BARF BoardRoom/Soapbox Archive
The Christian willingness to
override consent 1
By Lauren Sabina Kneisly
Time: Wed, 07-Apr-1999 21:45:50 GMT
::Nick: I want to be really clear. The reason many
::of us non-christans are concerned about
::movements like these and people like you is
::because of what you've just stated above, other
::peoples' wants, desires, etc, be damned, you
::want what you want, and you're going to do it
:;screw anyone else. You want to obey you.
:Those are your words Sabina. I NEVER said that.
You have said you will 'prey' for me against my
wishes and against my will, as 'you're a christian
and that's just what we do'. So because you are
'commanded to prey', my wishes be damned. That's
principle above person. You have in effect, said
:I'm not sure what the last sentence means.
Obviously there was a period where there shouldn't
be. It should read "You want to obey your 'god's
commands' even should that lead to unhappiness,
danger, or even death for other people.
:I have said repeatedly that I wish you would quit
:generalizing and trying to read between the
If you view others lifestyles, religions, etc as
somehow less than yours, and are willing to
override their consent to do what you want, these
are the kinds of consequences. I do not consider
it generalizations at all. I could point to many a
specific examples of such, but again, I am
focusing specifically on your writings.
::Your interpretation of 'God's will'
:I don't recall expressing anything about "God's
God's will is implied in that 'god has commanded
you to prey'. Either you are using 'god's will' as
cover for your own behavior, "we christians just
do that," or you must take direct responsibility
for your actions. I have asked you not to prey for
me repeatedly, and made it clear that such preyers
are non-consentual. You choose to override my
consent and do so in the name of christianity.
Fact is you want to prey for me, my wishes be
damned. Own up to it Nick: you choose to do this,
and you bear responsibility for your
non-consensual, violating actions.
::takes precedence, perhaps even should it
::preclude our existence.
I was referring to non-christians you choose to
act upon against their consent. If you want more
specifics: you have decided to do what you choose,
even should it be against the wishes of me, the
acted upon. You have placed prinicple over person,
and that's a path I am not comfortable having
people fixated upon me on. If you're willing to
walk over my desires on the small scale, in the
name of being a christian, what stops you from
walking over my very existence in the name of
being a christian?
::That's what I have a problem with. That's
::what's led to doctors being shot, and queers
::being bashed, swasticas spraypainted on jewish
::homes, and inquisitions. You want the courts
::and the state to impose your 'morality' and you
::feel there are 'right' answers-
:No matter what I say you will always equate me
:with those people that hide behind God to hurt
:others. That isn't me and never has been. I
:haven't ever supported anything of the sort and
:I never will.
Let's look at that: 'equate me with those people
that hide behind God to hurt others'. You hide
behind your 'that's just what christians do' to
prey for me.
Read Gavin DeBecker's 'Gift of Fear:' you are on
a continuum. I would argue that as christianity
is part of a continuum that systematically
overrides consent, and has found people
expendable in the past.
Further, and specifically: YOU have continued
that 'fine tradition' by overriding MY consent
and you yourself have said the inquistion was
christianity 'straying from its roots' (Never
mind all the devastation to others, the only
part that matters to you is how it affected
christians). You seem so christian-o-centric,
that you view the inquistion as something about
you and your religion!
::absolutes if you will, in terms of who should
::ave the ability parent, and other such
::decisions. That's not alright by many of
::us. That's what our page is about. When you put
::such ideology over the desires of those around
::you, not only are :you selfish, but I consider
:Selfish? Dangerous? Why?
Yes. You want to prey, to you it doesn't matter
what I want or how I feel about that. That is
both selfish, and potentially dangerous: you are
unwilling to take no for an answer.
:Are you afraid of someone that is different
No. I am concerned about your behaviour when I say
no and you don't stop.
:Do you fear someone just because they espouse a
:different philosophy about life?
Again, no. I am concerned about your behaviour
when I say no and you don't stop.
:That is the true essence of being bigoted.
:When a person makes assumptions about someone
:based on their religious beliefs, then acts upon
:those assumptions, that is bigoted.
I'm not judging you on you claiming to BE a
christian, nor assumptions about what
christianity may or may not be- I'm judging you
based upon your own writings and you behaviour
of 'violating another spiritually' against their
consent, and arguing 'that's just what
christians do'. I'm disscussing YOUR BEHAVIOR-
not any assumptions.
As far as "then acts upon those assumptions" I
have no idea what you're talking about. I have
done nothing to you.
:The only thing you have to fear is that maybe
:your philosophy is wrong.
I have no 'one true way' I have only what works
for me, it probably wouldn't work for
another. It is distinctly mine. If I find a
point I've taken a position upon, and later find
myself wrong, I change it. I have done so, and
continue to do so. As I've said, it's an evoling
process. I do not 'fear' these changes, as I
enjoy the process of change. That's part of what
being a Witch is all about: change of seasons,
changes over time, watching people
change. Indeed, perhaps the only thing to be
feared is absolute lack of change or stagnancy.
As far as 'my philosophy', I have actually spent
a fair amount of time reading lots of different
positions on issues, and philosophies. I have
spoken at legnth with many people directly
involved with such, and these are the (for now)
conclusions I've come to. I am not bigoted
against you, Nick, because I find your behaviour
alarming. nor am I bigoted against christianity
if I point to a systematic process of teaching
people within how to punch through other
people's "no's". I am critequing specific
behaviours and patterns of behavior. There is
nothing bigoted about pointing out your acting
upon others against their consent.
:If you don't periodically examine it and
:compare it with other's how will you know that
:it is right for you?
As stated above, I do. Everytime I tell someone
my conclusions, though, people like you accuse
me of closed mindedness, perhaps bacause I
haven't come to your point of view.
::If you were faced with 'god' saying kill, and
::a person in front of you saying no, what would
::you do? What would anyone with an ounce of
::humanity left do?
:I don't listen to voices in my head.
MANY christians do, and I have the books
systematically teaching them how to do so.
Again, just beacause you're unwilling to
actually pull a trigger doesn't mean you treat
any of the rest of us as equals. I suppose you
wait for someone else to pull the trigger. I
guess to your mind, folks like Paul Hill were
just 'straying from christianity's purpose'
(Never mind the dead doctor.)
:I listen to my heart. My heart is against
Well, as Fred said above there are multiple
kinds of death, death of the body and death of
the mind/ability to be oneself. What happens if
you have a 'change of heart?'. (After all,
you're a proponent of examination and changes of
:That is why I dislike abortion so much.
How much, Nick? When is enough? Is it enough to
write letters? Or is it enough to cheer the