[Vision2020] Defense Of Post "Amazonian Goddesses Do Battle!"

Tue Dec 19 13:05:15 PST 2006

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Tbertruss at aol.com <Tbertruss at aol.com>
Date: Jul 1, 2006 11:57 AM
Subject: Amazonian Goddesses Do Battle:New Version
To: starbliss at gmail.com

Mike:

I am again asking you to explain why you complained about the "Amazonian
Goddesses ..." post from March 2003, if you will, based on my explication of
this post's content in comments below.  What I wish is for an intellectually
competent reply responding with integrity to the ideas contained in the post
I authored that you decided to dismiss and complain about on the public
Vision2020 list, with no, it appears, intention to seriously engage in
substantive discussion of the ideas my post presented.

Why make such a powerful negative statement regarding someone's ideas on a
public list serve, then refuse to engage in further substantive discussion?
This strikes me as disingenuous and rude.

One issue that glares out rather obviously, is that while you implied I was
inappropriately attacking a religious group, you appeard to ignore the fact
that I was not attacking Goddess worshiping female based religion.  I was in
fact attempting to defend such a religious position against a male dominated
female subjugating patriarchal religious ideology, that has suppressed
female oriented religious ideology throughout its history.

Thus I was defending a certain religious ideology against attacks against
it!

Do you approve of the suppression of Goddess worshiping female oriented
religion by patriarchal male dominated Christianity?

You asserted "I was offended by your characterizations, finger-pointing, and
labeling ..." in your negative response on Vision2020 that is at the bottom
in whole.  You also stated recently you thought the post was a personal
attack.  I don't like personal attacks on Vision2020, and I do not believe I
engaged in this conduct in this post.

Who do I attack personally in this post?  Doug Jones?  I merely make
reference to one of his points about his ideology regarding the equality of
men and women.  I do not see this as a personal attack.  I mention Don Kaag,
because I made a point that was referring to another discussion Kaag and I
had on Vision2020.  There is no personal attack against Don Kaag.

Commenting on Vision2020 that Doug Wilson or Donovan Arnold is fat, or Dale
Courtney does a comb over of his bald spot, are personalized attacks.  These
sorts of attacks have occurred often by some of the most prolific Vision2020
list members, yet I do not recall you once taking issue with these
individuals for their personalized attacks on the Vision2020 list, attacks
that have been ongoing for years!

Everything else in the post below I regard as addressing issues in the realm
of ideas.  Yes, I do make some pointed comments about the history of
violence regarding Christianity (some think the war in Iraq is a new
"Crusade" against Islam, so this topic is hardly irrelevant to important
current events that were/are discussed often on Vision2020), and the
connection between aggressive "warrior" sports and preparing males for
warfare: both of these topics are defendable and can be discussed in the
realm of ideas: anyone with the slightest knowledge of modern feminist
theory understands the promotion of male dominance by educating males (via
warrior sports) to use physical force in their conduct, and discouraging
females from acquiring these physical skills of self defense and/or
aggression.

I go out of my way to point out in this post that I am not singling out
Christianity for its historical connection to the use of violence to promote
its ideology and agenda, when I assert that all major ideologies use
violence to promote their beliefs.  So the argument I was unfairly targeting
Christianity to the exclusion of other ideologies is false.

I fail to understand what you mean by "finger pointing and labeling" in the
context of this post.  If I make a connection between a male
dominated/female subjugating ideology promoting warrior sports for the males
but not the females raised in this ideology, how is this "finger pointing
and labeling?"  It is an analysis of how the ideology functions.  I think it
is apparent I was suggesting a defense of women's rights to be aggressive
and physical like men, and play sports like men do, if they wish, even in
school sports programs, and not be subjugated by men, with what was meant to
be a playful fantasy of Amazonian women doing competent battle against the
Logos school boys in sports.  As if school sports competitions are some sort
of improper topic?

