Why do we feel the need to..

[Guest guest]

Even though I'm exhausted I'll take a stab at this one if I may...a

restaging of punitive childrearing. Once the early antagonism of the

poisonous pedagogy is set up it's almost impossible to remove oneself from

that enemy-making mentality regardless of intellectual insight. With

authority-based " discipline " the lines have already been drawn. It's Us vs.

Them and only one can be right. You better hope you're on the right side or

else you'll suffer - the just dessert idea of judgment and

redemption/damnation. We're all put on the defensive to avoid being

shamed...or " we're all in a post-hypnotic trance induced in early infancy "

as someone else said.

This is precisely what I was talking about in my previous post. This is one

of the reasons why I consider the debasing, fear-based Abrahamic religions

to be profoundly immoral not only experientally, but doctrinally as well.

It's truly tragic and I don't say that to be dramatic or sarcastic. The

stripe of humanism in the new testament is miniscule in comparison to rest

of the sadistic texts (and subtexts) and can hardly be seen as beneficial

when interpreted in light of these texts. I only need reference one book to

show you where I got these ideas from. Don't get me wrong, " morality is of

utmost importance, but for man, not god " - Einstein [my paraphrase].

Let me get some sleep and maybe I'll be more coherent.

Why do we feel the need to..

> I find it ironic that when someone feels *attacked* they attack the

> person they feel attacked them, by telling them how wrong they are

> for attacking them.....huh??

> Why is it that we (ppl in general) have a hard time letting others

> have their opinion without taking it personally? Even if they are

> saying negative things about our religion, our political views, etc.

> why can't we let them have their opinion without attacking? Do we

> feel the need to defend our beliefs? I honestly wonder. I am not

> trying to shame anyone because I don't view any of it as good or bad,

> or right or wrong, just simply expression. But I would like any

> feedback about why we feel the need to defend/attack. Thanks,

>

>

>

>

> Send questions and/or concerns to ModOasis-owner

> " Stop Walking on Eggshells, " a primer for non-BPs, can be ordered via

1-888-35-SHELL () and for the table of contents, go to:

> http://www.BPDCentral.com

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I thought about this one last night and wondered why I get angered

when someone seems narrow minded and arrogant (like some religious

leaders)and uses the bible to defend hatred against particular groups

of people, etc. I get angry and frustrated with them and feel I am

*right* and that in itself is a bit narrow minded and arrogant. I

think it takes a very secure person to allow others their opinions

without it affecting/triggering them. If we deeply believe in

something is there really a need to defend it? Anyway, what I didn't

understand yesterday is that Greg wasn't directing his opinion at any

ONE person and so why do individuals get offended at a general

opinion (even if they think it is *wrong*?)Bottom line: I am glad all

of this came up, because it made me think about my own immaturity and

insecurity at times and how I can improve upon that. So,it goes to

show that even something that starts out being seen as *bad* can have

value. I often wonder what life would be like without us placing

value and judgement to situations and simply experiencing them. It

takes the right and wrong and separation out of the equation. I try

and apply that when I remember, but I don't do a very good job when I

get triggered. I'm going to make a conscious effort to work on

allowing others (especially those I disagree with) to their opinion

without taking it personally, attacking or defending.

[Guest guest]

Yes, it's not all-or-none.

Re: Why do we feel the need to..

> <<With authority-based " discipline " the lines have already been drawn.

It's

> Us vs. Them and only one can be right. You better hope you're on the

right

> side or else you'll suffer - the just dessert idea of judgment and

> redemption/damnation. We're all put on the defensive to avoid being

shamed...or " we're all

> in a post-hypnotic trance induced in early infancy " as someone else

said.>>

>

> Well, point taken, but realistically, don't people just feel good when

their

> opinion appears to be accepted and/or endorsed? I know I do!

>

> .

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

You made some very good points . I remember reading once a

quote " Would you rather be right or would you rather be happy? "

Sometimes that is helpful to remember when we are only trying to be

right for rightnesses sake.

I also think a thing to remember in this group is the purpose of the

group. The group was not created to uphold our freedom of speech. The

group was designed for KOs that are dealing with many issues. And we

all have a lot of emotional " stuff " going on. And many times our

emotions are not congruent with our logic.

So sometimes, no matter how hard we try, we are going to be triggered

as our emotional issues come up from the places in which they were

buried - and up to the light. That - too - is part of the healing.

And religion is one of those issues that often goes straight to the

core of our being. It is not " an intellectual discussion " for some of

us. It goes deeper than that.

And in responding to what has been brought up in several posts on

this issue (not just this one) I think we also need to keep in mind

that to tell someone we are hurt or offended by something they said

is also a valid expression in this group...as well and asking them to

a.) not talk about the issue. or

b.) talk about the issue in a way that is more considerate of our

feelings.

