On 3/14/19, Carl Jarvis <carjar82@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
With my rather active life, I've never tried using Book Share. One
day, perhaps. I finally finished a book on the stolen election in
1876 between Hayes and Tildon. Took about a month to read, one bit at
a time. But I'm halfway through the first of the Hedges books,
America, the Final Tour...I think...I would need to go to my player to
be sure of the title.
I think I'm in denial, like many of our clients. They think that they
can see better than they can, and I think I remember better than I do.
Carl Jarvis
On 3/14/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yes, Unsheltered is on BARD. Not only does Hedges have books on BARD, but
there are also several on Bookshare. The daisy audio format is relatively
easy to listen to and will play on your NLS player. If your regional
library
has an arrangement with Bookshare, there's no fee. If not, it's $75 for
the
first year and $50 a year after that. Bookshare gets some of the
political
books we want to read that never get to BARD.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2019 10:26 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Discussions about Religion
Thanks Miriam. I'll take a look at Unsheltered if it's on BARD.
Currently I'm reading 3 books by Chris Hedges. Since Cathy is not
excited
over listening to my political browsing for her "pleasure reading", we
share
suspense and mystery novels, and I do my "pleasure reading" whenever I
have
a few minutes. It's funny. One reason Cathy rejects many of the books
and
programs I listen to is because they are too violent and depressing. But
so
are most of the mysteries and suspense novels we read.
Carl Jarvis
On 3/14/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl,
I'm reading a lovely novel, Unsheltered, by Barbara Kingsolver. Her
novels are always about social issues, framed beautifully in people's
stories. This one moves back and forth between 2015 and 1870 in a
planned community in New Jersey. One of the things that she makes
clear is that although the times are so very different, the basic
cultural themes remain the same. You look at those people in 1870, and
you can see the Republican base today. Few of us move away from the
majority culture and question it. Mustafa is defending his culture
against
the American empire which you so often deride.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2019 9:27 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Discussions about Religion
Miriam,
Technically you're right. But Mostafa manages to get his digs in
regarding his feelings about all religions except his own, no matter
what rant he is on. It also annoys me that he posts his anti American
rants on this list.
I doubt, from what he writes, that he ever reads any of the articles,
such as Chris Hedges.
While I feel that Mostafa is bright, he is so under the influence of
his own self importance that he is simply a parrot echoing the
mouthing's of the Ancients. For the most part I hold out hope for
Mankind, but what a sense of bleakness overcomes me to think of a
world filled with mindless people carrying their prayer rugs so they
can pray five times daily to a vacuum in the sky.
Carl Jarvis
On 3/13/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl,
A small correction? Mustafa discusses subjects other than religion.
Usually, what he does is to choose a topic which involves something
that is going on in the US, usually something that you and I would
agree is rather awful, and he writes about it. While I'm no defender
of US policy, I do have a problem with a citizen of another country
whose participation on an email list or lists composed predominantly
of Americans, feels compelled to attack this country and the religion
of many of its citizens, in every post. He doesn't write about the
evil doers in the Middle East and certainly not about the autocrat
who leads his country. So basically, when Mustafa initiates a
discussion, his posts feel like attacks. I tried to say this gently,
but there is a communication difficulty due to language. If he
mentioned that our president has done a particular thing and asked
what we thought and said what he thought, that would feel more like a
discussion.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2019 8:21 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Mostafa Al'mahdy <mostafa.almahdy@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Discussions about Religion
Well Roger, I was afraid you were having too good a time. Actually I
don't even know why I wrote what I did. Mostafa can decide what he
wants to say.
But in a moment of annoyance,I felt moved to let him know how his
rants affect me.
I really don't want to sound as if I'm offering advice, since Mostafa
has made it quite clear that he has an agenda and will not be tricked
into discussing other topics. While I only express my own beliefs,
and try not to bully others, nonetheless, all the time and effort
Mostafa tells us he has invested in studying his religion, would, in
my opinion, be better spent studying most any social issue. It
always amazes me regarding the time Jeopardy spends on Mythology and
the Ancient Gods. But there are people who spend an entire career
amerced in such nonsense. But it's their lives.
I spent ten years exploring Christianity. I spent another ten years
becoming a pretty decent bowler, carrying a 196 average at my peak.
I've spent the past
55 years laboring in the field of work with the blind. So, we each
follow our own interests. But you are correct in your use of the
word "bullying".
