![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 13 of 13. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by bulldog2 on June 22, 2010, at 16:33:21
I did say that I found his posts offensive to me because he was implying we should use Christainty as a tool to cure our mental illnesses. Because this room is multi religious I felt his statements could be offensive to those who were not Christian. You have to read my post in social to understand why I was upset.
Posted by bulldog2 on June 22, 2010, at 16:33:21
In reply to I Never Said That Christ_Emp Was Anti Semitic, posted by bulldog2 on June 20, 2010, at 16:10:42
> I did say that I found his posts offensive to me because he was implying we should use Christainty as a tool to cure our mental illnesses. Because this room is multi religious I felt his statements could be offensive to those who were not Christian. You have to read my post in social to understand why I was upset.
Also please read his post in this thread. I felt he was very lose with his statements.
Posted by violette on June 22, 2010, at 16:33:22
In reply to I Never Said That Christ_Emp Was Anti Semitic, posted by bulldog2 on June 20, 2010, at 16:10:42
Bulldog,
Only Lou can speak for himself - but I didn't want you to think my post to Lou had anything to do with you, but I wanted to answer his questions..I thought Lou was referring to racist statements made about Jews which he's been bringing to the attention of administration for weeks now?
I'm not saying anymore about that situation because I don't know the whole story...All I know is that Lou has a situation he feels is unaddressed, but unrelated to your situation?
Posted by Phillipa on June 22, 2010, at 16:33:22
In reply to Re: I Never Said That Christ_Emp Was Anti Semitic » bulldog2, posted by violette on June 20, 2010, at 16:53:58
Yes that is what Lou is referring to. Phillipa
Posted by bulldog2 on June 22, 2010, at 16:33:22
In reply to Re: I Never Said That Christ_Emp Was Anti Semitic » bulldog2, posted by violette on June 20, 2010, at 16:53:58
> Bulldog,
>
> Only Lou can speak for himself - but I didn't want you to think my post to Lou had anything to do with you, but I wanted to answer his questions..I thought Lou was referring to racist statements made about Jews which he's been bringing to the attention of administration for weeks now?
>
> I'm not saying anymore about that situation because I don't know the whole story...All I know is that Lou has a situation he feels is unaddressed, but unrelated to your situation?
>
>I saw Christ_Emp post that Lou was referring to. The link is in Lou's post. You should read it. It is really offensive to anyone that is not Jewish. And Bob wants me to be civil! That needs to be yanked in my opinion. In other words if you don't accept Jesus..burn baby burn
Posted by violette on June 22, 2010, at 16:33:22
In reply to Re: I Never Said That Christ_Emp Was Anti Semitic » violette, posted by bulldog2 on June 20, 2010, at 18:04:49
Bulldog- I thought we were talking about racism here (my bad). I did not read Lou's link or posts; as I said to Lou-I do not wish to read the posts but was replying to his questions. I have noticed many posts by Lou to Dr. Bob, and did not read them although in the past, I had opened some out of curiousity.
My response to Lou's questions were in regard to racist comments, assuming "anti-sematic comments" referred to adverse ethnicity/racial comments directed at people of Jewish heritage. I was not talking about religion and do not feel like discussing religion or getting involved in this conflict or even commenting about religion right now.
It seems like common courtesy to answer questions asked by others. At the same time, no one has an obligation to answer questions and I'm sure people inadvertently miss posts, leaving others' questions unanswered.
But in answering Lou's questions, as I said before, I do not believe people should be permitted to make blantantly racist comments here.
Anyway, thanks for setting me straight as to what the situation was about. I was probably just having a ditzy moment...
I hope you and Lou and Christ_Emp and whoever and all can make amends and be friends and have mature debates, disagreements, discussions, and agreements.
Posted by Lou PIlder on June 22, 2010, at 16:33:22
In reply to Re: I Never Said That Christ_Emp Was Anti Semitic » bulldog2, posted by violette on June 20, 2010, at 16:53:58
> Bulldog,
>
> Only Lou can speak for himself - but I didn't want you to think my post to Lou had anything to do with you, but I wanted to answer his questions..I thought Lou was referring to racist statements made about Jews which he's been bringing to the attention of administration for weeks now?
>
> I'm not saying anymore about that situation because I don't know the whole story...All I know is that Lou has a situation he feels is unaddressed, but unrelated to your situation?
>
> Friends,
What post is involved on the admin board is the discussion concerning my request to Mr. Hsiung to post on the fiath board as to if or if not he considers the post in question to be supportive or not.
The post is as follows per this link at he end here. The post is authored not by the member that uses the handle, (..._empowerd), but by the poster that uses the handle (Buckeye Fan). The post could lead a Jew to feel put down when they read it, along with others that believe that they could have forgivness and Eternal Life by another means in their faith other than accepting Jesus Christ as their personal Lord ansd Savior and that the statement in question could mean that the Jewish children that do not accept Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior that were murderd by anti-Semites are precluded from Eternal Life and forgivness because the statement in question uses the imperative, {only}, which Mr. Hsiung has stated that preclusion is not supportive. But he says that to post the statement in question is {OK}. Now {OK} to post could mean something other than being supportive, or it could mean that it is supportive, so I am asking him to lift the ambiguity that I think exists by stating in the thread as to what he is wanting to mean as a request for clarification from me to him in order for me to respond to him there because I am unsure if he is wanting to mean that the statement, in and of itself, is supportive or not, or is just OK for some other reason.
Mr. Hsiung does agree that antisemitic statements are not supportive and that one match could start a forest fire and he has posted here that if something is posted, that support takes precedence, even if one is quoting someone else, even if the bible says it, even if they preface it with something like (I believe) and such. So I am wanting to know if he thinks that the statement is supportive or not for others could think that the antisemitic statement is supportive here and that could cause me as a Jew to be in fear of being a victim of antisemitic violence be it physical or emotional/psychological violence by emotional distress being inflicted on me.
You see, when the adminisrtrion drafts their rules, any ambiguity makes the rule to have the potential to be subject to be arbitrary, or caprecious, or discriminatory. And if the adminstration, be it the rule drafter or his assistants that he calls his deputies, is leaving a request unresponded to that asks for clarification of the ambiguity, then that could lead to further, in this case, antisemitic statements and the spread of antisemitic hate here, along with the spread of anti-Islamic hate and hatred toward others that do not accept Jesus Christ as their personal; Lord and Savior which then could lead to members to think that it is good for the community as a whole and that members are asked by the rule drafter here to try to trust him in what he does here.
Here is the link to the post on the faith board by Buckeye Fan.
Lou
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/20080809/msgs/941769.html
Then on the admin board,
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100321/msgs/950671.html
Posted by Phillipa on June 22, 2010, at 16:33:23
In reply to Lou's clarification-asemiied, posted by Lou PIlder on June 21, 2010, at 11:10:49
Lou there are no active deputies to the best of my knowledge at this time. Phillipa
Posted by violette on June 22, 2010, at 20:02:18
In reply to Re: I Never Said That Christ_Emp Was Anti Semitic » violette, posted by bulldog2 on June 22, 2010, at 16:33:22
"I saw Christ_Emp post that Lou was referring to. The link is in Lou's post. You should read it. It is really offensive to anyone that is not Jewish. And Bob wants me to be civil! That needs to be yanked in my opinion. In other words if you don't accept Jesus..burn baby burn" (Bulldog)
Hi Bulldog-I wanted to say hi and answer your post. No, I didn't read any of it. I don't believe in Jesus but do not think I will burn in hell. But I guess I just wanted to say that it doesn't offend me or bother me that others believe that. I can see why it might offend or bother other people though. I have my triggers too....
I think if I was afraid of burning in hell, it would induce personal suffering....and religious beliefs say more about the person who feels that way rather than refelcting anything about me personally. Coming from an authority figure would be different..but it seems all our opinions have equal weight here.
When others say things like that it just reminds me that I don't have to spend my life worrying that I will someday burn in hell. I have enough to worry about while I'm alive. :)
One less thing to worry about...so that's how I feel about it.
