Statistical abberation

[Admin]

Anastassia, although I agree with your general sentiments I really wish people like you would realize that a belief in one god or another has absolutely nothing to do with ones fundamental moral character. In fact, I would go as far as to say that the most ethically and morally challenged people I've met are "believers".

And btw, ultimately, everyone has someone to answer to; themselves.

As I read the point Anna was making, it is that her belief in God provided her context and reference for dealing with a VERY difficult situation with Lance (and their son). She also believes that people lacking faith may (emphasis on MAY) not have that context to be able to easily discern a path forward. I do not see her proselytizing - simply offering her perspective and life experiences that are relevant.

While true that some of the most moral people I have ever met were atheists or agnostics - it is also true that some of the most amoral people I have ever met were atheists or agnostics.

The relevance to our site - and probably better served as a new topic - is what WmGO has mentioned on numerous occasions - and that is, the relative proportion of RW who can (or will) share a faith with their husband. Clearly, with Anna, Lance found someone who was able to share a faith in Christianity. My wife and I share a similar faith in Christianity. Many of the women I met in Ukraine, my wife included, were NOT staunch believers in their faith. My wife now will say that; "God was always there for me [her], but I [she] was not always there for God." That has now changed for us - but it might be unwise for a man with a strong belief to expect change, hence, the search takes on a different dimension.

My $.02 worth.

- Dan

[Faux Pas]

Anastassia it is great to see your lovely face and words of wisdom post again on the forum. Please don't be a stranger 

[Ade]

As I read the point Anna was making, it is that her belief in God provided her context and reference for dealing with a VERY difficult situation with Lance (and their son). She also believes that people lacking faith may (emphasis on MAY) not have that context to be able to easily discern a path forward. I do not see her proselytizing - simply offering her perspective and life experiences that are relevant.

While true that some of the most moral people I have ever met were atheists or agnostics - it is also true that some of the most amoral people I have ever met were atheists or agnostics.

The relevance to our site - and probably better served as a new topic - is what WmGO has mentioned on numerous occasions - and that is, the relative proportion of RW who can (or will) share a faith with their husband. Clearly, with Anna, Lance found someone who was able to share a faith in Christianity. My wife and I share a similar faith in Christianity. Many of the women I met in Ukraine, my wife included, were NOT staunch believers in their faith. My wife now will say that; "God was always there for me [her], but I [she] was not always there for God." That has now changed for us - but it might be unwise for a man with a strong belief to expect change, hence, the search takes on a different dimension.

My $.02 worth.

- Dan

Dan, I read it differently and putting her words into context with her very strong, almost fundamentalist, Christian beliefs, I think that I can be excused that thought, at least until she clarifies herself.

To be honest, I feel mildly insulted by what I think she has insinuated.

[ECOCKS]

Anastassia, although I agree with your general sentiments I really wish people like you would realize that a belief in one god or another has absolutely nothing to do with ones fundamental moral character. In fact, I would go as far as to say that the most ethically and morally challenged people I've met are "believers".

And btw, ultimately, everyone has someone to answer to; themselves.

SJ:

You might read that over and notice that Anasatasia did not try to preach to us. Instead she clearly stated she was sharing one letter from a stream of correspondence and discussion with KenC concerning the topic of Ken's marriage situation. To jump on her for expressing her religious philosophy in what was originally a private letter to someone she was having an ongoing discussion with is uncalled for.

This is one stunning example (among many on this board) where a personal attack was made when a mere statement of a countering belief or facts would have sufficed. More and more we're getting sucked into these attacks by the lowlifes and "flakes" on this board.

Fight the urge.

[Ade]

SJ:

You might read that over and notice that Anasatasia did not try to preach to us. Instead she clearly stated she was sharing one letter from a stream of correspondence and discussion with KenC concerning the topic of Ken's marriage situation. To jump on her for expressing her religious philosophy in what was originally a private letter to someone she was having an ongoing discussion with is uncalled for.

This is one stunning example (among many on this board) where a personal attack was made when a mere statement of a countering belief or facts would have sufficed. More and more we're getting sucked into these attacks by the lowlifes and "flakes" on this board.

Fight the urge.

Yes, it was a private letter and she chose to make it and her thoughts public. I'm sorry, but I get offended by religious people that openly state that I, as an atheist, lack some sort of moral compass because I don't have a god to tell me what I should do, and that they wouldn't be so immoral in situation X because they believe.

