlate, for some, with
> >involvement with the TM program. It matches up with the jargon and
> >bogus explanations for how the world works that get taught in the
> >movement, using words like "negativity."
>
> What you've written above is bogus -- you don't know what involvement,
> if any, I have with the TMO.
Eh Ol. He did not mention the TM0. He talked about your involment wuith TM
and you are already on the record to be a bun hopper for peace.
> "Negativity" is used in many areas of
> life, not just the TMO. "Negative association" comes from psychology
You can not deny that it is impressed on the TM mindset. Mike is on the
money with that.
> >> I do recall Mike waxing you on more than one occasion. He hates
> >>fundies more than TMer's. Be careful !
> >
> >As with the TM movement, so it is with the stuff that people often
> >call "religious fundamentalism." You and Petrus have a lot in common,
> >which I'm sure you'll eventually discover: similarities in language,
> >similar phobias, and above all, the same way of dealing with those who
> >disagree with you and who aren't afraid to come out in public and say
> >so. The reflex of falsely attributing "hate" as the motivation of
> >people like me as part of your coping mechanism says a lot about the
> >landscape inside your mind, which again has little to do with me.
>
> OK -- maybe hate is too strong a word but I was speaking to Petrus,
> not to you.
That is no excuse. Where's the beef? Where the logic. Who cares who you
were talking to. You are on an open forum. Stand up for your convictions
or apologize.
> Regarding similarities in phobias and languages, I really
> can't agree. You don't know what's going to happen with Petrus and
> myself. You're guessing. You're assuming I'm some kind of TM
> fundamentalist. I'm not.
You bounce on your bottom because you were sold a bill of laden for
enlightenment and world peace, what more do we need to know about you?
>
> Bear in mind also that I'm disagreeing with you in public -- and I
> find that you're assuming a lot about my mental landscape.
Talk about ye olde pot.
Pedro
<Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
>
> >> >
> >> >These were his lack of understand of logic. A Mike showed him.
> >>
> >> I didn't answer Mike's post. There's no point. Mike is one of those
> >> people who is against things
> >
> >Can you figure out what logical fallacy you used there?
>
> Yes, and you can see what's happened since -- I get the feeling that
> maybe Mikey isn't so fond on you !
What else is new? I point out his logical fallacies the same I do yours.
> And there's you sending all those
> people to his website ! I thought you were on some kind of commission.
You have no idea...
> >
> >
> ><snip>
> >> >>
> >> >> When I said you must be bored, I didn't mean you must be bored.
> >> >
> >> >Well some people say what they mean and mean what they say. I guess
you
> >are
> >> >not one of them.
> >>
> >> You need to understand the intention behind the statement.
> >
> >Forgive me for not being able to read you mind. Forgive me for not
assuming
> >things as you like to do.
>
> Where did you study sarcasm ? Or were you born that way ?
That is the best you can do? Come on, give it another shot.
> >
>
Pedro
<Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:37:32 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
>
> >
> ><Oliver Lyons> wrote in message
> >news:m7eh30lcbmnv63s2a...@4ax.com...
> >> On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 18:01:13 GMT, "Pedro" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote:
> >>> >
> >> >What in the world are you talking about? Please make some sense.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Petrus : stop playing around. You know what I'm talking about. Google
> >> yourself and Elk Grove.
> >>
> >> "From: Back by popular demand (Nos...@Nono.Nothere)
> >> Subject: Re: LIES About TM: a research project
> >> Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental
> >> Date: 2003-07-10 17:14:38 PST
> >>
> >> JRM : Petrus didn't answer the question about the story of his Radiant
> >> Life
> >> Church located in an old bowling alley.
> >>
> >> Petrus : Actually, he did more than twice. Another hint I am a member
> >> of a church in
> >> Elk Grove."
> >>
> >>
> >> If you don't want to answer just say so.
> >
> >For any sleuth out there, I gave you two hints up there. All the info
you
> >need to figure out if I attend Radiant Life
>
> You also were involced with missionelkgrove.org and
> unstress4less.org --
Do you accept everything willy tells you?
> I was curious as to what happened to the
> Missionelkgrove.org as it's gone -- and I'm wondering what happened.
> People moved on to better things ? Faction fight ? You seem to like
> games so give a hint.
You haven't figured out the first one yet. Why should I burden you even
more?
Unknown
>> Oliver Lyons <> wrote:
>> >
>> >Thanks for the info -- I'm in Europe and we don't have the same kind
>> >of fundamentalism here. It does exist, but it's not at all strong, so
>> >the aggressive fundamentalism that characterises some NG's is a
>> >novelty to me.
>> >
>> >I'm not sure about Petrus being part of a conspiracy ...
See how I defended you -- and what thanks do I get :-]
>>
>> "Conspiracy" is the wrong word. The fact is that you can find people
>> who are widely scattered across the U.S. who do exactly the same
>> peculiar things like this. I've dealt a number of times with this
>> phenomenon of aggressive Christians,
>
>Now Mike, you consider me agressive? ROTFLOL And LOL .