I suspect that this is what caused me to call for an end to the
nonsense.
Carl Jarvis
On 3/13/19, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl, I don't think you can count on his stopping. Mostafa is a
religious bully. He first came to my attention when he started
subscribing to email lists just so that he could collect email
addresses and make a personal mailing list from which he would not
remove anyone even though they demanded to be removed. That is
bullying. That is religious harassment. Over time his bullying has
taken on other characteristics, but he is still a religious bully.
Now that he has been bested in the application of logic to his
rantings he turns his bullying into name calling, insults and other
personal attacks. What he doesn't understand is that I am actually
enjoying that to some extent. He is validating my position while at
the same time he is sabotaging his own credibility. I don't usually
experience enjoyment when someone sabotages himself, but in this
case he continues to validate my own position by doing it. So how
could I not enjoy that? I just picture him in my mind with his face
turning purple with rage that I have defeated him in a contest of
intellect and I laugh at that. I would not expect him to join the
ranks of the reasonable and civil crowd though. But wouldn't it be
really great if he finally admitted that what he has been harassing
people with is indefensible and so give it up?
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with.
It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices.
It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true.
But our preferences do not determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/13/2019 11:10 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
Please! Stop!
This sort of post is pure Childishness, and serves only to sooth
the ruffled feathers of he who wrote it.
When I was a child I was taken to the Woodshed and soundly spanked
for not behaving. I decided to use "reason" with my children,
believing that spanking only proved that Might makes Right. My
children, traumatized by my lectures, decided to try "Time Outs"
where their children were sent to their rooms to "think" about
their misdeeds.
But Please, whatever method works, Please let's agree to disagree,
and go forward to discuss such things as respect, courteousness and
objectivity.
Carl Jarvis Happy to say that I'm still an Agnostic. And, if you
notice, when it comes to the aforementioned topic, I just don't
care anymore.
On 3/12/19, Mostafa Almahdy<mostafa.almahdy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Roger, you are basing your ratiocination on inconsequence. I urge
you to study proper syllogism. If something isn't empirically
proved, that shouldn't signify it doesn't exist. So for instance,
electrical energy is not visually visible to us. However, it is
perceived with other senses. If the light is turned on, it has to
be decisive sign for
currently incessant electrical transmittance. It flows through
cables and consequently, produces power. The denial of God is
essentially based on obstinance and doctrinal abnegation. Science
doesn't negate nor affirm the existence of God. But, studying
science with intellectual independence and faith in action
necessarily leads to this conviction. Your attempts to evade are
futile. The fact you are petulant is immensely demonstrable. Your
alleged claim of holding a Biology degree testifies to your stiff
state of nescience and repugnance. Frankly, you are detesting
faith and that's why you are exercising derision and bigotry
toward its followers. Scientific theories never call people to
disbelieve.
They are faith haters who pervert them to venally reach up to that
incorrect conclusion. It is staggeringly inconsistent and
concurrently duplicitous to attribute science to Atheism. Atheism
is a psychologically developed delusional state. It is essentially
characterised with counterfeitly exculpating incredulity and
exalting philistinism. It thence eludes engaging in rational
scrutiny. In order for the deceitful portrayal to be amply
consummated, theology ought to be disparaged and violence has to
be falsely imputed to religion. This approach is plainly hostile
and anti religion anyway. I'd respect someone if he's to be rather
transparent.
Don't claim it is science that has caused you to disbelieve. Be
truthful and say, well, I just hate religion and actually,
couldn't cope with its tenets, such as, the do's and don't's.
You'd be more respected that way. The prob, nonetheless, that
faith is misportrayed by them as a motive to get into a
disgraceful state of civil retardation. This is wholly declined.
Roger funnily couldn't until now, cite at least one reliable or
even unreliable reference concerning his alleged claims about the
Koran and its authorship.
He furthermore accuses me of hypocrisy because I ask him for his
never rleased Biology degree and to cite any reference regarding
his claims about the Koran. Well, he couldn't do neither.
Moreover, he seems to have even misconstrued the term hypocrisy.
The latter is generically defined As counterfeit expression of
concurrence that is not endorsed by inward conviction. I am
satisfied though that Roger finally admitted that the existence of
God is rationally potential.