She chose to express her opinion and I chose to express mine.

FWIW, if she did not intend her words to mean what I've interpreted them to mean then I apologise to her unreservedly, but, I certainly do not apologise for expressing an opinion in the first place.

And just so you know, I do not consider what I wrote to be a "personal attack".

[brucen36]

I see that Lena didn't think ahead at all. She didn't think what she would do in 10-20-30 years and how she would see herself beside you when you are so much older than her. She never thought about it and thus, never confronted herself to these ideas. We can only guess, though, what she did think about. I think you know the answer.
 

The thing is, can she (Lena) really be blamed for this?  She was after all in her early 20s (practically a kid).  If anyone, shouldn't he be the one who had possibly foreseen this?  

[Admin]

Yes, it was a private letter and she chose to make it and her thoughts public. I'm sorry, but I get offended by religious people that openly state that I, as an atheist, lack some sort of moral compass because I don't have a god to tell me what I should do, and that they wouldn't be so immoral in situation X because they believe.

She chose to express her opinion and I chose to express mine.

FWIW, if she did not intend her words to mean what I've interpreted them to mean then I apologise to her unreservedly, but, I certainly do not apologise for expressing an opinion in the first place.

This really is the subject for a different topic.

I doubt Anna would be one to stand in judgment on anyone - she would leave that for God. In terms of her own life choices, surely she is allowed to choose freely - and this includes the choice of a partner who shares her faith. She describes her worldview, and I think it should be respected. That does not mean that everyone is expected to follow her views. It also means that RWD is accommodating to views that are different. It does NOT mean that it is appropriate to attack or aggressively challenge her views, or those who are different from hers.

In this instance, to use a phrase my Dad often used - it seems you SJ 'got your nose out of joint' over what Anna wrote that was not directed at or to you.

Rather than escalate an issue - why not seek to find common ground? Just because you and I may not agree about belief in God, does not mean we should fail to recognize the worthwhile points offered in another's views. I accept that a lack of faith in God does not automatically mean someone is amoral - and I suspect Anna would accept that as well. Still, it was her point that having Christian context offers a person a path they may not have without that context. I suppose the same could be true of a Jewish context or a Mormon context. In those instances, at least, some of life's difficulties have been considered and plans offered. Absent those contexts, there is at least some possibility of a vacuum - would you agree? If you agree, then my quip about nature and a vacuum, etc.

- Dan

[Faux Pas]

Yes, it was a private letter and she chose to make it and her thoughts public. I'm sorry, but I get offended by religious people that openly state that I, as an atheist, lack some sort of moral compass because I don't have a god to tell me what I should do, and that they wouldn't be so immoral in situation X because they believe.

She chose to express her opinion and I chose to express mine.

FWIW, if she did not intend her words to mean what I've interpreted them to mean then I apologise to her unreservedly, but, I certainly do not apologise for expressing an opinion in the first place.

Okay, we get it. You are atheist and do not believe in God or Gods. I did not see where she stated that "YOU" "as an atheist lacked any moral compass. She stated her beliefs and her inspiration. She takes her vows and belief in God very seriously. Why does that offend you as an atheist. Why is it necessary to try to insult a believer with phrases like "I really wish people like you " or  "the most ethically and morally challenged people I've met are "believers"" just because you are not? Your hatred is showing.

[Admin]

The thing is, can she (Lena) really be blamed for this?  She was after all in her early 20s (practically a kid).  If anyone, shouldn't he be the one who had possibly foreseen this?  

At least in the case of KenC, I saw no attempt to blame Lena. I have also seen KenC over many years place warnings to others that his was a high-risk proposition and he never encouraged others to follow his lead.

FWIW

- Dan

[GoodOlBoy]

The thing is, can she (Lena) really be blamed for this?  She was after all in her early 20s (practically a kid).  If anyone, shouldn't he be the one who had possibly foreseen this?  

I tend to agree with your statement Bruce36, BUT......I have been "told" by several member's here on RWD that it is OK to "chase" schoolgirls.  :noidea:

As a matter of fact I have been told several times that they are NOT schoolgirls (20-25yo), BUT.......WOMEN!!  

Go figure.


GOB

BTW....I guess I have a built in "bias", I have a daughter in her late 20's.