Saying we are hurt or offended is no more narrow minded than venting

without consideration of the feelings of others. And asking another

person to be a bit more considerate is not censorship - it is asking

another to honor our own sacred space.

I agree that when we take something personal - when it was a general

statement - we often need to explore within ourselves - as to why we

did that.

Yet I also notice in this room - that when a person discusses their

own experiences with ANY issue - even religion - their experiences

are usually honored - no matter how different than ours they were -

or how negative we percieve them to be.

But several times lately feelings have been hurt and tempers have

flared - and attacks / semi-attacks have been launched at fellow

group members - which started with general, broad, all encompassing

opinions about religion, the economy, etc.

Though - in the end - it is often healing for some, most, or all of

the people involved - as each person has to take responsibilty for

the way they deal with the issue - and many of us use it to learn

another lesson on our path - I have to ask myself - is it really

neccessary? Though we learned from it in that way - isn't there

a " better " way? Don't we have enough opportunities in our lives to

learn from pain and chaos? And can't we try to learn in ways that are

a bit kinder and gentler on our souls in here?

So I am still a little hesitant to say that it is okay to make

negative broad generalizations in here - and that the people

who " feel " attacked should learn to deal with it because it

is " their " issue. Maybe that IS a better way - but I am not convinced

within myself that it is. To me - it is kind of like implying the

old " you are making yourself feel bad... you are doing this to you.. "

If you have ever had an arguement with someone who ignores your

psersonal FEELINGS on an issue - but also does not express THEIR

personal FEELINGS - but keeps attacking the general " principles " of

something that is affecting you personally - it can become some real

crazy making stuff. One person is ignoring their personal feelings

and acting like it is an intellectual discussion - while the other

person becomes an emotional ping pong ball - because the " attacks "

are coming from a different level - that level of emotional

distancing. I have experienced some of these discussions with the guy-

person. And I always ended up feeling frustrated, exhausted,

helpless, stupid, and sometimes crazy when those occured.

So I know discussions in which one person is speaking general and the

other is speaking personally can be very unhealthy. And I am not

convinced that the one who is speaking personally is the one " at

fault " for taking things " personally. " Why would someone continue to

speak so generally (especially in a negative way) when they become

aware that the other person is at a personal level in the discussion?

It would seem like the kindest thing to do is:

a.) if you don't have a personal issue with the topic - then drop

it.. because the person who is personally invested in the issue

FEELINGS would take precendence over your need to be " right " in a

generalized rhetorical way.

Or

b.) if you DO have a personal issue with the topic - then be more

direct and emotionally honest about what that issue means to YOU...

and stop talking about apples as if they are oranges.

Sometimes - when others make some really broad statements - I really

don't understand what they are trying to say - so I ask them to be

more specific - or ask questions to encourage them to do so - so I

can better understand what their issue really is - before I respond.

And usually when they ARE more specific - they become more clear

about what the issue really means to THEM - which brings it out of

the realm of vagueness or intellectual generalizations - to something

we can TALK about in a meaningful way.

If I make some really broad statements - I hope others will do the

same for me - because sometimes I do hold things at that more

intellectual, general distance which seems so much safer than

saying " this is about ME and how *I* feel " - and I need a little

nudge to take it to the next level. And I certainly hope I don't hurt

others in the process of trying to intellectualize my feelings - and

I hope that if I do - they will be able to tell me that without my

feeling they are trying to censor me. And yes, I hope they don't

attack me in the process.

I don't know. I'm looking at all sides of this issue. And I know we

are all learning - and that we will make many mistakes. I hope we can

keep learning from them.

Free

> I thought about this one last night and wondered why I get angered

> when someone seems narrow minded and arrogant (like some religious

> leaders)and uses the bible to defend hatred against particular

groups

> of people, etc. I get angry and frustrated with them and feel I am

> *right* and that in itself is a bit narrow minded and arrogant. I

> think it takes a very secure person to allow others their opinions

> without it affecting/triggering them. If we deeply believe in

> something is there really a need to defend it? Anyway, what I

didn't

> understand yesterday is that Greg wasn't directing his opinion at

any

> ONE person and so why do individuals get offended at a general

> opinion (even if they think it is *wrong*?)Bottom line: I am glad

all

> of this came up, because it made me think about my own immaturity

and

> insecurity at times and how I can improve upon that. So,it goes to

> show that even something that starts out being seen as *bad* can

have

> value. I often wonder what life would be like without us placing

> value and judgement to situations and simply experiencing them. It

> takes the right and wrong and separation out of the equation. I try

> and apply that when I remember, but I don't do a very good job when

I

> get triggered. I'm going to make a conscious effort to work on

> allowing others (especially those I disagree with) to their opinion

> without taking it personally, attacking or defending.