Dewey's post
-
Many posts in this thread have been pointless blather, totally agree. My posts have been excellent though.
-
Many posts in this thread have been pointless blather, totally agree. My posts have been excellent though.
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
Many posts in this thread have been pointless blather, totally agree. My posts have been excellent though.
Yes. High end blather
-
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
Many posts in this thread have been pointless blather, totally agree. My posts have been excellent though.
Yes. High end blather
@Mik said in Dewey's post:
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
Many posts in this thread have been pointless blather, totally agree. My posts have been excellent though.
Yes. High end blather
Premium artisanal hand crafted old world blather.
-
@Mik said in Dewey's post:
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
Many posts in this thread have been pointless blather, totally agree. My posts have been excellent though.
Yes. High end blather
Premium artisanal hand crafted old world blather.
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
Premium artisanal hand crafted old world blather.
Hand crafted? Video, or it didn't happen, Bay-boy! I wanna see the keyboard video...
-
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
Premium artisanal hand crafted old world blather.
Hand crafted? Video, or it didn't happen, Bay-boy! I wanna see the keyboard video...
@George-K said in Dewey's post:
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
Premium artisanal hand crafted old world blather.
Hand crafted? Video, or it didn't happen, Bay-boy! I wanna see the keyboard video...
Maybe I’ll leave an air of mystery and take my chances with what people say about me after I’m gone.
-
@George-K said in Dewey's post:
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
Premium artisanal hand crafted old world blather.
Hand crafted? Video, or it didn't happen, Bay-boy! I wanna see the keyboard video...
Maybe I’ll leave an air of mystery and take my chances with what people say about me after I’m gone.
-
@George-K said in Dewey's post:
@Horace you misspelled "mysterie," destroying any credibility you had.
So, bye.
Be seeing you
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
@George-K said in Dewey's post:
@Horace you misspelled "mysterie," destroying any credibility you had.
So, bye.
Be seeing you
LOL!
-
All this is really pointless blather. I’ve lost my friend and, flaws acknowledged, the place will be less without him.
@Mik said in Dewey's post:
All this is really pointless blather. I’ve lost my friend and, flaws acknowledged, the place will be less without him.
I agree on the latter.
On the former, I nod while reading Phibes' posts, although I'm sure Dewey expected it (maybe he's lurking here?) when he posted it publicly on FB. I think I made my position on Dewey clear in my earlier posts but to repeat myself (which Larry knows I do quite frequently)... I enjoyed meeting Dewey once, enjoyed his contributions (wish he still participated in TNCR), thought his FB post was crass and of no purpose other than catharsis, and to that end, I hope it brought him some peace.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
I dont a problem with it. People react differently, and obviously Dewey had some pretty strong feelings about his interactions with Larry (most of which I probably dont know about). I dont know the Bible well (actually not at all LOL), so I dont know what it says about talking about someone after they die.
It's about making a claim about someone else's belief, recently deceased or otherwise. While I'm sure it's the emotional truth of many that Larry was not a believer in Christianity, for Dewey to make that claim would be against the rules of how he's supposed to comport himself within that same faith. I am sure you have issues with people who don't practice what they preach, but in this case, you also know that Larry was mean, so the rules don't apply to him. That's nice.
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
I dont a problem with it. People react differently, and obviously Dewey had some pretty strong feelings about his interactions with Larry (most of which I probably dont know about). I dont know the Bible well (actually not at all LOL), so I dont know what it says about talking about someone after they die.
It's about making a claim about someone else's belief, recently deceased or otherwise. While I'm sure it's the emotional truth of many that Larry was not a believer in Christianity, for Dewey to make that claim would be against the rules of how he's supposed to comport himself within that same faith. I am sure you have issues with people who don't practice what they preach, but in this case, you also know that Larry was mean, so the rules don't apply to him. That's nice.
For me, a minister is no more or no less perfect than me or anybody else. It appears that Dewey knew Larry much longer and closer than me (and maybe you also). Maybe they had conversations about this subject. :woman-shrugging:
As I said, I probably whould not have reacted the same way in the same situation, but it really does not bother me. Maybe it should, but it doesn't.
As I am not very religious I am sure has some bias on my reaction.
-
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
I dont a problem with it. People react differently, and obviously Dewey had some pretty strong feelings about his interactions with Larry (most of which I probably dont know about). I dont know the Bible well (actually not at all LOL), so I dont know what it says about talking about someone after they die.