I received positive responses from women list serve members to this post on
"Amazonian Goddesses" who understood what I was getting at, and applauded.

I can understand someone claiming the post wanders, with the ending suddenly
introducing a plea for pacifism, but this is not the critique you made.

Ted Moffett

*[Vision2020] Amazonian Goddesses Do Battle!

Ted Moffett

*ted_moffett at hotmail.com <ted_moffett%40hotmail.com>
*Wed, 12 Mar 2003 03:58:56 +0000*
Previous message: [Vision2020] Major news story from the Colorado
Independence Institute
<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-March/001057.html>
Next message: [Vision2020] Mother of All Freedom Fries
<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-March/001060.html>
*Messages sorted by:* [ date
]<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-March/date.html#1058>
[
thread ]<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-March/thread.html#1058>
[
subject ]<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-March/subject.html#1058>
[
author ]<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-March/author.html#1058>All:

The very suggestion that Trinitarians' would model their sports programs on
the government school regulations mandating women's sports is unthinkable.
After all, "equality denies difference," to quote Doug Jones, and
Trinitarians' clearly think men and women are different in ways that mandate

they not be given equal treatment, both in chest exposure and exposure to
the rigors of sports.

I would love to match the buffed and trained female " amazonian" children of

gay Goddess worshiping feminist female parents (Don Kaag take note) in
battle against the Trinitarian boys.  Who cares about facts and reason,
let's settle this in battle, and let children and youth fight to promote our

cause!  Surely I jest, but after all, is this not how the dominant
ideologies of the world have spread their beliefs throughout history?

Let's not be so naive as to think that the violence of sports for male youth

has no connection to preparation for warfare.

No one should blink an eye at the endorsement of warrior sports for the
males being raised in a fundamentalist Christian tradition.  Christianity
has been spread by the sword when it could not succeed by "peaceful" means
to convert the natives.  This is a fact of history that of course will be
denied and put through the spin filters of those wishing to place
Christianity in a more favorable light.

But I don't mean to pick on Christianity here, though it is the dominant
religion of our country.  All MAJOR ideologies use violence to promote their

beliefs.  If someone can provide an counter example, I would be grateful.
In anticipation of exceptions I will comment that sadly the ideology of
pacifism is a NOT a major ideology in our world, nor has it ever been.

There is still time for pacifism to become a dominant ideology before the
prevalent attitude of the use of violence to settle conflict leads to
technological and scientific based warfare that could lead to the extinction

of the human race or to a result that will leave the survivors wishing they
were extinct.

Ted Moffett

*[Vision2020] Amazonian Goddesses Do Battle!

Mike Curley

*curley at turbonet.com <curley%40turbonet.com>
*Wed, 12 Mar 2003 21:34:16 -0800*
Previous message: [Vision2020] Amazonian Goddesses Do Battle!
<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-March/001083.html>
Next message: [Vision2020] Amazonian Goddesses Do Battle!
<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-March/001085.html>
*Messages sorted by:* [ date
]<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-March/date.html#1087>
[
thread ]<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-March/thread.html#1087>
[
subject ]<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-March/subject.html#1087>
[
author ]<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2003-March/author.html#1087><color><param>0100,0100,0100</param>Ted:

I thought your original attack of a religious group was
inappropriate on this list regardless of how much I might
disagree with the philosophy or practices of the religious
group.  I was offended by your characterizations, finger-
pointing, and labeling as I would have been had you
attacked my Jewish, atheist, Muslim, agnostic, Buddhist,
or other (non-"fundamentalist") Christian friends.  This is
indeed a public list, but I don't think that means that
anyone you want to criticize, and any way you want to
criticize them, is fair game.  However, since no one ever
seems to want to take the continuing religious philosophy
discussions off list, I would just ask one thing.  Please
retain the "subject" thread in continuing posts (amazonian
goddesses) so that the multitude of us who want can
readily identify and delete the messages.  Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20061219/2d33b014/attachment-0001.html 