Posted by Lou Pilder on June 24, 2010, at 16:39:35
In reply to Re: I Never Said That Christ_Emp Was Anti Semitic » bulldog2, posted by violette on June 22, 2010, at 20:02:18
> "I saw Christ_Emp post that Lou was referring to. The link is in Lou's post. You should read it. It is really offensive to anyone that is not Jewish. And Bob wants me to be civil! That needs to be yanked in my opinion. In other words if you don't accept Jesus..burn baby burn" (Bulldog)
>
> Hi Bulldog-I wanted to say hi and answer your post. No, I didn't read any of it. I don't believe in Jesus but do not think I will burn in hell. But I guess I just wanted to say that it doesn't offend me or bother me that others believe that. I can see why it might offend or bother other people though. I have my triggers too....
>
> I think if I was afraid of burning in hell, it would induce personal suffering....and religious beliefs say more about the person who feels that way rather than refelcting anything about me personally. Coming from an authority figure would be different..but it seems all our opinions have equal weight here.
>
> When others say things like that it just reminds me that I don't have to spend my life worrying that I will someday burn in hell. I have enough to worry about while I'm alive. :)
>
> One less thing to worry about...so that's how I feel about it.violette,
You wrote,[...I can see how it could...].
There is some difficulty that I am having understanding what is what here.
The post in question that I am requesting for Mr. Hsiung to post as to if he considers the statement, in and of itself, to be supportive or not is posted here by {Buckeye Fan}, not {..._Empowerd}. The post reads:The ONLY reason given in God's Word that has or ever will cause someone to miss out on God's forgivness and Eternal Life...is to reject the gift of His Son Jesus as Lord and Savior.
You wrote,[...I can see how it could cause xxxx and yyyy other people...]
I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean here. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
You wrote that you did not read a post by (..._Empowerd) mentioned by Bulldog2 to you that as being in a post by me. I am unsure if that post is or is not the one by {Buckeye Fan } that I am concened about here or not.
If you post any answers here, could you refer to the post that I posted here in this post by {Buckeye Fan}?
My question here is :
A. do you see anything in that post by BF that could xxxx or yyyy other people?
B. What people could those be that could be xxxx or yyyy when they read the post by BF?
C. Who could be an authority figure in relation to you writing that here?
D. Who, in your opinion, could an authority figue be in relation to the situation here?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 7, 2011, at 5:20:43
In reply to Lou's clarification-asemiied, posted by Lou PIlder on June 22, 2010, at 16:33:22
> > Bulldog,
> >
> > Only Lou can speak for himself - but I didn't want you to think my post to Lou had anything to do with you, but I wanted to answer his questions..I thought Lou was referring to racist statements made about Jews which he's been bringing to the attention of administration for weeks now?
> >
> > I'm not saying anymore about that situation because I don't know the whole story...All I know is that Lou has a situation he feels is unaddressed, but unrelated to your situation?
> >
> > Friends,
> What post is involved on the admin board is the discussion concerning my request to Mr. Hsiung to post on the fiath board as to if or if not he considers the post in question to be supportive or not.
> The post is as follows per this link at he end here. The post is authored not by the member that uses the handle, (..._empowerd), but by the poster that uses the handle (Buckeye Fan). The post could lead a Jew to feel put down when they read it, along with others that believe that they could have forgivness and Eternal Life by another means in their faith other than accepting Jesus Christ as their personal Lord ansd Savior and that the statement in question could mean that the Jewish children that do not accept Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior that were murderd by anti-Semites are precluded from Eternal Life and forgivness because the statement in question uses the imperative, {only}, which Mr. Hsiung has stated that preclusion is not supportive. But he says that to post the statement in question is {OK}. Now {OK} to post could mean something other than being supportive, or it could mean that it is supportive, so I am asking him to lift the ambiguity that I think exists by stating in the thread as to what he is wanting to mean as a request for clarification from me to him in order for me to respond to him there because I am unsure if he is wanting to mean that the statement, in and of itself, is supportive or not, or is just OK for some other reason.
> Mr. Hsiung does agree that antisemitic statements are not supportive and that one match could start a forest fire and he has posted here that if something is posted, that support takes precedence, even if one is quoting someone else, even if the bible says it, even if they preface it with something like (I believe) and such. So I am wanting to know if he thinks that the statement is supportive or not for others could think that the antisemitic statement is supportive here and that could cause me as a Jew to be in fear of being a victim of antisemitic violence be it physical or emotional/psychological violence by emotional distress being inflicted on me.
> You see, when the adminisrtrion drafts their rules, any ambiguity makes the rule to have the potential to be subject to be arbitrary, or caprecious, or discriminatory. And if the adminstration, be it the rule drafter or his assistants that he calls his deputies, is leaving a request unresponded to that asks for clarification of the ambiguity, then that could lead to further, in this case, antisemitic statements and the spread of antisemitic hate here, along with the spread of anti-Islamic hate and hatred toward others that do not accept Jesus Christ as their personal; Lord and Savior which then could lead to members to think that it is good for the community as a whole and that members are asked by the rule drafter here to try to trust him in what he does here.
> Here is the link to the post on the faith board by Buckeye Fan.
> Lou
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/20080809/msgs/941769.html
> Then on the admin board,
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100321/msgs/950671.html
>
>
Mr. Hsiung,
I am requesting that the entire thread that contains the post in question here be deleted. I base this on that IMHO any statement that could arouse antisemitic feelings could have the potential to fuel hatred toward Jews by the nature of the statement precluding Jews that do not accept Jesus as Lord and Savior to be precluded from forgivness and eternal life. The statement in question also precludes Islamic people and other non-Christians from forgivness and Eternal Life. That then could have the potential IMHO to playout in the mind of someone taking mind-altering drugs to target a Jew or other non-Christians that do not accept the claim in question, on the basis that they could think from that the statement in the post is {OK} by you here, and your TOS states that you do what will be good for the community as a whole, that since you say that the statement in question is {OK}, that it is also supportive, which I have asked you to declare if you are wanting to mean that or not and my request is outstanding now for a long time.
Now to allow my requests to you to remain outstanding for this amount of time, while you post here to evict people and redirect postts, could foster IMHO the idea in some that you are indifferent to my request which could IMHO then have the potential to foster antisemitic feelings in this community and to those tthat read here. This then IMHO could make Jews and others that do not accept the claim in question about that those that do not accept Jesus as Lord and Savior will be precluded from forgivness and eternal life, to be in fear of being a victim of antisemitic violence. This then leads me to question as to if your leaving my request outstanding is or is not a sound mental-health practice. Do you understand then why I am requesting that you delete the whole thread?
Lou Pilder
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 3, 2012, at 9:32:55
In reply to Lou's request to Mr. Hsiung for a deletion, posted by Lou Pilder on February 7, 2011, at 5:20:43
> > > Bulldog,
> > >
> > > Only Lou can speak for himself - but I didn't want you to think my post to Lou had anything to do with you, but I wanted to answer his questions..I thought Lou was referring to racist statements made about Jews which he's been bringing to the attention of administration for weeks now?
> > >
> > > I'm not saying anymore about that situation because I don't know the whole story...All I know is that Lou has a situation he feels is unaddressed, but unrelated to your situation?
> > >
> > > Friends,
> > What post is involved on the admin board is the discussion concerning my request to Mr. Hsiung to post on the fiath board as to if or if not he considers the post in question to be supportive or not.
> > The post is as follows per this link at he end here. The post is authored not by the member that uses the handle, (..._empowerd), but by the poster that uses the handle (Buckeye Fan). The post could lead a Jew to feel put down when they read it, along with others that believe that they could have forgivness and Eternal Life by another means in their faith other than accepting Jesus Christ as their personal Lord ansd Savior and that the statement in question could mean that the Jewish children that do not accept Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior that were murderd by anti-Semites are precluded from Eternal Life and forgivness because the statement in question uses the imperative, {only}, which Mr. Hsiung has stated that preclusion is not supportive. But he says that to post the statement in question is {OK}. Now {OK} to post could mean something other than being supportive, or it could mean that it is supportive, so I am asking him to lift the ambiguity that I think exists by stating in the thread as to what he is wanting to mean as a request for clarification from me to him in order for me to respond to him there because I am unsure if he is wanting to mean that the statement, in and of itself, is supportive or not, or is just OK for some other reason.