It's about making a claim about someone else's belief, recently deceased or otherwise. While I'm sure it's the emotional truth of many that Larry was not a believer in Christianity, for Dewey to make that claim would be against the rules of how he's supposed to comport himself within that same faith. I am sure you have issues with people who don't practice what they preach, but in this case, you also know that Larry was mean, so the rules don't apply to him. That's nice.
For me, a minister is no more or no less perfect than me or anybody else. It appears that Dewey knew Larry much longer and closer than me (and maybe you also). Maybe they had conversations about this subject. :woman-shrugging:
As I said, I probably whould not have reacted the same way in the same situation, but it really does not bother me. Maybe it should, but it doesn't.
As I am not very religious I am sure has some bias on my reaction.
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
For me, a minister is no more or no less perfect than me or anybody else.
They are in a position to be more hypocritical than anybody else. That hypocrisy is what I'm attempting to examine.
Education is extremely important.
-
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
I dont a problem with it. People react differently, and obviously Dewey had some pretty strong feelings about his interactions with Larry (most of which I probably dont know about). I dont know the Bible well (actually not at all LOL), so I dont know what it says about talking about someone after they die.
It's about making a claim about someone else's belief, recently deceased or otherwise. While I'm sure it's the emotional truth of many that Larry was not a believer in Christianity, for Dewey to make that claim would be against the rules of how he's supposed to comport himself within that same faith. I am sure you have issues with people who don't practice what they preach, but in this case, you also know that Larry was mean, so the rules don't apply to him. That's nice.
For me, a minister is no more or no less perfect than me or anybody else. It appears that Dewey knew Larry much longer and closer than me (and maybe you also). Maybe they had conversations about this subject. :woman-shrugging:
As I said, I probably whould not have reacted the same way in the same situation, but it really does not bother me. Maybe it should, but it doesn't.
As I am not very religious I am sure has some bias on my reaction.
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
I dont a problem with it. People react differently, and obviously Dewey had some pretty strong feelings about his interactions with Larry (most of which I probably dont know about). I dont know the Bible well (actually not at all LOL), so I dont know what it says about talking about someone after they die.
It's about making a claim about someone else's belief, recently deceased or otherwise. While I'm sure it's the emotional truth of many that Larry was not a believer in Christianity, for Dewey to make that claim would be against the rules of how he's supposed to comport himself within that same faith. I am sure you have issues with people who don't practice what they preach, but in this case, you also know that Larry was mean, so the rules don't apply to him. That's nice.
For me, a minister is no more or no less perfect than me or anybody else. It appears that Dewey knew Larry much longer and closer than me (and maybe you also). Maybe they had conversations about this subject. :woman-shrugging:
As I said, I probably whould not have reacted the same way in the same situation, but it really does not bother me. Maybe it should, but it doesn't.
As I am not very religious I am sure has some bias on my reaction.
Sorry, you don't count. Neither do I. I refer you to I Timothy, II Timothy and Titus. Those are very short and quickly read. If you don't care for the KJV, try something like the CSB. I think you'll find them interesting.
-
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
I dont a problem with it. People react differently, and obviously Dewey had some pretty strong feelings about his interactions with Larry (most of which I probably dont know about). I dont know the Bible well (actually not at all LOL), so I dont know what it says about talking about someone after they die.
It's about making a claim about someone else's belief, recently deceased or otherwise. While I'm sure it's the emotional truth of many that Larry was not a believer in Christianity, for Dewey to make that claim would be against the rules of how he's supposed to comport himself within that same faith. I am sure you have issues with people who don't practice what they preach, but in this case, you also know that Larry was mean, so the rules don't apply to him. That's nice.
For me, a minister is no more or no less perfect than me or anybody else. It appears that Dewey knew Larry much longer and closer than me (and maybe you also). Maybe they had conversations about this subject. :woman-shrugging:
As I said, I probably whould not have reacted the same way in the same situation, but it really does not bother me. Maybe it should, but it doesn't.
As I am not very religious I am sure has some bias on my reaction.
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
I dont a problem with it. People react differently, and obviously Dewey had some pretty strong feelings about his interactions with Larry (most of which I probably dont know about). I dont know the Bible well (actually not at all LOL), so I dont know what it says about talking about someone after they die.
It's about making a claim about someone else's belief, recently deceased or otherwise. While I'm sure it's the emotional truth of many that Larry was not a believer in Christianity, for Dewey to make that claim would be against the rules of how he's supposed to comport himself within that same faith. I am sure you have issues with people who don't practice what they preach, but in this case, you also know that Larry was mean, so the rules don't apply to him. That's nice.
