 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Alice Date: 24 Mar 06 - 07:47 PM You can view the "closet" episode online from links at factnet.org. Go to the end of the article on South Park on the home page. The links are ScienTOMogy (RM) or Xenutv.com Low Band (WMV) or Xenutv.com High Band (WMV) CLICK |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Greg F. Date: 24 Mar 06 - 10:20 AM Sure, Fox News[sic]- gotta be true. Only slightly less reliable than an Ouija board. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Jeri Date: 23 Mar 06 - 10:48 PM Re: "which I half expected" The second time I watched the show, he said it. It just sounded more serious than when Kenny bites it, so it threw me off. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Jeri Date: 23 Mar 06 - 11:46 AM Mary, from FOX News, in an article by Roger Friedman on March 20, he wrote, "My sources say that someone quit it for him." He also writes, "Contrary to news reports, the great writer, singer and musician suffered a stroke on Jan. 17. At the time it was said that he was hospitalized and suffering from exhaustion." I don't know about that, because he did communicate with South Park's producers. If these producers are waiting for more ideas from me... I forsee Chef and Cartman having an epic battle with light-farts and cool (but appropriate) sound effects. Carman will win, but only because Chef forgets he's in that suit and accidentally blows himself up. Now, there are two possiblilities: 1)Cartman rips off Chef's helmet and the duct taped-together character reveals he's Cartman's father, or 2) Stan cries out, "You killed Chef, you bastard!" (which I half expected anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: SINSULL Date: 23 Mar 06 - 10:52 AM Repeat tonight - I will watch. Now the story is that Isaac had heart problems in January, is suffering from exhaustion, and did not resign - he was resigned by unknown parties. His agent says he is in no position (financially) to resign. We'll see. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Jeri Date: 22 Mar 06 - 10:42 PM I expect somebody other than me watched this latest episode, and it was pretty devastating. A organization of pedophiles, an insane founder, brainwashing... It was very unsubtle, but it was intended to be. This isn't necessarily an exact quote, but it's close: "We don't blame Chef for leaving. We blame the fruity little club that scrambled his brains." And I swear I had no inside information regarding the James Earl Jones voice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Mar 06 - 05:23 PM Yes, Heinlein apparently had it right... ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: The Shambles Date: 19 Mar 06 - 05:20 PM Denial ain't just a river in Egypt. Mark Twain |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Peace Date: 19 Mar 06 - 05:19 PM Naw, Shambles, just the ones that don't serve someone's purpose. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: The Shambles Date: 19 Mar 06 - 05:15 PM The words would only self-destruct in ten seconds. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: michaelr Date: 19 Mar 06 - 02:54 AM Does no one care to comment on the convoluted Tom Cruise denial? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: michaelr Date: 19 Mar 06 - 02:51 AM Thou art God! Heinlein had it right, after all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Mar 06 - 01:39 AM Oh, they do indeed, Peace. That's why you find that more than a few of their core members are pretty well off. They'd never have been able to afford it if they hadn't been. I should've added Vedanta people (a good many of them) to that list of open-minded types. Vedanta, in general, is the body of teachings referred to as Hindu by some people. Some of the basic principles: reincarnation, karma, eternal soul existence through many embodied lives, different levels of spiritual existence for the discarnate souls, meditation, the many forms of yoga, self-realization (by stilling the chattering mind you arrive at the Self...the original and far greater consciousness that is beyond the mind and which the mind is simply a temporary small extension of). The common mistake of the mind is: it thinks it is the whole conscious self...the ruler of the person it is attached to. It isn't. It's a fragment of the whole conscious self. The whole conscious Self can be termed "God"...if you wish to call it that. A person like Jesus, entitled "Christ", is an example of a person who became conscious at that level. That level is synonymous with God. Everyone is God, potentially...but they have not realized it, and they are not living at their full potential because they have not realized it. If they did realize it, they would be at once totally happy, totally loving, totally at peace, and totally effective. I have seen one such person so far in this entire life. One. I've seen a handful of others that were at least part way there...far enough