.
More on Responsibility
Moderator: doubleVee
11 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:43 pm
Page 96 makes no sense. I grieve for my grandmother, but I had no responsibility in her death. I was a child for one, and for another she passed of natural causes. I also fail to see how someone can be "responsible" for fear in most cases. I have a fear of falling, for example - what is my responsibility there? A child may fear spiders - what is their responsibility? For that matter, babies are born crying, clearly demonstrating misemotions. What exactly is a babies' responsibility?
Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:58 pm
Re: More on Responsibility
The most important thing to learn about Life, the Universe, and Everything, is firstly; the answer is 42, and secondly; how utterly ridiculous it truly is
Thu Apr 24, 2008 3:41 am
I just want to point out your "source" contains such tidbits as
-"An example of someone who was selfless was Adolf Hitler"
-"So here is the worst thing about raising an infant. The parents believe they need to break its spirit. This is what you try to do when torturing someone. They believe that this makes them a good parent."
And other goodies, and there's also the fact half of it is just disproven nutritional information. This is not what is considered factual information, neither can any writings from L.Ron that have not been proven by unbiased third sources, of which there are very, very few.
Orderous is also right, rewriting the tech in any way was considered squirreling until David Miscaviage decided he needed to charge everyone all over again for all new material.
"O hay, some people have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on this tech, and we just figured out the tech we've been pushing and selling and living was wrong, but it's cool because now you can start paying for the right tech that actually will work now."
Does that sound right to you? Even without the sarcastic tone, hearing david miscaviage himself say it still sounds like he's about to bend over each and every scientologist packed into the event and slowly count out the money in their wallets while reaming their back ends.
I'm curious if you have any opinions of your own, or if all you can do is quote false data and unreliable sources.
I would welcome a real debate with a scientologist, but time and again I'm proven those in the sect can only repeat the same false data over and over again.
-"An example of someone who was selfless was Adolf Hitler"
-"So here is the worst thing about raising an infant. The parents believe they need to break its spirit. This is what you try to do when torturing someone. They believe that this makes them a good parent."
And other goodies, and there's also the fact half of it is just disproven nutritional information. This is not what is considered factual information, neither can any writings from L.Ron that have not been proven by unbiased third sources, of which there are very, very few.
Orderous is also right, rewriting the tech in any way was considered squirreling until David Miscaviage decided he needed to charge everyone all over again for all new material.
"O hay, some people have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on this tech, and we just figured out the tech we've been pushing and selling and living was wrong, but it's cool because now you can start paying for the right tech that actually will work now."
Does that sound right to you? Even without the sarcastic tone, hearing david miscaviage himself say it still sounds like he's about to bend over each and every scientologist packed into the event and slowly count out the money in their wallets while reaming their back ends.
I'm curious if you have any opinions of your own, or if all you can do is quote false data and unreliable sources.
I would welcome a real debate with a scientologist, but time and again I'm proven those in the sect can only repeat the same false data over and over again.
11 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Return to Tech Debates & Discussion
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests