Theos-Talk Archives (December 1996 Message tl00308)

TTT S=o) writes:

>That's my take on this whole talk like a t/Theosophist approach.  The
>funny thing is that once one expresses a viewpoint with "emotion" and
>frankness, we get rebuked by saying we are not talking like
>t/Theosophists.  I guess the way to be a true t/Theosophist is to be
>passive-aggressive.


Oh, yes, we all love honesty - all long as it's in someone else's
neighborhood.


>Yes, I agree.  However, any causes requires a defender.  Some of the
>most eloquent people for a cause are ones who have experienced much
>suffering at some injustices.  It requires the selfish ego to say,
>"That's happened to me.  I suffered, and I'm going to do whatever I can
>to prevent future suffering."  Suppose we want to say that everyone, and
>in particular the wealthy and corporations, should pay heavy taxes to
>make sure that no one will ever have to starve or be denied medical
>treatment.  The people that heavy taxes are imposed upon will protest
>that they have alimony and house payments to make.  Corporations will
>say that we are hurting the economy by hurting them.  All arguments can
>be trivialized by stating that "things are tough all over," and "deny
>the selfish ego."  Anyone who defended a cause is guilty of denying the
>other side, and is guilty of doing it through their ego.

Well, well, well, what have we here?  Thoughtful insight, keen observation,
valuable lessons and just some plain cool writing all in one paragraph?!
God, I hate posts like this. . .[joking :-)]

Way to go. . .sister o' mine.


pax vobiscum,

Kym