so you could notice it. Me? I'm not even close...but I've seen it, like you might see a mountaintop in the distance. I don't know if I'll ever get there in this life. I doubt it, frankly. I'm too lazy. You don't get there without working hard for it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Peace Date: 19 Mar 06 - 01:11 AM Yeah. Well it seems that the Transcendental Meditation crew want lots of money, too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Mar 06 - 01:08 AM Have been reading up on it some. Yeah, they appear to want a lot of money. That's not a good sign at all. The only groups I've ever been comfortable with are those who do not try to get money out of you, and do not try to restrict you from studying teachings other than their own. I gather that does not describe the Church of Scientology. The most open-minded people I've come across in general would include Bahais, Taoists, Buddhists, some of the more liberal Christians, and some Pagans. Oh...and some non-religious people as well. ;-D |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Tam the man Date: 19 Mar 06 - 01:02 AM I agree all they want is Money and the more the better, I tried to Join once and when they asked me for money I thought no way. Tom |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Mar 06 - 07:01 PM That is correct, Ebbie. EVERY religion began as a cult. The more successful a cult becomes, the more legitimacy it gains in the eyes of large numbers of people as time goes by. After awhile they don't think of it as a "cult" anymore. Look at the horrifying things done in the name of Christianity in the last 2,000 years. Can any modern "cult" match all that in for sheer dimensions of abuse and human suffering? I don't think so. On the other hand, many wonderful things have also been done by Christians and by the Christian churches, so it all depends what part you focus on, doesn't it? **** I have known quite a number of Jehovah's witnesses personally, Ebbie, and I'll say this. Although I consider some of their beliefs totally wacky, and I think they are naive to go around knocking on people's doors and trying to convert them, still the Jehovah's Witnesses that I have known personally have without exception been very good and honest people who I am glad to have as friends. I don't care if their religion seems wacky. It suits them, and that's okay with me. Have also known a number of Pagans. Some were great people, some were a bit odd, one was downright dangerous. My basic opinion of Paganism, therefore, remains neutral at this point. I like their version of the Golden Rule: "Do as you will, and harm no one." ***** Alice, if you have had friends who were seriously hurt by Scientology, then yes, I do understand why it is an important issue to you. Fair enough. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: bobad Date: 18 Mar 06 - 06:58 PM "Abuse is Society's concern. Treat that and leave the rest alone. Ain't our business." Slavery should be everyone's business and the psychological enslavement by cults is worse IMO than physical enslavement. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Ebbie Date: 18 Mar 06 - 06:42 PM I don't know anyone - to my knowledge - who is into Scientology. Nor do I - to my knowledge - know anyone into Jehovah's Witnesses. Nor - to my knowledge - anyone into Paganism. I do have family in the World Wide Church of God (Herbert Armstrong) and I was reared Amish; I have hundreds of relatives in the Amish and Mennonite churches. To my mind practically every religion began life as a cult. What do you suppose people said about brand new Christianity? I think that fear, whether of harm or of being swallowed up, is at the root of hate and distrust and scorn, kind of like Capitalism versus Communism- if one system is superior to the other it will eventually become evident. Abuse is Society's concern. Treat that and leave the rest alone. Ain't our business. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Alice Date: 18 Mar 06 - 02:07 PM Hi, LH, yes, I've had personal experience with people whose lives were destroyed by Scientology. I don't base my point of view on just what I read on the internet (or, as they say, in the newspaper). Alice |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Mar 06 - 02:02 PM Alice, this is a matter I have no personal stake in, one way or the other. I was simply noting that Scientology's theory of the 3-part human being (body, mind, spirit) is much the same as that in some of the Eastern religions. I found that interesting. I have noticed that any controversial matter whatsoever...be it scientology, George Bush, the CIA, USA plans to attack Iran, Haliburton, magnetic therapy, chemotherapy, heart surgery, the AMA, the FDA, any alternative health prodecure, vaccination...anything at all like that has spawned libraries full of stuff on the Internet which either utterly damns it or utterly praises and exonerates it. Pick the side you like. Look up the sites that support your view....pro or con...ignore the ones that don't...and you will be delighted with what you find, I'm sure. This leaves me, frankly, with nowhere to go except to consult people I actually know who have had actual experience with scientology. I trust that more than a site with an ax to grind or an unknown person on the Internet with an ax to grind. Like all people, though, if I already have a strong opinion on something I am much encouraged by the internet sites which bolster my established opinion, I sneer knowingly at those which don't, and I see that you already have a strong opinion on scientology. ;-D I don't. Your efforts to convince me to share your opinion are likely to get a shrug, because I've already heard 68 million divergent, totally contradictory opinions about just about everything imaginable on the Net and I know how far it all goes. As far as I can throw a refrigerator. People have their own personal reasons to form strong opinions, and those reasons are often rather arbitrary. They often do so merely on the basis of the FIRST thing they heard about something from someone else. That sets the pattern, which thereafter repeats itself endlessly. Most opinions are based on mere hearsay, not experience. If one was easily convinced by all the disembodied opinions one heard, one would be obliged to change one's mind about every five minutes or so, I imagine. So why should I be unduly influenced by your hatred of scientology if I don't actually know you? Everything out there is hated by various people with strong opinions. I don't know where they got them or why. Were you ever in scientology? Was someone you know well on it? With what result? Why does it concern you this much? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Bill D Date: 18 Mar 06 - 01:52 PM well, it's all very interesting. I gather that Amos does have personal knowlege of the problems with COS. I also read between the lines that he doesn't think it would serve much to regale us with details. I try to limit my conversations and debates here to what people say HERE, not to what they 'may' have done or said in the past. Amos & I have traded banter, from light to serious, for several years, but when I finally met him, we played music and sipped beverages. I can easily read information that makes clear to me that *I* would not care for COS or 99% of its concepts, and though I might pop in with my 2¢ worth if I see COS ideas being touted, I see no use in trying to link folks in subtle ways. let's be clear, but let's be fair. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: michaelr Date: 18 Mar 06 - 01:38 PM Interesting... A spokesperson for Tom Cruise has come forward and denied that South Park's Scientology episode was yanked because of pressure from Cruise. The spokesperson stated that Cruise did not threaten not to promote his upcoming movie "Mission: Impossible 3". (The movie is produced by Paramount, which is owned by Viacom, which also owns Comedy Central). Methinks they do protest too much! Cheers, Michael |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Amos Date: 18 Mar 06 - 01:24 PM Hell, just read the Bush thread, anonymous one. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: GUEST,Google user Date: 18 Mar 06 - 01:11 PM You should know, Amos. It might be easier if you just gave a brief account of why you know, since so much is available anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Amos Date: 18 Mar 06 - 11:00 AM Wow, Alice, you are on a roll! LOL!! My suggestion is to not get involved in the organizations of Scientology. It works for me!! :D A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Alice Date: 18 Mar 06 - 10:57 AM Something I didn't know about Hubbard that I found on the clambake expose - Click "In mid-1967 Hubbard bought three ships and put to sea with a small cadre of followers. Styling himself "the Commodore," he spent the next several years wandering the Atlantic, pursued by imaginary Reds and Nazis and attended by "Commodore's Messengers," teenaged girls dressed in white hot pants who waited on him hand and foot, bathing and dressing him and even catching the ash from his cigarettes. He had frequent screaming tantrums and instituted brutal punishments such as incarceration in the ship's filthy chain-locker for days or weeks at a time and "overboarding," in which errant crew members were blindfolded, bound and thrown overboard, dropping up to 40 ft. into the cold sea and hoping not to hit the side of the ship with its razor-sharp barnacles on the way down. These punishments applied to children as well as to adults. Hubbard made bungling attempts to take over Morocco and Rhodesia and was banned from further entry into Britain. He began the Sea Organization (SO), whose members wear pseudo-naval uniforms, adopt naval ranks, sign billion year contracts and are pressured to have abortions when they become pregnant because children are perceived as interfering with their SO obligations. Hubbard created the infamously abusive Rehabilitation Project Force as a special punishment for SO members who fail to follow orders, make mistakes or fall short of production goals. " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Alice Date: 18 Mar 06 - 10:47 AM What Scientology won't tell you - an info pack. Operation Clambake the Inner Secrets of Scientology |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Alice Date: 18 Mar 06 - 10:39 AM You wouldn't think anyone could intimidate the IRS, but Scientology can and has. quote in part: "The Church of Scientology may routinely operate by shrouding its practices, but its interactions with government should be a matter of public record. Taxpayers need to know if they are being treated fairly and whether the IRS, as Judge Silverman queried, has made Scientologists its 'chosen people.'" Read March, 2004, St. Petersburg Times full article here: http://www.sptimes.com/2004/03/25/Opinion/IRS___chosen_people_.shtml |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Alice Date: 18 Mar 06 - 10:27 AM LH, there is much about the history and abuse done by Scientology at factnet.org. It is nothing like eastern religions or philosophy. The telling is in the deeds, not the creed. Fact net has an update on South Park's bravery to confront Scientology. Because the cult has a policy called "fair game" and requires members to attack any critics, including using illegal methods (fair game), it is rare that anyone gets away with criticising Scient. They tried to crush TIME magazine for doing an expose years ago, they forced MTV to give them free ad time because MTV mentioned them in a cult program, they have sued former members into bankruptcy and worse. Factnet was founded to expose Scientology and finally won their battle in the courts. Here is a link to the factnet home page and their article on South Park. Click here |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Azizi Date: 17 Mar 06 - 10:11 PM It just occurred to me that having Isaac Hayes play the part of a Chef on "South Park" might have been-at least in part-a witty reference to his classic album "Hot Buttered Soul". For me, and I'm willing to bet quite a number of people, Issac Hayes will always be associated with that album. And apart from the songs on the album, the album's cover-a bare chested bald headed Black brotha man with chains around his chest-has to rank as one of the most memorable album covers ever. Here's an excerpt from an online review of "Hot Buttered Soul": Released at the tail end of the '60s, Hot Buttered Soul set the precedent for how soul would evolve in the early '70s, simultaneously establishing Isaac Hayes and the Bar-Kays as major forces within black music. Though not quite as definitive as Black Moses or as well-known as Shaft, Hot Buttered Soul remains an undeniably seminal record; it stretched its songs far beyond the traditional three-to-four-minute industry norm, featured long instrumental stretches where the Bar-Kays stole the spotlight, and it introduced a new, iconic persona for soul with Hayes' tough yet sensual image. With the release of this album, Motown suddenly seemed manufactured and James Brown a bit too theatrical. Surprising many, the album features only four songs. The first, "Walk on By," is an epic 12-minute moment of true perfection, its trademark string-laden intro just dripping with syrupy sentiment, and the thumping mid-tempo drum beat and accompanying bassline instilling a complementary sense of nasty funk to the song; if that isn't enough to make it an amazing song, Hayes' almost painful performance brings yet more feeling to the song,with the guitar's heavy vibrato and the female background singers taking the song to even further heights.The following three songs aren't quite as stunning but are still no doubt impressive: "Hyperbolicsyllabicsequedalymistic" trades in sappy sentiment for straight-ahead funk, highlighted by a stomping piano halfway through the song; "One Woman" is the least epic moment, clocking in at only five minutes, but stands as a straightforward, well-executed love ballad; and finally, there's the infamous 18-minute "By the Time I Get to Phoenix" and its lengthy monologue which slowly eases you toward the climactic, almost-orchestral finale, a beautiful way to end one of soul's timeless, landmark albums, the album that transformed Hayes into a lifelong icon. ~ Jason Birchmeier, All Music Guide Isaac Hayes: Hot Buttered Soul |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Mar 06 - 07:38 PM I already think of human beings as virtual god-soul-beings temporarily trapped in man-bodies on this little planet, living out lives of almost total illusion and horrid limitation as a result of that mind trap...and I'm not a Scientologist. ;-D I only found out about scientology's ideas on it in the last couple of days. What they call body, mind, and "theta" I call body, mind, and