For me, a minister is no more or no less perfect than me or anybody else. It appears that Dewey knew Larry much longer and closer than me (and maybe you also). Maybe they had conversations about this subject. :woman-shrugging:
As I said, I probably whould not have reacted the same way in the same situation, but it really does not bother me. Maybe it should, but it doesn't.
As I am not very religious I am sure has some bias on my reaction.
Secondly, Dwain, which is the name he posted under, goes back to before 1998, back to the RMMP'er Room if I'm not mistaken. I was on PW not long after Larry, Jodi, Burton and a few others, probably late 98 or early 99.
-
All this is really pointless blather. I’ve lost my friend and, flaws acknowledged, the place will be less without him.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
For me, a minister is no more or no less perfect than me or anybody else.
They are in a position to be more hypocritical than anybody else. That hypocrisy is what I'm attempting to examine.
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
For me, a minister is no more or no less perfect than me or anybody else.
They are in a position to be more hypocritical than anybody else. That hypocrisy is what I'm attempting to examine.
Seems like everyday, worldwide (for example monks in Thailand or Taiwan, ministers in the US, etc.) religious people break either moral or legal laws. Again, they are just ordinary people.
Just like ordinary people. LOL I remember having a discussion about religion with some friends, and one of them said that they remember their priest saying something like, "Christianity seems to end in the parking lot". It was meant as a joke that people are getting mad at each other in the parking lot because someone cut someone else off, took their spot, etc. but there is some truth to it.
As I said, I am not very religious but it seems that alot of religious people (again, worldwide, not just US christians) seem to think that they have a higher "moral" standing because of that. I dont agree with that and dont believe that, so maybe that is another reason why Dewey's post did not bother me. Maybe he will look back and say, "yup, I probably could have done that differently." Maybe not.
-
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
For me, a minister is no more or no less perfect than me or anybody else.
They are in a position to be more hypocritical than anybody else. That hypocrisy is what I'm attempting to examine.
Seems like everyday, worldwide (for example monks in Thailand or Taiwan, ministers in the US, etc.) religious people break either moral or legal laws. Again, they are just ordinary people.
Just like ordinary people. LOL I remember having a discussion about religion with some friends, and one of them said that they remember their priest saying something like, "Christianity seems to end in the parking lot". It was meant as a joke that people are getting mad at each other in the parking lot because someone cut someone else off, took their spot, etc. but there is some truth to it.
As I said, I am not very religious but it seems that alot of religious people (again, worldwide, not just US christians) seem to think that they have a higher "moral" standing because of that. I dont agree with that and dont believe that, so maybe that is another reason why Dewey's post did not bother me. Maybe he will look back and say, "yup, I probably could have done that differently." Maybe not.
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
For me, a minister is no more or no less perfect than me or anybody else.
They are in a position to be more hypocritical than anybody else. That hypocrisy is what I'm attempting to examine.
Seems like everyday, worldwide (for example monks in Thailand or Taiwan, ministers in the US, etc.) religious people break either moral or legal laws. Again, they are just ordinary people.
Just like ordinary people. LOL I remember having a discussion about religion with some friends, and one of them said that they remember their priest saying something like, "Christianity seems to end in the parking lot". It was meant as a joke that people are getting mad at each other in the parking lot because someone cut someone else off, took their spot, etc. but there is some truth to it.
As I said, I am not very religious but it seems that alot of religious people (again, worldwide, not just US christians) seem to think that they have a higher "moral" standing because of that. I dont agree with that and dont believe that, so maybe that is another reason why Dewey's post did not bother me. Maybe he will look back and say, "yup, I probably could have done that differently." Maybe not.
I think maybe I overstated the degree to which I'm interrogating your personal emotional reaction. I don't care about that. I was looking for some acknowledgment of an hypocrisy from a man who I'm very sure lives a life meant to convey he is above that sort of thing. But please don't overestimate the degree to which I'm looking to pry that acknowledgment out of you, personally. You are free to have your own view on everything, as always.
Education is extremely important.
-
I learned today that a former acquaintance died. I never met him in person, but I knew him online, as a fellow member of a music-related forum, for the better part of two decades, in the era just before the social media explosion. For years, I considered him a very dear, close friend.
