Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl00212)

At 05:16 PM 5/3/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Greg writes:
>> The worst was the use of "repugnent" to describe
>>individuals, groups and their ideas.
>
>	I think that we have all agreed to confine such
>attributes as "repugnant" to ideas rather than people.  In
>many ways, it seems harsh to even consider such a name
>for ideas, but here is the fact of it:  although we are all under
>the theosophical umbrella, certain sections of the fabric do
>seem repugnant to those standing under other sections.
>There have been more than one posting (on ethics, for
>example) that practically make me barf, and I feel
>horrified that theosophists could think such silly things.
>So, I crusade away against what I consider repugnant
>ideas, theosophical or otherwise, while trying to keep
>the personalities out of it.  Sometimes I miss, but I do
>try.  I don't see any other way of maintaining such a
>free-wheeling list such as this one.  Any ideas?
>
>	Jerry S.
>	Member, TI
>
>
>Thank you Jerry. Attitude was what I was referring to and "his attitude is
repugnant to me" is what I said. It is quite possible< I think, to find
attitudes and concepts repugnant and not be a terrible person. I for
instance find Adolf Hitler's ideas perfectly repugnant. And no I am not
comparing the ULT with Adolf Hitler, but I find their ideas repugnant too,
not as repugnant as Hitler's of course, but certainly as repugnant as Pat
Robertson's. It seems to me there's a double standard active among certain
people who are posting remarks on this list. For instance, it is apparently
perfectly "theosophical" to christen some of us "The Gang of Four" which has
heretofore always been viewed as a pejorative, it is perfectly "polite" and
"unaggressive" to label me, and others, "heretics" and "blasphemers" and
"hostile to HPB" but when we, or rather when I respond to that by saying I
find such labeling and the attitude which goes with them both repugnant and
pharisaical I am immediately condemned as Attila the Hun. Well, as far as
I'm concerned, I don't like being a "target", this one can "fire back" and will!
It is important to keep this list an open medium for the exchange of ideas,
even totally dichotomous ideas. One cannot have such an open channel when
one side takes liberties and then engages in emotional blackmail and
"ganging up" on the other side for objecting. Like you I try to keep
personalities out of the discussion but when I am personally attacked, not
being a Christian, I do not "turn the other cheek" nor do I "love those who
hate me". I think that in the time on this board I have learned one lesson
extremely well, there are some people on this board, to whom I can do no
right, say nothing valid, and who have but one desire, to see me gone. I
was, for a while terribly tempted to gratify their wishes, as I lead a busy
life and I really don't have time for petty people with petty spites,but
Chuck reminded me that I don't stay to fight again, they'll win and so,
unpleasant as I find it, I'm going to hang around and keep saying what i
believe. When people are polite to me, I can be equally polite in return but
I have always believed in returning everything "in kind"

thanks for the opportunity to get this off my chest

alexis d.