> > Mr. Hsiung does agree that antisemitic statements are not supportive and that one match could start a forest fire and he has posted here that if something is posted, that support takes precedence, even if one is quoting someone else, even if the bible says it, even if they preface it with something like (I believe) and such. So I am wanting to know if he thinks that the statement is supportive or not for others could think that the antisemitic statement is supportive here and that could cause me as a Jew to be in fear of being a victim of antisemitic violence be it physical or emotional/psychological violence by emotional distress being inflicted on me.
> > You see, when the adminisrtrion drafts their rules, any ambiguity makes the rule to have the potential to be subject to be arbitrary, or caprecious, or discriminatory. And if the adminstration, be it the rule drafter or his assistants that he calls his deputies, is leaving a request unresponded to that asks for clarification of the ambiguity, then that could lead to further, in this case, antisemitic statements and the spread of antisemitic hate here, along with the spread of anti-Islamic hate and hatred toward others that do not accept Jesus Christ as their personal; Lord and Savior which then could lead to members to think that it is good for the community as a whole and that members are asked by the rule drafter here to try to trust him in what he does here.
> > Here is the link to the post on the faith board by Buckeye Fan.
> > Lou
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/20080809/msgs/941769.html
> > Then on the admin board,
> > http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100321/msgs/950671.html
> >
> >
> Mr. Hsiung,
> I am requesting that the entire thread that contains the post in question here be deleted. I base this on that IMHO any statement that could arouse antisemitic feelings could have the potential to fuel hatred toward Jews by the nature of the statement precluding Jews that do not accept Jesus as Lord and Savior to be precluded from forgivness and eternal life. The statement in question also precludes Islamic people and other non-Christians from forgivness and Eternal Life. That then could have the potential IMHO to playout in the mind of someone taking mind-altering drugs to target a Jew or other non-Christians that do not accept the claim in question, on the basis that they could think from that the statement in the post is {OK} by you here, and your TOS states that you do what will be good for the community as a whole, that since you say that the statement in question is {OK}, that it is also supportive, which I have asked you to declare if you are wanting to mean that or not and my request is outstanding now for a long time.
> Now to allow my requests to you to remain outstanding for this amount of time, while you post here to evict people and redirect postts, could foster IMHO the idea in some that you are indifferent to my request which could IMHO then have the potential to foster antisemitic feelings in this community and to those tthat read here. This then IMHO could make Jews and others that do not accept the claim in question about that those that do not accept Jesus as Lord and Savior will be precluded from forgivness and eternal life, to be in fear of being a victim of antisemitic violence. This then leads me to question as to if your leaving my request outstanding is or is not a sound mental-health practice. Do you understand then why I am requesting that you delete the whole thread?
> Lou PilderMr. Hsiung,
I am changing my request from requesting a deletion to requesting that you post in the thread in question as to what is in question as to if in your thinking it is supportive or not.
Lou Pilder
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 13, 2013, at 8:18:50
In reply to Re: I Never Said That Christ_Emp Was Anti Semitic » bulldog2, posted by violette on June 22, 2010, at 20:02:18
> "I saw Christ_Emp post that Lou was referring to. The link is in Lou's post. You should read it. It is really offensive to anyone that is not Jewish. And Bob wants me to be civil! That needs to be yanked in my opinion. In other words if you don't accept Jesus..burn baby burn" (Bulldog)
>
> Hi Bulldog-I wanted to say hi and answer your post. No, I didn't read any of it. I don't believe in Jesus but do not think I will burn in hell. But I guess I just wanted to say that it doesn't offend me or bother me that others believe that. I can see why it might offend or bother other people though. I have my triggers too....
>
> I think if I was afraid of burning in hell, it would induce personal suffering....and religious beliefs say more about the person who feels that way rather than refelcting anything about me personally. Coming from an authority figure would be different..but it seems all our opinions have equal weight here.
>
> When others say things like that it just reminds me that I don't have to spend my life worrying that I will someday burn in hell. I have enough to worry about while I'm alive. :)
>
> One less thing to worry about...so that's how I feel about it.violette,
If you could return to this thread, I would appreciate it. For there could be more dialog that IMHHHO could save lives here and prevent life-ruining conditions and prevent anti-Semitic violence
Lou
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.