Well, that's good and leastwise, a step forward even if it's minor
one. I'll continue to amend Roger's fallacious propositions until
he ultimately recognises and gives in to the vitally
incontrovertible truth. It is rendered as namely. Life has a
purpose and people are going to depart this world to an eternal
one. Lastly, Atheism is used by many in the Arab world as a manner
to bootlick westerns, so they may obtain a visa or be granted
asylum. This act is indeed to be considerably oleaginous and
disingenuous. This is what I call, the sale of the worthful for
the worthless. People abandon Islam to immigrate to western
countries because they are culturally manipulated. As for someone
like me who is intellectually independent, I don't need to defer
to civil defeatism.
I learned this foreign language to be broadly communicative, not
to be ridden, owned and controlled by someone else.
On 3/12/19, Roger Loran Bailey<rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx> wrote:
By the way, every time I type the name Mostafa my spell checker--
urges me to change it to Hemostat.
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with.
It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held
prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want
to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/11/2019 4:20 PM, Mostafa Almahdy wrote:
Hey petulant senior, I decided not to pollute my ears with your
wretched terms. You're maliciously mischievous and your
Atheistic disposal are emphatically the clearest sign for your
miserable loss.
You must fathom that I don't care about your opinion of me. I
don't believe in an invisible man in the sky. I don't personify
the divine.
This is what Christendom does. This is a vivid proof that
reflects your Christian scope of presuming the divine, despite
your disaffirmation or unprovably arrogating otherwise. I
rather believe in a unique Supreme Being. Allah glory be to Him
has ultimate
omnipotence to providentially sustain and maintain creation. He
doesn't beget, nor He is begotten and no one is comparable to Him.
This is my belief in brief. Your refuge with incorrectly
considering my argument to be of circular reasoning is just a
foiled attempt to evade. Your inactive conscience is the primal
factor of this incessantly delusional state. Nonbelievers have
gone so broadly conjecturing the commence of the universe.
Nonetheless, they are inwardly aware of the divine existence.
They just prefer to interpret all models of taxonomic variance
in merely empirical manner. Even prominent English theoretical
physicist who devoted himself to fend for Atheism and died
recently, Stephen Hawking, circumstantially confessed on a
televised interview, that God may exist. But science can
explain everything without the need for a Creator, he added. So
plainly, science isn't a major barrier
to faith and vice versa. It has rather been flexed by some
to make it falsely incompatible with spiritual engagements.
Science doesn't negate the possibility of God. However, looking
at the perfectly structured and integrated universe has to
logically lead to this conclusion. Islam enjoins its followers
to read and ponder onto the signs of the heaven and within the
broader figure of the farther cosmos. Thence, I don't have any
motive to even think of potentially abandoning faith. My
religion doesn't prohibit the looking into the universe and the
study of chiefly temporal pertained scientific disciplines.
Unlike the Church which wholly precluded all sorts of scientific
development in medieval era, Islam bases its major tenets onto
the divine injunction that says, read in the name of thy Lord.
In many verses, the Koran praises science and those who belong
to it. You have sarcastically invited me to dispose faith and
embrace your path.
I am seriously wondering, what for? Theology made me confident
and your lack of made you arrogant, ignorant and malcontented to
say the least. You now have to reconsider your unjustifiedly
obstinate temperament. Your objection to faith is of essentially
psychological trait. Otherwise, you would have leastwise looked
at the Koran or cited any relieble or unreliable reference for
your oddly unexplainable dissent to the Koran regarding science
in its various topics. Lastly, you're struck with immense
sorrow, perhaps because of your desolation, pathetic life or
both and quite possibly, even more.
I therefore strongly urge you to seek consulting a certified
psychotherapist. I detest to be inimical with some senior like
you.
Your situation evokes pettiness. If you need help concerning
your psychologically awful status, I could refer you to someone
who is competent of aiding you properly. I absolutely view
Atheism because of mainly psychological traumas.
On 3/9/19, Roger Loran Bailey<rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Well, here we have more childish name calling and insults.
Okay, I will try again. I respectfully and civilly ask you to
provide your refutation for my explanation of how your major
argument for an invisible man with magic powers who lives in
the sky is circular reasoning and is thereby a logical fallacy.
If you cannot do that, which I very strongly suspect, then I
respectfully ask you to revise your argument. If you cannot do
that either, which I also strongly suspect, then I respectfully
ask you to admit that you have been wrong and to come over to
the world of reason. What I fully expect, though, is that you
will spew more invective and insults. That, again, is just
adding the ad homenem logical fallacy to the circular reasoning
logical fallacy. But I keep giving you the chance to make
yourself look better. Every time, though, you throw another
tantrum and make yourself look even more ridiculous than you
already have.
