Aspies For Freedom

I’m afraid to say I think tenaciouscj is right Guesswho.

You really do need to throw away that list.

There are so many wonderful ladies out there--and to my mind, your ‘list’ excludes some of the best.

Switch off your head--open up your heart--it’s the only way you’ll find someone.

And it won’t be the someone you thought you were looking for.

Here’s another guy who has very exacting standards when it comes to finding a wife.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDIVmdTzj...ed&search=
It took him 2000 years--do you really wan to wait that long?

Opps I seemed to have left my t somewhere (I'm always doing that).

Ah, there it is.
Should have read...do you really want to wait that long?

But we non-Christians and ex-Christians don't need 'saving' - please respect other peoples' right to follow a different spirital path from you.  I have a religion which is as true to me as yours is to you - that doesn't make one of us right and one of us wrong, it just makes us different.

(Actually, in my religion, proselyzing is considered very bad form as it interfers with another's free will.)

"The idea is to try to save them." How do you "save" them?
I hope you aren't trying to get into the non-Christians are all doomed to burn for all eternity (irrespective of their morality or integrity type of talk again.
You aren't saying this are you Guess Who? Tell me you are over the fear-mongering hate talk. Tell me I misinterpreted this line.

"Clergy person...clergy person...Friendly neighbourhood clergy person"
Sure Chris we could ask them and they could explain to us and naturally we are going to believe everything they say blindly right?
Why not? Clergy persons until it was exposed worldwide helped hide the shameful pedophilia priests in many Christian denominations. Clergy persons up to very recent times were completely supportive of removal of children from indigenous communities and into white communities. Clergy Person have in times removed supported holy wars. Clergy persons supported the Spanish Inquisition and all the nasty tortures and such that accompanied such practices. Clergy persons supported burning of weird people as spawn of Satan or witches and burnt them or tortured them. Would you have been classed as weird back then. If so would your friendly neighbourhood clergy person have stopped you from been tortured and/or burnt at the stake.
IF they were to explain anything to you at this stage I am betting it would be justified as "the will of god". They no doubt would have "evidence" in the bible to give explanations to all such horrendous practices. So Chris don't for a bloody minute think that saying so patronisingly "Maybe a friendly neighbourhood Clergy person can explain it to you" in any way addresses nasty behaviour by people purporting to be Christian.
In each of the above examples of Clergy Person's behaviour, they and the Christian faith supported their practices. The individuals of the faith (Clergy Persons, church officials, priests, members of the flock) endorsed such beliefs and behaviours and had the bible to back them.
Read the bible anyway you choose and you can endorse a lot of terrible things. Ignore other bits and you can stop a lot of good. read and examine it "logically" and it will continually contradict itself. Why? Because a lot of it was written over time from different people with different viewpoints, because a lot of it was meant to be analogies and metaphor and other non-concrete representations, a lot of it was written by wine-spilling apostles and all of it was written in by people in a time and culture that has been superceded.

I knew some Christians who lived near us. They had two lovely little girls who were sweet and lovely mannered. One of the girls who was in primary school had a real big problem with wetting herself and having horrible nightmares. It came to light that there is a section in the bible apparently about "sparing the rod and spoiling the child".
Chris you are probably going to battle trying to find anything on where it says that gays are terrible people and banned from heaven BUT I bet you can find this phrase.
Now apparently these people used to obey this instruction and beat their kid systematically with this. I was disgusted and informed them that it was illegal (child abuse). They said that they God's law was better than man's or something equally as stupid. They also did not get or like when I asked them whether they wanted to try someone their own size with or without a rod.
We didn't see much of them after that. In fact I think they deliberately avoided us.
Now tell me how they may have been wrong in their interpretation. Tell me they were not child abusers. Tell me that they were not doing God's will.
See Chris? Ignore one bit of the bible and you become just a little bit more the non-practicing Christian and hellfire becomes a little more certain. Accept all the bible and practice everything and the compassion, acceptance of others and such behaviours as shown by J.C. is soooo much harder.

The problem is mate, you try to treat those of us who are not Christian as either ignorant or unintelligent. We are neither. We make a rational decision and are OK with it.
I have no problem with not liking Christians or putting down their belief structure. At the same time I have no problem being supportive of Christians having strong faith. I take individuals on their own merits. I don't need to classify them on basis of their gender, sexuality, race, nationality, religious beliefs, age or other classifications. None of these things will stop me from looking at the person first.

Oh *** do people get graded now how saved they are?
Chris why are you still talking up your bloody ***, hateful damnation talk again?
Any reason?
Any?
Any at all?

http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com/showthre...860&page=6

Chris read from post #88.
That is about as explicit as I can be

Well Chris you are obviously doing something very right then. I mean it is plain to all of us that your stance on the lack of value non-christian ladies has only impacted positively in your life ad left you happy, content, fulfilled, loving, and able to positively grow in life.
I think after the thousand or so posts you have posted here not one of us would damn every non-baptised Christian in our midst and give up the chance to be with someone we could love. I think your work here is done. With an example like your's to follow why would we not want to be just like you?