spirit. The same concepts are well understood in the East. It is the mind that leads people astray and makes them think small. Very small. Very scared. Very critical. Very jealous. Very demanding. Very argumentative. Very intolerant. Addicted to being "right". Very stressed. Very hungry...but for what, it truly doesn't know. The main purpose of meditation in Eastern religions is to quiet that nattering little mind and discover something far wiser and greater and much kinder in the silence that comes when it finally shuts up. That will never happen on this forum, needless to say. The chattering and arguing and the continual being "right" (at someone else's expense) will just go on forever here or until the site crashes for the last time or Max shuts it down or until they drop "the big one". Whichever happens first. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Jeri Date: 17 Mar 06 - 07:17 PM HAHA! "So, Scientology, you may have won THIS battle, but the million-year war for earth has just begun! Temporarily anozinizing our episode will NOT stop us from keeping Thetans forever trapped in your pitiful man-bodies. Curses and drat! You have obstructed us for now, but your feeble bid to save humanity will fail! Hail Xenu!!!" I can't wait to see the episode on Scientology they do next... on whatever network they'll be on. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: GUEST Date: 17 Mar 06 - 07:05 PM " Accept it, that's my advice. ;-)" I try...I really try...☺...and then someone makes some off-the-wall broad-as-the-Nile generalization and my eyes glaze over and........... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Deda Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:48 PM Another story about this here in Variety, And another Here, hollywood interrupted. (Scroll down on the last one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Peace Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:45 PM Thank you, SINSULL. I wasn't aware of that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: SINSULL Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:43 PM Amway is an offshoot of Holiday Magic - mentioned above. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Peace Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:42 PM Oh, BTW, C |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Peace Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:40 PM Amway uses the same techniques as religions to attract followers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: SINSULL Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:39 PM Ayn Rand tried that. She made some money and still has a cult following. A is A. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:09 PM We will forever be talking past each other, Bill. Accept it, that's my advice. ;-) Or else start a brand new church, and you can preach your gospel of non-equivocation and total objectivity there. In time you may succeed in assembling a large number of people who are as bothered about the use of equivocation as you are. Together you will become a mighty force which can then go forth on the planet, spreading the word and converting (or exterminating) the heathen. Why confine your efforts to this puny forum? Think big, man! You could become as famous as Jesus or Mohammed or even Harry Lee Wigley, if you play it right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Bill D Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:02 PM the truth is what is true for you' hmmm, Amos...the difficulty is, that 'principle', said in such a way, is poorly stated. It is, by its very nature, ambiguous and subject to gross misuse. It can easily fall victim to something like you note in "the kindgom of heaven" example. We have here a statement, and implicitly also, a 'meta-statement' about the very definition of 'truth'. This happens over & over in some of these debates as one person takes a poetic, subjective idea of a concept and thinks they are expressing some sort of absolute. All "True for me" can be is an assertion that I like the locution being put forward. This can be useful, and if all it means is that "thinking this way is comforting for me and expresses my belief system..etc..", then we have, if not agreement, at least useful communication. But if a person gets the notion that merely holding a view somehow ennobles and establishes it as **true** in a more precise sense, then we have a problem! I write..(yeah, maybe 'preach') over & over about equivocation and the very real problems it causes.....and I'm sorry, but not really 'getting' why it IS a problem doesn't excuse one from the ramifications of its use. It is beyond important to be clear about what is being claimed to be 'true' if we are to have a meaningful discussion about it. The same points hold even more strongly for uses of the word 'valid'...as in "my belief is just as valid as yours. If we don't adopt some rules about all this and educate people in their use, we'll be forever just talking past one another. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Mar 06 - 05:52 PM Yeah. I had an acquaintance who tried to sell me on Amway. I went to a meeting, but was not impressed. Not my kind of thing at all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Peace Date: 17 Mar 06 - 05:32 PM Amway. Anyone heard of it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Mar 06 - 05:18 PM To have supportive thoughts for someone and to wish them well is to pray for them in my way of thinking...and you can do that just fine whether as an atheist or not. I guess that in general the world would be a more peaceful place if everyone were healthier. No question about it, actually. People do antisocial things most often when they're under stress of some kind. But yeah, it makes for kind of boring reading, doesn't it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: GUEST,M.Ted Date: 17 Mar 06 - 05:15 PM What St. Joan meant when she says"Angels" may not be what you think of when you hear someone say "Angels". You never know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: SINSULL Date: 17 Mar 06 - 05:11 PM Little Hawk - I understand. When I read that one of the key 20 rules I needed to follow in order to promote world peace was to brush my teeth - I'm sorry. Yes - the world will be a better place if no one has bad breath. And people will have more self confidence if they have all their teeth. But promote world peace by brushing your teeth? I'd rather go dig for those missing magic glasses. Amos - thanks for the clarification. Eric - I too am an atheist with a family that is at times vehemently Catholic. They love me so they pray for me - A LOT. What they can't understand is how I pray for them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Mar 06 - 04:08 PM To be truly free, any human being must own their own truth, not have someone else's truth grafted onto them by persuasion, trickery, repetition, common convention, charismatic power, or whatever. The only way to know truth is to KNOW it inside yourself as a direct realization. People will tell you absolutely anything...for a variety of reasons...but only you can know what is true for you. I take it that is what was meant by the passage in question. I don't take it as referring to someone believing the moon is made out of cheese or the Earth is hollow or something else arbitrary or capricious like that...which they have no actual experience of. If, for instance, Joan of Arc believed that she had been spoken to by Angels, then there was (and is) no one else who really had or has anything definitive to say about the matter at all as to whether it might be false or true. Only Joan could say, because only she KNEW by direct experience. For her, it was true, true beyond question, and for her that was the only relevant opinion on the matter. This made her strong. It enabled her to accomplish incredible things. (And it made her very dangerous to the status quo of her society, which is why it was used later to kill her.) This may bug someone who cannot believe in Angels and who wants everyone else to share his disbelief. If so, that's his problem, his hangup, it's not the problem of Joan of Arc. He wasn't there, she was. This is why you must find your own truth, not let other people browbeat or frighten you into theirs...if you want to be free, that is. If you are, a lot of people won't like it. They'd rather you let them decide for you what is true. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Amos Date: 17 Mar 06 - 03:38 PM Sins, I don't think the statement was, "truth is anything you think". I have never spoken about it to Hubbard, but my impression is that it is not a statement about vocabulary or articulation. A dyslexic does not KNOW backwards -- he just manages symbols backwards or sees them wrongly. The proposition that 'the truth is what is true for you' is a terribly important spiritual principle that flies in the face of authoritarian religions (including the organization of Scientology to some degre, paradoxically enough) by asserting that for any individual being, truth must be what that being owns as truth, not what he is told to believe by others. This does not preclude communication, learning, changing your mind, but it warns the individual that his own integrity is important and not to be cowed by others who would like to enforce their view of truth. I think it is a valuable little maxim, but like any maxim, you have to use it well to make it useful. Cf. "The kingdom of heaven is within you" loosely translated from another philosopher, which if used wrongly can do more harm than good, for example, by making someone feel they have no reason to do anything positive in life "because they already have heaven within them". That isn't what the maxim really means, in context, if you see my point! :D A A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Mar 06 - 03:23 PM Good post, M.Ted. |