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple
with.
It
may
be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices.
It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true.
But our preferences do not determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/9/2019 1:14 PM, Mostafa Almahdy wrote:
To the Virginian archfiend, wrath and curse upon thee. I
warned you several times earlier, not to cross your boundries.
I'm exceedingly comported with civil people and immensely
strident with rude, yokelish and pretentious ones. You haven't
exhibited any sense of logic with the radically imbecilic
gibberish you ludicrously uttered.
It's you who's peculiarly pestilent, petulant, stupefied,
garbled, tomfool, daft, awless, cozened, anathemised, scurvy,
disheartened, infidel, nescient, noncivilised, tameable,
vicious, crocked, crooked, swinish, opprobrious and
emphatically dismantled. You're mentally mishandled and I'm
going to show you how to talk. What is an incapacitated
idiotic senior like you going to do? Even if I lived nearby
your damnable residence which I fortuitously don't, I would
have never thought of unwisely vitiating my cleansed spirit
with your intemperately contaminated figure. Your mind is
miserably dazzled.
It's sufficient for me that you perhaps be shot at your piggy
head with a demented sniper in your gravely smutty
neighborhood and that's not improbable to occur in America.
I'm here to just destroy you mentally. I think I'm doing well.
You are poorly deluded with being counterfeitly prosperous.
You knew this is demonstratively fallacious.
I'm enormously halcyon with my faith and you're implausibly
deplorable with your lack of. What has your irreligion brought
to you so far but curse and blasphemy? You live insane and
shall die in vain. What has your nonsensical logic of seeing
everything merely material has presented to you? You've
foolishly chased illusion to bogusly perceive superior and has
commonly, miserably failed to attain. As I expected, you won't
ever release your alleged Biology certificate because it
doesn't exist and you won't cite one reliable or even
unreliable reference regarding what you claimed about the
Koran and its authorship because you are fibber and chiseler.
If you don't like theology, that doesn't exempt you from being
respectful and reliable which you aren't. You need to be
properly disciplined.
I'm a teacher and it's part of my job to thoroughly discipline
misbehaving children.
If you were at my presence, I would have laid you carefully
confined on a submission table, took off your shoes and socks
and toughly caned you barefooted until you cryout, mercy,
mercy, in agony and regret.
This is the manner by which they used to discipline obstinate
children here in Egypt's rural regions. It's called corporal
punishment. It works well in disciplining misdemeaning
children and you're among them. Sometimes, aged individuals
act like kids and thence, they have
got to be treated accordingly. After this disciplinal act,
you
should have known how to behave. Dissing someone disgraceful
like you is something its doers shouldn't be scolded. Go to
hell mr smart, curse and wrath upon thee.
On 3/9/19, Roger Loran Bailey<rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Now we have a threat of unspecified violence, unspecified but
still violence. Mostafa, do you have any idea of how much
misery you will cause for yourself if you actually try to
carry this out? Is this really your idea of being civil? I
can only say that I have tried my best to be civil to you,
but as soon as I give you a logical argument that you cannot
refute you throw childish fits along with insults and threats.
And then you say that it is I who knows nothing of logic.
Is
this a case of that psychological term called projection?
Come on, Mostafa, you have taken it onto yourself to harass
everyone you can over the Internet with religion. Can't you
take the inevitable fight back?
Are you really so cowardly that you will run away making
threats?
Why
can't you defend that which you do your best to force onto
others?
Give
it some thought. If you can't defend it then just maybe it is
indefensible and just maybe you should give it up. You do
yourself no service by continually making a complete fool of
yourself and alienating people. And by the way, if anything
happens to me there is now a record of your threatening me.
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple
with.
It
may
be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices.
It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be
true. But our preferences do not determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/8/2019 8:21 AM, Mostafa Almahdy wrote:
Mariam, as long as you don't have precise stats, you are not
suppose to arbitrarily refer to them. Roger, you're not more
than an absurdly senior, eyeless Virginian imbecile. Someone
used my e-mail address to unsubscribe me from the list and I
felicitously have done so. I've left the list permenently.
Roger, you have proved to me, yourself and others that you
are completely unaware of logic, science, philosophy,
religion and even courtesy for that matter. Theology isn't
infertile and reality lies beyond mere philistinism. There
is Allah, there is heaven, there are daemons, you're among
them, there is hell and that's where you're damnably
destined to dwell infinitely.
