Law of One Religion?

[Steppingfeet]

Hey remember in Post 74 I was like:

But why is this about Monica's position in any way?

The thread isn't strictly a matter of "Hey, what do you guys think about these questions?"

In addition to the good questions, Monica is directly making a charge that people with whom she disagrees are doing just what he first post asks about.

Hence Parsons's reply and my own, both of which have been quite respectful.

And then Monica responded with a Chorus of "No"

Okay, now that we’re caught up on where my contribution to this thread intersects with Monica’s, some examination.

Monica, I meant you only kindness and respect. I gave your questions time and space for consideration. As I said a couple of times, I felt they were quite good in and of themselves.

But you magnified one particular comment I made, and on that point did pivot the conversation in a different direction. I didn’t intend for that to happen, but as it has, I’d like to address your befuddlement, and help explain how others could reach the conclusion that your questions are not just good, general, objective, knowledge-seeking questions, but also contain your feeling that Bring4th members (with whom you disagree) are mistreating/misunderstanding/misapplying this information, that is, are being dogmatic-fundamentalist.

You said this in Post #40

And then Post #69

And then I read this morning  a most excellent post from you that asks really challenging, complex, and thought-provoking questions that could be the fuel for very intensive, stimulating discussion.

Post #225

But what that post also does is further substantiate the assertions made by Parsons, myself, and others.

I myself am befuddled that you can write a post like that while simultaneously stating that you are not charging other members with exactly the scenario your OP questions identify.

I think I get that post. You are trying to understand how and why other members disagree with you and have the reactions they do to your positions, and one of your conclusions, it seems, is explained in Post 225. Your conclusion, though, is exactly what I was saying.

Diana, am I just way out in left field here? Am I grievously misreading Monica?
 
Monica, you are so brilliant. I’ve always admired your intelligence, your principles, your convictions, and your capacity be outspoken. I don’t share that latter quality with you, but I would enjoy more of that strength.

There are different ways to explain why you clash with others here. From my own limited view in the corner of a very big room, it’s not so much the convictions, per se, but how you go about the discussion process.

With love/light,
GLB

PS: I seldom create threads, but were I to create one, and were it to veer from its intended course, I might diligently and gently shepherd it back to its original course. Or attempt it.

And a big lololol