Despite the fact that the forum - family of forums, actually - was primarily music-related, a lot of the conversations revolved around politics, religion, all the touchy social subjects that you aren't supposed to talk about in polite company. The forum was populated by many really intelligent and diverse people, and it really became a family. We hosted in-person gatherings all over the country. The forum itself was featured in a New York Times Best Seller, written by one of the forum members - one of several accomplished authors who were members. Together, we celebrated life's major milestones and joys in our own lives and the lives of our loved ones. We celebrated weddings. We mourned deaths. Our hearts were broken by a murder. In fact, it was a forum member who first pointed out that it seemed that I was being called to the ministry - a comment that, given what would later become our polar opposite theologies, I'm sure he came to regret. But that's another story.
For a long time, the political/social discussions, while sometimes getting quite intense, were mostly fairly high level. The forums were unmoderated, and on occasion, they could get pretty nasty - more than once, the comparison was made between some forum debates and the cantina fight scene in the original Star Wars. Still, on balance the arguments were relatively harmless - at least originally.
Over time though, that changed. Things got nastier, more partisan. Factions formed, or I suppose, it's more accurate to say that they became more entrenched. With some of the members, the arguments got intensely personal and abusive. A small group of members - I'm ashamed to say that I was one of them - banded together as the conservative "guardians," ready to go on the attack against not just progressive positions, but against specific individuals in personal ways that I can only say was a forerunner to the Trumpist school of destructive personal discourse. I cringed during the worst of those personal attacks, but I'm ashamed to say that I often agreed with them in principle, if not in their actual execution. So I only rarely objected to any of the attacks. On the contrary, I was an enabler of them.
I did so because I'd become good friends with the man who would ultimately become the leader of this wolf pack. He'd shown himself to be a good person in many ways, and that resonated with me - so much that for a long time, I couldn't bring myself to stand up and oppose him when he crossed the line - and as time wore on, he crossed it increasingly often. He eventually just went almost completely dark.
It was while I was studying for the ministry when the real cracks in our friendship began. He'd always known me as having very conservative religious views that he agreed with - at least in theory. He wasn't really a religious person at all; the whole subject only mattered to him insofar as it bolstered his extreme right-wing politics. But the more my religious training continued, the more I questioned, and eventually rejected, those conservative views, theologically, and by extension, politically.
And that's when he turned on me, with a vengeance.
I suddenly became the target of his abuse. Even after I tried to ignore and disengage from him, he continued to harass, insult, and abuse me online. I came to be the recipient of all the vitriol and personal attacks that I'd earlier laughed at, and enabled, and defended when he'd targeted others. Karma is indeed a bitch.
Much of his abuse against me revolved around my theology of full acceptance of LGBTQ people in society and church. He was a rigid ultra-conservative in all regards, but his rabid homophobic bigotry was his most strident position. When my views changed, and I found the courage to disagree with him - which was an intellectual, theological turn that actually predated my recognition and acceptance of my own sexuality - that was the last straw for him. He smeared me with a number of falsehoods and constant personal insult. He was in every real sense, an online stalker. The abuse intensified to the point that I seriously considered investigating what actual charges might be filed against him.
And today, I learned that he has died.
With his passing, many are offering kind words about him, and many of them are justifiable for certain aspects of his life. At the same time though, the truly horrible, harmful, abusive aspect of his personality, and the real and deep harm that he inflicted on people, are being minimized - partly, I suppose, out of a desire to not speak ill of the dead, but I think even more because only those he abused can understand the magnitude of the pain and suffering he caused. Only those who never received it, or at most were only passive observers of it, can dismiss it with such ease. I can't, not for my own sake, or the sake of others he abused.
In remembering him, one person said that despite his flaws, when push came to shove, he could be relied upon to do the right thing. In reality, when push came to shove, it was usually him doing the pushing and shoving, and while doing it, he very frequently, in fact, did the wrong thing.
I do genuinely mourn the loss of all that was good in this man - and at least at some point in his life, there was significant good. My condolences go out to his family and all who loved him. But I recognize the good, and I offer the condolences, while bearing the scars that he caused. It does nothing good, and it does a real disservice to those he hurt, to ignore or minimize the magnitude of the horrible side of his personality as well. He was often a vicious, abusive bully. Only God knows why he was so often gleefully cruel to others, and especially so constantly, vehemently homophobic. For all his good, and all his bad, he is now in God's hands, and I trust God to deal with him with the appropriate measures of mercy and justice.@Horace said in Dewey's post:
He wasn't really a religious person at all; the whole subject only mattered to him insofar as it bolstered his extreme right-wing politics.