You are enwrapped in empirical presumptions and you are not
able to see beyond them.
It
isn't my prob that you are spiritually piteous. You're
brought to dispute for nothing but to be flamboyant. My
retaliation from you should extend beyond scandalising your
woeful nescience and insolence.
It proceeds to broadly exemplify your fallibility and
absolute lack of credibility. Just watch out for my immense
strike that is yet to come.
I am going to make you gravely suffer in this life and you
shall indeed be subjected to tremendously awful doom in the
hereafter.
On 3/8/19, Roger Loran Bailey<rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Of course the discussions of religion here leads to
something positive.
It exposes religion for the complete bat shit wackiness
that it is.
And,
Mostafa, you help. You have yet to address my explanation
of how your major argument for religion was circular
reasoning.
When instead of refuting my point you start the personal
attacks like you continue in this very message you validate
my position. You won't flat out admit that you cannot
refute me, but by engaging in ad homenem attacks you make
it clear that you have no refutation. Really, wouldn't you
try to refute me if you had a refutation? Face up to it,
Mostafa, we live in a real world. Whether we like it or not
we are embedded in reality.
There
are no gods. There are no allahs. There are no devils or
demons.
There
is no heaven. There is no hell. There is only reality and
reality is enough. There is a lot more to learn about
reality than we have ever learned about it before. Learning
about reality is something that can be a lifetime pursuit.
Studying theology can be a lifetime pursuit too, but it is
a sterile one. It is just one made up story after another.
Theology is a terrible way to waste a life.
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to
grapple with.
It
may
be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held
prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we
desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not
determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/7/2019 9:09 PM, Mostafa Almahdy wrote:
I am now totally convinced that discussion about religion
here won't lead to anything positive. This is another good
reason that Miriam previously mentioned and thence,
inspired it into my head. I initially quitted bringing
the subject back because it isn't respected and often
unhallowed by certain irreligious individuals.
Whenever
it's
brought up, people are stirred to expose their conniptions.
Roger
in
particular, has designated incredible ignominy, nescience
and discourtesy to anything that is labeled with faith or
religious belief. This is truly unfair. It just
demonstrates how cretin Roger is. He showed us throughout
the course of my conversation with him, how dipstick and
wanker he miserably turned out to be. I am flabbergasted
at this senior and his incredible ability to be
onomatopoetically pretentious. Roger is simply a hapless,
tedious old racist.
Roger doesn't fathom that faith and science harmoniously
parallelise because he despises religion beforehand. He
proved his detest to faith pertained matters as he
insistently derided the miraculously prophetic nocturnal
journey to the celestial realm.
He
may have sought refuge with this tactic to purposely
marginalise my status. He attempted to do so but he
fortunately couldn't. I am wholeheartedly stiff in my
belief and won't ever defer to Roger's predominantly
repulsive tendency. I determined to amply retaliate and
strike this daft senior with what he justly merits. I'm
not incensed because of his Atheistic perspective. I am
rather indignant at his wildly half-witted disposal and
his repeatedly failed attempts to pretend otherwise. He is
mentally indisposed and unjustifiedly imperious to proper
knowledge. He has at least committed five major offences
during this tremendously preposterous confabulation.
First
off, he doltishly admitted, that apart from certain
Christian preachings and the unknowledgeable sermoniser
who interpreted his blindness as some form of God's wrath
at his sinful state, he never experienced any spiritual
involvement. If we skeptically entrusted
Roger's account on that regard, Christian preachers in the
States
are generically unreliable and incomparably, considered
the farthest from prestigious theological vocation.
Thence, their wordages are formally declined. Second, he
admitted that he kept a taped copy of the Koran but he
never attempted to play it and carelessly returned it to
the library of his local residence. This demonstrates his
prejudiced and cavalier inclination. Third, he on several
occasions, claimed to have a Biology degree but failed to
release this alleged certificate. Fourth, he claimed that
the Koran is inaccurate about black holes, giving no
evidence for that. He seemed to be indecisive but rather
despicable. When I sent him a video to counter his view on
this, he didn't even click on its link and came up with
obviously preconceived notion about its content. Fifth and
ultimately, he allegedly claimed that the Koran was
authored by prophet Muhammad but never cited either one
reliable or unreliable reference to verify his proposition.