>
>
>> particularly online, who won't
>> under any circumstances disclose what church they're going to
>
>What in the world does that have to do with the discussion at hand? You
>know what fallacy in logic you committed there don't you? If you lik eto
>know what I believe, why don't you ask? As you can tell I have never been
>hiding or shy about my beliefs.
What church are you a member of ? Simple question -- no more games.
>> ; this
>> can also be seen sometimes in media reporting here on the actions of
>> individual Christians. It is those churches in which these habits are
>> taught, and these churches have their own, not particularly visible,
>> communication network among their leadership. There is also a huge
>> Christian media infrastructure here that also plays a role. Because of
>> the communications, these habits, along with doctrine and other
>> methods, become very similar across a huge body of people.
>
>Are you afraid of the dark also?
You
know what fallacy in logic you committed there don't you?
>
>>
>> He won't say what church he goes to because the model he uses for
>> himself is as an independent missionary
>
>Yes pretty much so. As I am on the record here already, I believe that even
>in the Protestant churches, there are many that teach false gospels. Narrow
>is the road... and few find it.
Cliche.
>
>
>> unconnected to anyone -
>> remember, anything other than a missionary Christian is an impostor to
>> him.
>
>
>No absolutely not it is Holy Spirit to one person, I'm jus the messanger...
>
>> It's actually an enormous institution to one person,
>
>Yeah you do get it. That enormous institution, is the Kingdom of God.
>
>
>> with Petrus
>> as self-appointed representative of that institution;
>
>Nope not self-appointed, Christ appointed. I am an ambassador for Christ.
He appointed you in person or did you imagine it ?
>
>Are you sure you are studying the Christian church? You are awfully
>mistaken on some of the most basic points of Christianity.
>
>
>> what he does as
>> a "missionary" would be pointless without the institution that's
>> trained him to do these things exactly this way.
>
>Say what? That would be obvious to anyone. With out the Kingdom of God
>behind the efforts, it would be pointless. What *are* you trying to say?
>
>>
>> >-- he seems to me
>> >(and I'm fairly new at this) to be a troll who has nested in this NG
>> >for some karmic reason and refuses to be dislodged. Like a cuckoo
>> >stealing a nest. Eventually, he's tolerated, and even liked -- the
>> >black sheep of the family.
>>
>> He's not a troll because trolls are pointless.
>
>Well, thank you.
>
>> He's a missionary, and
>> missionaries of this flavor clearly have a point.
>
>Thank you. That may be the nicest thing you have ever said to me.
>
>> It doesn't matter if
>> it seems that he doesn't succeed,
>
>See that is where you are way off base. I have succeeded every time I
>present the gospel. God is responsible for the conversion. You sure you've
>studied up on this stuff?
Thing is -- you've converted me to Mahayana Buddhism. Heaven with you
in it would be hell.
Unknown
>> >> "From: Back by popular demand (Nos...@Nono.Nothere)
>> >> Subject: Re: LIES About TM: a research project
>> >> Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental
>> >> Date: 2003-07-10 17:14:38 PST
>> >>
>> >> JRM : Petrus didn't answer the question about the story of his Radiant
>> >> Life
>> >> Church located in an old bowling alley.
>> >>
>> >> Petrus : Actually, he did more than twice. Another hint I am a member
>> >> of a church in
>> >> Elk Grove."
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> If you don't want to answer just say so.
>> >
>> >For any sleuth out there, I gave you two hints up there. All the info
>you
>> >need to figure out if I attend Radiant Life
>>
>> You also were involced with missionelkgrove.org and
>> unstress4less.org --
>
>Do you accept everything willy tells you?
Let's see -- what kind of logical fallacy is that ?
BTW This didn't come from Willytex -- it came from someone else. Do
you want me to give you a hint ?
>
>
>> I was curious as to what happened to the
>> Missionelkgrove.org as it's gone -- and I'm wondering what happened.
>> People moved on to better things ? Faction fight ? You seem to like
>> games so give a hint.
>
>You haven't figured out the first one yet. Why should I burden you even
>more?
I thought you wanted to make me suffer :-)
>
Unknown
>
>> >
>> >
>> ><snip>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> When I said you must be bored, I didn't mean you must be bored.
>> >> >
>> >> >Well some people say what they mean and mean what they say. I guess
>you
>> >are
>> >> >not one of them.
>> >>
>> >> You need to understand the intention behind the statement.
>> >
>> >Forgive me for not being able to read you mind. Forgive me for not
>assuming
>> >things as you like to do.
>>
>> Where did you study sarcasm ? Or were you born that way ?
>
>That is the best you can do? Come on, give it another shot.
You know, my little dutch cousin, I sometimes wonder if you're being
sincere.
>
>
>> >
>>