[Admin]

Okay, we get it. You are atheist and do not believe in God or Gods. I did not see where she stated that "YOU" "as an atheist lacked any moral compass. She stated her beliefs and her inspiration. She takes her vows and belief in God very seriously. Why does that offend you as an atheist. Why is it necessary to try to insult a believer with phrases like "I really wish people like you " or  "the most ethically and morally challenged people I've met are "believers"" just because you are not? Your hatred is showing.

A couple of my best friends are atheists. I find, personally, no difficulty in reconciling personal relationships with people of different, or no, faiths. Others may feel differently, as is their prerogative.

I think it is important to 'make room' for people of faith here at RWD - as well as people who profess no faith. There are things to learn from both (and ALL).

The 'key' to making that room is to NOT attack others - and to be open to their comments - and to be sincerely interested in learning from them. Take aboard what 'fits' your life - and discard what does not. No different really from everyday life. Each of us is barraged with influences from others many times each day on a multitude of topics. We filter those things that are worthwhile (or threatening) and discard most of it - accepting only those influences/messages we deem important in the now. Same here. Can you imagine the chaos that would result if every single comment that came to us each day was met with a vigorous reaction?!? The energy needed just to react would be daunting - and, I daresay, not possible. Just relax and be a bit more tolerant - a bit more accepting of others - a bit more willing to listen - and a LOT less prone to 'flying off the handle.'

- Dan

[Ade]

This really is the subject for a different topic.

I doubt Anna would be one to stand in judgment on anyone - she would leave that for God. In terms of her own life choices, surely she is allowed to choose freely - and this includes the choice of a partner who shares her faith. She describes her worldview, and I think it should be respected. That does not mean that everyone is expected to follow her views. It also means that RWD is accommodating to views that are different. It does NOT mean that it is appropriate to attack or aggressively challenge her views, or those who are different from hers.

In this instance, to use a phrase my Dad often used - it seems you SJ 'got your nose out of joint' over what Anna wrote that was not directed at or to you.

Rather than escalate an issue - why not seek to find common ground? Just because you and I may not agree about belief in God, does not mean we should fail to recognize the worthwhile points offered in another's views. I accept that a lack of faith in God does not automatically mean someone is amoral - and I suspect Anna would accept that as well. Still, it was her point that having Christian context offers a person a path they may not have without that context. I suppose the same could be true of a Jewish context or a Mormon context. In those instances, at least, some of life's difficulties have been considered and plans offered. Absent those contexts, there is at least some possibility of a vacuum - would you agree? If you agree, then my quip about nature and a vacuum, etc.

- Dan

Dan, I will accept that my posts came across far more strongly than I intended - I have had problems with that on many occasions. I'm sure that if I were to speak in person most would not have seen me as being aggressive.

I will point out that I agreed with her general sentiments so I'm not entirely blinded by our diametrically opposed views on religion.

As for your first statement, well, I thought the whole point of that letter she wrote was to judge Lena and she obviously found her wanting.

[Admin]

I tend to agree with your statement Bruce36, BUT......I have been "told" by several member's here on RWD that it is OK to "chase" schoolgirls.

As a matter of fact I have been told several times that they are NOT schoolgirls (20-25yo), BUT.......WOMEN!!  

Go figure.


GOB

BTW....I guess I have a built in "bias", I have a daughter in her late 20's.

Yet another example of an intolerant position.

I don't think you have EVER been told by members of RWD that "it is OK to "chase" schoolgirls." At the very best, that is a gross exaggeration - and more likely, an outright misrepresentation of the message.

- Dan

[Admin]

Dan, I will accept that my posts came across far more strongly than I intended - I have had problems with that on many occasions. I'm sure that if I were to speak in person most would not have seen me as being aggressive.

I will point out that I agreed with her general sentiments so I'm not entirely blinded by our diametrically opposed views on religion.

As for your first statement, well, I thought the whole point of that letter she wrote was to judge Lena and she obviously found her wanting.

>>I thought the whole point of that letter she wrote was to judge Lena and she obviously found her wanting.<<

Or.... she was providing comfort to someone in a time of need - and finding alignment with his plight so as to help him soften the blow.

It is all in what you want to see, I suppose.