One of the little peccadillos of (some/many) Protestants is to step into the shoes of God Almighty and declare judgement on some other Protestants that aren’t in full theological agreement as “unsaved” and “unbelieving.” This may be the case with Dewey here. I didn’t follow the Larry-Dewey wars all that closely but I’m sure Larry had a similar pronouncement. (As a Catholic I don’t get into these internecine arguments and actually the one thing that just about all these Protestants agree on is that Catholics are “unsaved” and “unbelieving.”) Anyway, I do take issue here with Dewey’s appraisal. I remember when Wacky Iraqi was on the board and had terminal cancer Larry stopped his usual harangue, changed his whole demeanor, and tried to convert Wacky to the Gospel and save his soul before he died. It is exactly what Christians are supposed to do. Larry really impressed me by how he took his faith and Wacky’s salvation so seriously. It didn’t even occur to me to do something similar. And not that I would have even if it did. But Larry did it and that would be a Christian.
Well, there’s that. As to the tone of Dewey’s missive—Dewey was butt hurt by Larry and he’s just expressing what he feels. Larry, I’m sure would do something similar is the shoe was on the other foot. Next door the people there are pretty much dancing on Larry’s grave. They were sometimes on the wrong end of Larry’s personal invectives and are venting. The gleefulness is a bit troubling, but that is the sandbox we all play in. But those over there tend to see the mote in Larry’s eye and not see the plank in their own—right from the beginning they expected to lecture the poor conservatives on the error of our ways with equal measures of condescension and pity and they expected us acquiesce to their wisdom, but instead to their surprise they got one hell of a fight. All good.
One think that troubles me though: Steve Miller said over there:
"The most memorable thing about that visit was learning that Larry in person was exactly the same as Larry on line."
I really wonder if that is true. -
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
@Horace said in Dewey's post:
@taiwan_girl said in Dewey's post:
For me, a minister is no more or no less perfect than me or anybody else.
They are in a position to be more hypocritical than anybody else. That hypocrisy is what I'm attempting to examine.
Seems like everyday, worldwide (for example monks in Thailand or Taiwan, ministers in the US, etc.) religious people break either moral or legal laws. Again, they are just ordinary people.
Just like ordinary people. LOL I remember having a discussion about religion with some friends, and one of them said that they remember their priest saying something like, "Christianity seems to end in the parking lot". It was meant as a joke that people are getting mad at each other in the parking lot because someone cut someone else off, took their spot, etc. but there is some truth to it.
As I said, I am not very religious but it seems that alot of religious people (again, worldwide, not just US christians) seem to think that they have a higher "moral" standing because of that. I dont agree with that and dont believe that, so maybe that is another reason why Dewey's post did not bother me. Maybe he will look back and say, "yup, I probably could have done that differently." Maybe not.
I think maybe I overstated the degree to which I'm interrogating your personal emotional reaction. I don't care about that. I was looking for some acknowledgment of an hypocrisy from a man who I'm very sure lives a life meant to convey he is above that sort of thing. But please don't overestimate the degree to which I'm looking to pry that acknowledgment out of you, personally. You are free to have your own view on everything, as always.
@Horace Ah okay. But I guess I would answer - should people in certain positions (religion, law enforcement, politics, etc) be held to a higher standard?
I think most of us (me included) probably do that, even if it is not something that should be done.
(Off topic but not really). I remember (probably on a TV show or something) where the lawyer was asking a juror if witness testimony from a police man should be given higher priority than witness testimony from anybody else. My internal bias says that they should, but my reality brain says "nope", it should be the same.
Not sure I am answering your question. 555
Is it hypocritical for Dewey to post that? I honestly dont know. It was posted without names, and I dont know if he posted it as his position in the church.
I guess the only thing I am sure of is that it doesn't bother me that much. In my (small) knowledge of him, I think that Dewey is a good writer and pretty deliberate before he writes something. Maybe he himself struggled with posting it. Has anybody gotten any feedback from him?
-
All I can think of as I watch this piling on from both “sides” is that Larry would have loved this sh*t. It’s actually made me laugh out loud a couple of time. Sorry, I’m in a weird place in my mind lately. A weird and sometimes overwhelming grief that pops up at strange times from losing my Dad and both of our cats this year, along with my mom’s dementia that has taken her mostly away, even though her body is still there. Really hard. So death has been on my mind a lot lately.
