Subj : Rush to Judgement?
To   : CONSTANCE RAWLEY
From : RALPH ZETTER
Date : Tue Oct 31 2000 11:33 pm

>  
>  On Oct. 31st, 2000 - John Wilson wrote to Todd Henson:
>  
>  JW> That we differ is way evident...I've come to enjoy your insulting
>  JW> scorn and personal attacks...(I think I've come off easy, being
>  JW> merely a `jerk'  ...I admit to being shocked when you called
>  JW> someone a pervert; when his response showed you clearly that
>  JW> such a charge was im error...
>  
>  
>  John,
>  
>  While I might disagree with Todd's aggressiveness, (I'm unable to
>  think of a more suitable term at the moment), after seeing Voigt's
>  posts in the Matzdobre echo and some of his arguments here, I'm
>  inclined to think that "pervert" is an appropriate label for the
>  person you're attempting to defend. Perhaps if you had a more
>  complete picture of the exchanges involving Voigt, Henson and others,
>  you'd recognize that.

I've only been peeking in just a bit here, but it does seem that Todd likes
to grab the bull by the 
horns, doesn't he? I'd have to agree though with your opinion of  Mr.
Voigt, only because I saw 
the "Matzdobre" echo, thinking it was something Jewish because Matzdobre is
a misspelling of 
matzobre. It is quite the little vulgar hatefest there, so I didn't post
there, nor go back. They all 
sound like a bunch of babies who follow you around and yell things at you
because they 
themselves are weak. Every last one of them. One big pig pen you might say.
:-)

I find some of Mr. Massingil's posts thoughtful, when he and Mr. Henson are
not duking it out. 
Same with Mr. Wilson. John and Todd seem to go a lot of rounds. Todd, well,
he seems to have 
a very strong personality, which isn't necessarily a bad thing if it's
channeled properly. I just 
think that maybe some folks around here don' t like to have their ideas
challenged and take it 
out on the challenger. But hey, I'm just a hillbilly, what do I know? ;-)
I'm more laid back, so a 
person like Todd wouldn't get to me.

I figured I'd see something about Plato here, but instead there's nothing
but personality 
conflicts. Kinda like Jerry Springer (heeheeee).  I guess I'll just have to
be the outside observer. 
Sometimes I won't post in fear of stirring up more dust...maybe when the
dust settles some 
more...

I do find the few truly philosphical bits here to be interesting. Todd
believes in the Biblical God 
and it's accompanying philosophy, John believes the universe is alive, and
I'm still not sure what 
Frank believes, but I like the mix of all these ideas. And how the topic
goes back and forth 
betwen science, religion, philosophy, and back around again. Good mix. I
suppose Joseph is 
an atheist. There are a few others here, but these guys seem to talk the
most and the loudest. 
:-)

I might want to bring up Buddhism, but I don't want to get into a long
drawn out debate on 
Buddhism against the Bible, because I know Christians don't have much room
for other 
religions. Makes you wonder what they think happens to all those people who
never heard of the 
Bible. I guess they fry. :>)

>  I think Voigt's response substantiated Henson's charge. Perhaps it
>  comes down to what one believes is the function of sex and the meaning
>  of "perverse." This is what Voigt wrote:

I feel the same, but for someone who says he's a Christian, that response
seemed a wee bit 
harsh, dontcha think? But then again, he did at least admit that. From what
I've read, not even 
the apostles were perfect all the time. I guess just as long as a person is
willing to admit their 
faults.

I guess I've crammed a lot in one post here. :)  But I didn't see too many
posts from you here, 
so I thought I'd compare notes with someone who doesn't seem to be caught
in the middle of 
the fray here
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr4
 * Origin: BBS Networks @ www.bbsnets.com 808-839-5016 (1:10/345)

.