What is this to be called rather than plainly disheartened
and piteous individual? Miriam, Carl and others are
irreligious but not brattish as Roger really is. I utterly
discern the situation concerning religion in the west. It
isn't as crucial therein as it is here in the Middle East.
It portrays a substantial portion of our culture, heritage
and identity. Therefore, the two are inseparable. The west
has to respectfully accommodate this condition and deal
with us accordingly. I knew what religion is in the west,
I respect that in spite of my own convictions. For
instance, it doesn't organise social life for many, except
for inconsiderable group of traditional Christians. This
is called conservatism in western
cultural terminology. Basically, conservatism in western
culture
is
properly defined as a theological orientation that
advocates the preservation of the best in society and
immensely opposes secular views. Six years ago, I received
a guest from Britain. He used to be my English teacher at
the British Council. I didn't know anything about his
personal belief until we met here in Cairo's international
airport.
We chatted at his arrival and he incidentally disclosed
his irreligious identity to me. He told me so in quite a
jesting manner.
I
slightly smiled, and had no problem with that what so ever
and invited him at my home for dinner next day. It was
Ramadan and the peak of Summer at that time. The man came
to my house approximately fifteen minutes before dusk.
Although the temperature was so hot, he politely refused
to take even one sip of water. Despite my insistence on
him to leastwise drink some water, he thanked me and said
he would wait until people break their fast, saying, it's
soon anyway. He has done so out of respect to the general
atmosphere. People loved him, we prayed in front of him,
he never commented and happily ate with us. He so much
loved Egyptian desserts and the dates I typically bring
from Medina, called them so delicious. Medina is the city
that sites prophet Muhammad's tomb, located in western
region of modern Saudi Arabia.
I
didn't have another chance to see him again during his
brief visit because in Ramadan, I am usually occupied with
charitable affairs during daylight hours post to work and
at night, we are praying.
On
his departure's date eve, he called and unfeignedly
thanked me for the nice dinner and the truly beautiful
experience.
I warmly paid him a heart-whole farewell on the phone and
apologised for not being able to come to the airport to
see him off. This is a decent model for someone who
doesn't believe in religion but still, so respectful. In
order to be respected, you have got to respect others,
someone
said.
Moreover,
this personal experience clearly demonstrates the plain
difference between the competently educated and otherwise.
The man obviously drinks but he never asked for this. He
honoured our sobriety, yet he knew it is motivated with
religious tenets. This also demonstrates the level of this
man's education and more importantly, his civility.
I'm
done.
On 3/7/19, Carl Jarvis<carjar82@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Some folks learn through other folks experiences. I
happen to be in that other group, the hands on guys.
Well okay, maybe not when it comes to certain things,
like robbing a bank or crawling down a long tunnel, but
in my experience it is better understood if I am totally
submerged.
Hmm...this is getting me trapped, so I'm going to back
out and go sweep the kitchen and shake out the throw
rugs, and even run the vacuum.
Carl Jarvis
On 3/6/19, Roger Loran
Bailey<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Well, I never had a dramatic journey from belief to
nonbelief either.
I
didn't even have an undramatic journey from belief to
nonbelief.
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to
grapple with.
It
may
be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held
prejudices.
It
may
not
be
consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But
our preferences do not determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/6/2019 1:19 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Carl,
So, what prompted me to say what I did was that you do,
periodically, make pronouncements about the foolishness
of belief in a personal deity.
And
sometimes, you make those comments in response to
Mustafa who, clearly, has a different view on the
matter from your's. I never had a religious education.
My parents were nominally Jewish, which meant that they
celebrated "the high holidays", and sort of celebrated
Passover, but not according to the whole tradition. So
I never had a dramatic journey from belief to non belief.
Perhaps that is why I don't feel the need to counter
arguments for the existence of God with arguments in
opposition to the existence of God. I did, as I've
mentioned before, go through a thought process,
probably when I was in college, when I formalized my
own position on religion.
However, given my social work education which involved
courses on human behavior, I've never considered
religion to be the major cause of human dysfunction,
just as I've never considered our economic system to be
the basic cause of human dysfunction. Rather, I see
both as expressions of how people function. But it does
seem to me that institutions, once they have been
formed, have a life of their own.
A
government is not the same as the individuals who are
part of it.
Take
Obama out of the Presidency, and he won't be planning
the assassination of people every week.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of
Carl Jarvis
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2019 11:22 AM
To:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Discussions about
Religion
Miriam wrote in part:
..."Carl may never stop wanting to make amends for
having been an Evangelical Christian in the past."