Lucie1 I would appreciate Chris not bringing up this crap about saved people and allusion to non-Christians being all damned eternally. I would think it respectful not to keep the running commentary that you, he knows and we all know he does.
So Lucie1. The phrase I heard come from somewhere or other that I am sure Chris has heard himself is "DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO UNTO YOU". (Hint here Chris Luke 6:31)

Naturally you are not going to see this Lucie1 and I have come to appreciate that you won't. Why? I honestly don't know that either. I just know you are you and you will continue to defend people who are offensive and insulting...go figure?

I appreciate your suggestion that you wish me to leave him alone Lucie1. I honestly do....and I will too.
As long as Guess Who refrains from offensive or insulting posts I will do likewise.
Chris does insult and offends. He upsets me. He knows this is the case because it has been explained...over and over and over and over and over. He stops this and I will stop insulting and offending him back and it is really that simple.
If he has no control on doing this then I won't either. If he can't see how he does this I will make sure I point it out to him. If believes he has a right or duty to keep on with doing this then he will expect this type of response.
I expect he will keep doing this regardless just as I expect you will keep defending his insults and keep having a go at me. You are probably not going to be the only one to have issue to my posting style. I don't have a problem with you not agreeing with me or anyone else not agreeing.
I defend my actions and will always do so. I have no issue with anyone wanting to argue against me. I can hold my own and don't ask for favours here.
If Chris was a fundamental Islamic, I would have no issue with it. I would not have issue with him being Islamic. If he posted though saying Western women are, in the way they dress, morally loose, I would similarly shoot him down in flames. Why? Because that belief structure is different to what I believe but I don't want to see it expressed like that here. He could believe what he likes and has a right to but taking a religious moral stance like that is not nice. Alluding to it is not nice.
I know if Chris was that person you would defend his right to say that too and would have issue with me attacking his Islamic beliefs because on form alone that is what you do Lucie1.
I don't stop here. I am a terrible person I know but I will have a go at any group that denounces others or maintains their group is better than another. Religious vs non-religious and visa-versa, Straight vs gay and visa-versa. A particular nationality and visa-versa. NT vs Autistic and visa versa. Male vs Female and visa versa. Racial Ethnicity vs another racial ethnicities and visa-versa.
I know I am a horrible man to have such a view on things and I know that this personal view of mine to both attack discriminatory viewpoints and promotion of superiority of such attached identity probably makes me bad person all around as does the support I try to give people here by listen and sharing experiences.
...........or perhaps I may be trying to make a difference here, in my own way

Sad isn't it Chris. You see me as in your thread trying to get you to shut up.
You see me as not thinking you have any right to be here.
You see me as having no reason to read your posts other than to have a go at you.
Do you know why that is sad Chris?

My grandparent's were Christian Catholics. They used to be strict but caring, accepting, good-hearted people who used their belief in God to empower their lives. They could quote really nice phrases out of the bible that had nothing to do with retribution, damnation or elitism. The stuff they quoted was nice, sensible, inspiring and comforting as well as uplifting. The stories they told us on sleep-overs were exciting and seemed to embrace all the aspects of Christianity which seem to pepper so many of your posts.

I see both of the aspects of Christianity and I can't think there would be many here including Max and myself who would have any issue with the values of Christianity which are nice, compassionate, inspirational, comforting and so forth. Damnation, moral superiority and religious exclusion are just not going to ride with me.

The other thing of course is you are another male diagnosed autistic born in 1970. From all you have said over 1600 posts and apart from a mutual interest in Metallica that is the most I can relate to you. I would love to share a joke with you. I would love to be able to share experiences with you and learning from you and instead every time I see a post of yours it is doing those things to damn me, laud over others or grieve your place in the life and mostly in the name of Christianity (This same religion I saw only positive things in as a small child). It does get to me. It frustrates more. It angers me. I do live in hope that one day I will see a post and see no trace of these types of things. I will respond and encourage more of the same. Perhaps I will see another side of Chris and perhaps this will find that another autistic male my age has got a bit in common to chat about.

As I say Chris. Very sad.

I am being very bloody straight and honest. There are no riddles here. Not a lot subtle about me Lucie1. I am blunt and direct. Look as much as you like for agendas or anything devious in my behaviour and you will not find it.

Not at all Lucie1.

I am not very good with abstract concepts like sarcasm. I do struggle with analogy and metaphors but as with most things I struggle with, there usually is a place for them and I will try to get at least a basic understanding of them.

So was that first post sarcastic. Yup! I am surprised there was a question as to whether I was being sarcastic. Thanks I have done better than I thought.

It was a post borne of frustration and displeasure. It was honest in the sense that sarcasm is meant. Say the opposite of what you think in such a way to clearly demonstrate the absurdity of the notion you present and it is seen as not having investment in your premise and actually is used to erode your opponents premise. In this sense it is honest because if it is understood that the other is being absurd and not truthful it is a known lie and therefore in term on honesty a double negative. Right?

As for me not trying to shut Chris up. Correct. Absolutely. He can talk about whatever he likes. He can also talk about whatever insulting crap he likes. If he does I will have a go at him. He knows this and I know this and that is fine. If he talks about non-insulting stuff I may be interested and share and learn from him (and who knows probably defend those ideas) and he knows this too as do I.

So Lucie1. Not being straight? Double messages? What are you on about?