- Dan

[AnastassiaAsh]

I am not really offended by SJ and SJ, i hope you are not either, because i was just trying to describe who I was trying (and always will) to lean on during such moments. Yes, this letter was addressed to Ken, and actually I don't think he is Christian either (Ken confirm), and I still decided to share this with him because this is me and how I did it. I didn't have any offense in mind, more over I wanted to comfort Ken and help him see some things differently. I simply can't understand where unbelievers take strength and survive this drama and go through it with dignity just relying on themselves or answering to themselves. That's all. To tell you the truth, I have already had a chance to meet 'Christians' who in actions showed themselves worse than anything. So, I know what you mean. True Christians are very rare. American churches, at least which I used to go to, are pretty far from true sacrificial, loving, honest and God fearing people....
Ken just accepted my point of view with understanding and I am sure thought about what I had to say from my believer's point of view.
It's all good guys, as it was said - somebody will get something good out of it. And if this helped at least one person, I am sure Ken is glad about that. We are all learning.

[Ade]

Or.... she was providing comfort to someone in a time of need - and finding alignment with his plight so as to help him soften the blow.

It is all in what you want to see, I suppose.

- Dan

Actually, maybe that's what you "want" to see but the only thing I want is to see is the truth and the intended meaning. I do understand that the truth can be skewed by our own personal biases and preconceptions though. Maybe that's what you meant when you said, "want"?

[Admin]

Actually, maybe that's what you "want" to see but the only thing I want is to see is the truth and the intended meaning. I do understand that the truth can be skewed by our own personal biases and preconceptions though. Maybe that's what you meant when you said, "want"?

>>Maybe that's what you meant when you said, "want"?<<

I could have taken it in either a metaphysical or a biological direction - opting ultimately for the simple approach and use of the non-specific term "want."

Look - Anna replied with her intent and meaning, and I hope it suffices.

Anything further - let's take it out of KenC's topic. OK?

- Dan

[Ade]

I am not really offended by SJ and SJ, i hope you are not either, because i was just trying to describe who I was trying (and always will) to lean on during such moments. Yes, this letter was addressed to Ken, and actually I don't think he is Christian either (Ken confirm), and I still decided to share this with him because this is me and how I did it. I didn't have any offense in mind, more over I wanted to comfort Ken and help him see some things differently. I simply can't understand where unbelievers take strength and survive this drama and go through it with dignity just relying on themselves or answering to themselves. That's all. To tell you the truth, I have already had a chance to meet 'Christians' who in actions showed themselves worse than anything. So, I know what you mean. True Christians are very rare. American churches, at least which I used to go to, are pretty far from true sacrificial, loving, honest and God fearing people....
Ken just accepted my point of view with understanding and I am sure thought about what I had to say from my believer's point of view.
It's all good guys, as it was said - somebody will get something good out of it. And if this helped at least one person, I am sure Ken is glad about that. We are all learning.

Thank you for clarifying. I apologise unreservedly for taking offence where none was intended.

I simply can't understand where unbelievers take strength and survive this drama and go through it with dignity just relying on themselves or answering to themselves. That's all.

You may find some answers to that on secular humanist sites like, http://www.humanism.org.uk/humanism

[Faux Pas]

A couple of my best friends are atheists. I find, personally, no difficulty in reconciling personal relationships with people of different, or no, faiths. Others may feel differently, as is their prerogative.

I think it is important to 'make room' for people of faith here at RWD - as well as people who profess no faith. There are things to learn from both (and ALL).

The 'key' to making that room is to NOT attack others - and to be open to their comments - and to be sincerely interested in learning from them. Take aboard what 'fits' your life - and discard what does not. No different really from everyday life. Each of us is barraged with influences from others many times each day on a multitude of topics. We filter those things that are worthwhile (or threatening) and discard most of it - accepting only those influences/messages we deem important in the now. Same here. Can you imagine the chaos that would result if every single comment that came to us each day was met with a vigorous reaction?!? The energy needed just to react would be daunting - and, I daresay, not possible. Just relax and be a bit more tolerant - a bit more accepting of others - a bit more willing to listen - and a LOT less prone to 'flying off the handle.'

- Dan

I didn't take offense as his words were not directed at me. In SJ's response to the letter AA posted, I read it and moved on. No flying off the handle here. SJ's follow up to that post I thought was a bit much and at the very least he owed her an apology, which he subsequently did. I respect him for that. Perhaps my "hatred showing" remark was a bit strong but, wasn't intended to be. He and I disagree often and we both have a propensity for pointing it out. I was accusing him of doing what I felt he was accusing AA of doing, falsely so. I'll work on my delivery  and won't taint Ken's thread anymore than I have with this line.

[GoodOlBoy]

Yet another example of an intolerant position.