Sometimes, Miriam, I think that you have a Devilish
sense of humor.
When I was young, I proudly exclaimed to one and all
that I never spent time or energy regretting my past
activities...or lack thereof.
But I really do have some regrets. And I would undo
some hurts that my behavior caused others. And I would
go back, if I could, and do some of the things for
which I did not have the courage to do. But my many
religious experiences, like my many political
experiences, and my many love affairs(many of them
imagined), all contributed to who I am today.
My past is just that, My Past! And I make no
judgements on what or
how I behaved or thought. But there are things in my
past
that
I
do
not talk about, but which are just as much a part of
who I am today, but of which I would strike from my
Life's Experiences. I still fight my own Goblins and
Bogymen, and would hang my head in shame if they were
exposed.
And yet, as I say, they are also part of 83 plus
years of living and experiencing that has given me a
grand trip through life.
It's true that I become a bit rabid at times when on
the subject of religion. But religion is just one
thread woven into our human fabric.
But it is a thread that has strong influences on the
entire fabric of Life. After my days as a small child
in Sunday School, learning about Jesus, Santa Claus,
the
3 Wise Men and a special woman who had God's baby, and
the tooth fairy, and the Easter Bunny, I left any
doings with religion until I married my first wife. I
was 25, and she was 22.
She
was
a
Christian, and insisted that I should attend church
services every Sunday, morning and evening, and midweek
Bible study.
I took this on in the same way I've taken on every new
facet of my life.
I began to explore and to question. At some point I
became certain that most people in our congregation
were only paying lip service, and were not true
Believers.
So I decided to find out what Belief was all about.
I
was baptized, and gave myself over to Jesus Christ. I
accepted the existence of God, and the Holy Spirit. I
attended a "full gospel"
group,
and spoke in tongues and had visions.
It was an interesting time, with some unexplained
happenings.
But
I
never
found God. I did find many honest Believers who said
they had met God, but I also met many phonies and Users.
After nearly ten years, I came to understand that God
was a feeling. Those who gave themselves over to that
Feeling never questioned it, and believed it would
carry them to a higher place after their life on Earth.
While I totally respect those people who are "True
Believers", I could not resolve the many
contradictions, let alone the many versions that caused
more strife in the world than it resolved. As I
questioned others, the answer was the same, although
expressed in many different ways.
I must "trust". I was told that God moves in
mysterious ways...I won't go into all the events that
led up to my leaving the Christian Faith, but suffice
it to say that I knew that I had to be true to myself.
I could not simply trust. And to try to sneak along on
someone else's trust, well that would never work.
But the entire experience was valuable. My wife and I
separated, not over religion, butt because she could
not adjust to living with a blind man.
While I was in Rehab, learning to go forward with my
life, she was alone, seeing her dreams shattered, and
no one was there to lead her through to the other side.
We did marriage counseling through a Christian Counselor.
Finally I moved out. Those were hard times,
leaving my daughter behind.
But my wife and I did come to resolve our personal
hurt, and stayed friends until her death many years
later.
Christianity worked for my first wife. As she aged she
developed Diabetes, cancer, and congestive heart
failure, but her Faith never wavered.
How you, Miriam, or Roger or Mostafa deal with your
Faith has to be an individual, very personal matter.
And frankly, how I feel about it should not matter to
anyone else. But it is this willingness to trust in
some unknown Power, without question, that concerns me.
Until we can openly discuss and question why we behave
the way we do, and how our beliefs effect Life on
Earth, we will continue to make the same foolish
mistakes over and over until we are no more.
Carl Jarvis
On 3/5/19, Miriam
Vieni<miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I would like to make a neutral observation. The
discussions regarding religion that have taken place
among Roger, Carl, and Mustafa, do not lead to mutual
understanding or resolution of issues.
Rather,
they
appear to be experienced by Mustafa as attacks upon a
central tenet of his life, an important part of his
identity, and thus, he attacks back. While Roger sees
these discussions as rational debate, and Carl sees
them as open discussion of personal views, Mustafa
does not.
Mustafa is not going to stop believing in his faith.
Roger is not going to stop wanting to prove over and
over again that he is the more rational of the two and
that his position is correct. Carl may never stop
wanting to make amends for having been an Evangelical
Christian in the past.
Miriam
(Seeking knowledge is compulsory from cratle to grave because it
is a shoreless ocean.)
