note: The BK advocate said their parents arrange their entry into the BK because they can't marry them off. It doesn't sound like the daughters have a choice.
And do they have a better choice if they are married off to some rich guy who will rape them each night when they come home from whatever money making job he forces them to do.
I have read the papers and seen how husbands are allowed to kill their wives in india and get away with it. Are you sure the BK are such a horrible alternative?
the lesser of two evils argument... that's a winner...
James, yesterday you "accused" me of "attacking" your religion. I asked if you could provide me with a couple of examples of this. You responded by saying how my behavior made you sometimes feel attacked. I asked you a second time to provide some examples. You balked. Is this a "reasonable" observation of what just went on?
Now you are saying that criticism can be dangerous and that I sometimes use my education as a weapon. Are you criticizing me for being educated?
We are each engaged in a process of observing, analyzing, concluding and feeding this information back (responding) to the group or individual within the group. The principles at play here are that this feedback is most effective when:
By being here, we have all invited feedback.
What you see as me being critical I see as me feeding back observed and/or substantiated (validated) information back to the group or individual. I suspect that you think of criticism as some kind of "negative" feedback. However a movie critic, for example, is not obliged to give negative criticism. Being critical does not, by definition have a negative meaning. A critic could love the movie. Right? There is nothing wrong with being critical - is there?
As for using my education (interpersonal communication skills) as a weapon, again James, can you give me an example or two?
Look, if you say something that doesn't make sense to me and I tell you what it is and give you some examples of why I think it doesn't make sense, am I using my communication skills as weapons? I'm not trying to negate your perception that I seem overly critical. I'm again suggesting that you go over our exchanges (in your head) and let me know where I was "unnecessarily" critical (of you). Did I call you stupid, a moron, a putz or give you a derogatory label? Now ask yourself, where there things that the Kernel said that made you feel a bit dumb? What were they. When I said I found some of your comments to be obtuse?
Thanks for your feedback James. Sorry I don't have time now to provide a more thorough response. Perhaps we can pick this up at a later stage.
I am proposing that with some basic communication protocols, the quality of participation in this group could consequently be elevated. I am also suggesting there may be some here who are quite content to leave things the way they are.
Develop a premise and test it - as you sometimes do.
There are quite a few Christian churches in India. They are not thought of kindly by the Hindus it would seem.
The Christian church does do what it can.
I provided the proof that you attack Christians. As an example I showed that you call them all idolaters.
Oh that's right.... You wanted James to prove it. Sorry, this is an open forum. A question asked to one is asked to all.
You continually ask manipulative questions. You think you are so good at it others can't see them for what they are? Sorry once again, but we see them very well.
If you believe the Bible, then salvation is through Jesus. All other are of the other hub.
I do not think I accused you of attacking "my" religion probably because I am not sure I even have a religion. My being so critical of the christian religion myself and continually referring to the Quotes of Jesus to tell those who did things in his name to depart from him, doesnt bode well for me to even want to be a part of that religion.
What I thought I said and what I intnded to say is that any critical comment about any religion could be seen as an attack upon that religion and an attack on persons who are members of that religion.
I also suggested that while being critical can be good in the sense of "constructive" criticism, criticism can also be very destructive as in the case of "
I wonder how many of these beliefs we can appreciate the validity of.
Anton LaVey compiled the Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth in 1967, two years before the publication of the Satanic Bible. It was originally meant for circulation only among members of the Church of Satan as it was considered "too frank and brutal for general release" as per the Church of Satan Informational Pack. This document is © Anton Szandor LaVey, 1967.