I don't think you have EVER been told by members of RWD that "it is OK to "chase" schoolgirls." At the very best, that is a gross exaggeration - and more likely, an outright misrepresentation of the message.

- Dan

Dan,

I have been "told" several times by SEVERAL members (off the top of my head Simoni, Faux Pas...) that 20 -25 yo University schoolgirls are in fact NOT schoolgirls BUT women, in their opinion.

I can refer you to one thread where I called out an RWD member (DaveyJ) for chasing a 21 year old University Student and I was admonished by Simoni for doing so.

http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=9075.msg170595#msg170595

There are several other instances that come to mind, but I really don't have the inclination to "prove" anything and I really don't have the hours it takes to comb through the threads.

Contrary to what you believe in your mind, I didn't fabricate anything.

Bottom Line........You have member's on this board who like to "chase" young girls and if anybody calls them on it then the "usual suspects" come out of the woodwork and jump on that member for being "intolerant".


GOB

[Makkin]

SJ,

   I think Anna was clearly free to say what she wanted to and how she wanted to. I respect her religious beliefs and feel strongly that atheists and non-christians look for openings in which to vent the other side of beliefs and their belief systems. SJ what you did and said is as predictable as a Christian in many cases. Your ability to do and feel in standard form as you might guess.
   My boss is an atheist and I'm now working with him on issues of hating his mother and getting back to his childhood where he may find that religion has little to do with his real problems in the adult world.

Makkin

[Admin]

Dan,

I have been "told" several times by SEVERAL members (off the top of my head Simoni, Faux Pas...) that 20 -25 yo University schoolgirls are in fact NOT schoolgirls BUT women, in their opinion.

I can refer you to one thread where I called out an RWD member (DaveyJ) for chasing a 21 year old University Student and I was admonished by Simoni for doing so.

http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=9075.msg170595#msg170595

There are several other instances that come to mind, but I really don't have the inclination to "prove" anything and I really don't have the hours it takes to comb through the threads.

Contrary to what you believe in your mind, I didn't fabricate anything.

Bottom Line........You have member's on this board who like to "chase" young girls and if anybody calls them on it then the "usual suspects" come out of the woodwork and jump on that member for being "intolerant".


GOB

GOB,

So let me ask a question. Would you find it objectionable for a 40-year old AM to pursue a relationship with an 18-year old RW?

At what age point does the pursuit NOT offend your sensibilities?

- Dan

[Ade]

  My boss is an atheist and I'm now working with him on issues of hating his mother and getting back to his childhood where he may find that religion has little to do with his real problems in the adult world.

Makkin

And that is relevant how exactly? 

[Daveman]

Yes, it was a private letter and she chose to make it and her thoughts public. I'm sorry, but I get offended by religious people that openly state that I, as an atheist, lack some sort of moral compass because I don't have a god to tell me what I should do, and that they wouldn't be so immoral in situation X because they believe.

She chose to express her opinion and I chose to express mine.

FWIW, if she did not intend her words to mean what I've interpreted them to mean then I apologise to her unreservedly, but, I certainly do not apologise for expressing an opinion in the first place.

And just so you know, I do not consider what I wrote to be a "personal attack".

SJ, I have worked with Anastassia in the past, and may again in the future. She clearly knows that I am agnostic. Not once did I have the feeling that she judged me as immoral, or look down upon me for my beliefs (of lack thereof).  Her perspective is as valid as any other.  I don't mind her mention of God as it could be beneficial to others who share that faith.

I agree with you that many of those who do believe in some higher entity do have a major tendency to pass judgment on those with a lack or even different belief.  Religion is responsible for more atrocities in this world than any other cause (I think). 

In my experience, some of the most moral people I have met are other agnostics or atheists, and some of the most spectacular snakes in the grass were those who claim to be "Christian".  However, if I think about it seriously, I can reverse that sentence as well.  My personal observation is that religion, regardless of flavor, really has little to do with a individual's morality. 

As far as how any of this applies to KenC's situation, well, I'll leave that up to KenC himself as really only he can apply it or not to his own situation.

[LiveFromUkraine]

Thank you for clarifying. I apologise unreservedly for taking offence where none was intended.

You may find some answers to that on secular humanist sites like, http://www.humanism.org.uk/humanism

Funny how you find negativity in almost everything.  If someone wants to talk about their beliefs than what is the problem?  They are not forcing you to read it nor listen.  Put her on ignore if you don't like it.