> On Aug 5, 11:31 am, "maz" rocketmail.com> wrote:

>> The Golden Rule

>
> You mean they preach the golden rule but don't bother practicing it.

> Hypocrisy is what all religions have in common, actually.

> ...say they all have good will in common at their core.

> namazt

>
> maz wrote:

>> The Golden Rule
>>
>> http://www.acimradio.net/wkbk/GOLDENRULE.htm

>
> .
>
> The golden rule in simplest form is, 'treat others the same way you
> would want to be treated by others'.
>
> There are arguments against this golden rule. The depressed person
> would want treatment to be killed by others and following golden rule
> he is obliged to treat others same way i.e kill others.
>
> I didn't know this golden rule until 27 Dec 2004. During discussion in
> alt.atheism, I wrote my own code of conduct which is...
> ...

> "Katie" yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
>

>> On Aug 5, 11:31 am, "maz" rocketmail.com> wrote:

>>> The Golden Rule

>

>> You mean they preach the golden rule but don't bother practicing it.

>
> No, i don't mean that. I mean all are students/teachers,
> and that we need to practise in order to become
> masters. Inconsistencies along the way can be both,
> stumbling blocks and also stepping stones. See the
> difference?
>

>> Hypocrisy is what all religions have in common, actually.

>
> That's only a matter of focus. One could also say
> they all have good will in common at their core.
>
> namazt ...

>>> Re: Why Religious Belief Should Be Abandoned - Part 1

>
> Yeah, that's like saying we should abandon our
> healthy sex lives because some whackos indulge
> in cross dressing perversity. rotfl!

> Lee <4gi...@innocent.com> wrote:

>> Katie yahoo.com> wrote:

>>> "Human beings who sacrifice their intellectual integrity on the altar
>>> of any religious dogma can work terrible mischief in this world.
>>> Those who really believe they are doing "God's Will" can literally be
>>> "murder" for the rest of us. "....
>>>http://ffrf.org/fttoday/2001/nov01/ricker.html

>

>> "All fanatics are dangerous. Religious fanatics are especially
>> so because they believe the 'Truth" they claim has the sanction
>> of a deity and thus cannot be challenged by mere mortals."

>
> This quote is from the essay Katie linked to, btw.
>
>
>
>
>
> ...

>>> Re: Why Religious Belief Should Be Abandoned - Part 1

>
> Yeah, that's like saying we should abandon our
> healthy sex lives because some whackos indulge
> in cross dressing perversity. rotfl!

>
> As far as I'm concerned, this is really simple. Helen did not take
> responsibility for the work in her lifetime as far as I can see. She
> allowed it to be spread, and failed to take responsibility for this
> action as well. I don't care what her excuses were. I don't expect to
> get away with this kind of behavior. To expect me to allow someone
> else to get away with this kind of behavior is inconsistent with my
> expectations of myself and everyone else I deal with. If someone wants
> to claim they channel someone I recognize (or not), fine. I expect
> them to be responsible for what they do with what they channel. And
> the test of that, for me, is being able to explain what the meaning is
> and to be able to live by what they channel. If they can't do that,
> it's preaching with another layer of excuse, as far as I'm concerned.
> Cable is filled with preachers, and I don't pay much attention to them
> either. Translated, apply ACIM to Helen's life and see how she failed
> to live what she promulgated on the rest of humanity, by her own
> admission. By her example, our shared responsibility to each other is
> erroded. I happen to value that shared responsibility as a core value
> in our life on spaceship earth. ...

> As far as I'm concerned, this is really simple. Helen did not take
> responsibility for the work in her lifetime as far as I can see.

> She allowed it to be spread, and failed to take responsibility for this
> action as well.

> I don't care what her excuses were.

> I don't expect to
> get away with this kind of behavior.

> "Chuck" yahoo.com> wrote in message
>

>> As far as I'm concerned, this is really simple. Helen did not take
>> responsibility for the work in her lifetime as far as I can see. She
>> allowed it to be spread, and failed to take responsibility for this
>> action as well. I don't care what her excuses were. I don't expect to
>> get away with this kind of behavior. To expect me to allow someone
>> else to get away with this kind of behavior is inconsistent with my
>> expectations of myself and everyone else I deal with. If someone wants
>> to claim they channel someone I recognize (or not), fine. I expect
>> them to be responsible for what they do with what they channel. And
>> the test of that, for me, is being able to explain what the meaning is
>> and to be able to live by what they channel. If they can't do that,
>> it's preaching with another layer of excuse, as far as I'm concerned.
>> Cable is filled with preachers, and I don't pay much attention to them
>> either. Translated, apply ACIM to Helen's life and see how she failed
>> to live what she promulgated on the rest of humanity, by her own
>> admission. By her example, our shared responsibility to each other is
>> erroded. I happen to value that shared responsibility as a core value ...