People with behavior that we find less than tolerable should be called out and it presented to them. How else do people glimpse how they are seen through the eyes of others?
I couldn't agree more
Hi Terry,
I've gone over this post a few times, looking at the dynamics of this conversation. I'm glad you posted it.
What are offensive and intolerable actions for some are not for others, as katiekitten illustrated. While this approach didn't have a positive effect with you, it would with others. There are people whose lives are changed for the better because of encounters very much like this. I think it was her opinions more than her actions that bothered you. I wonder how offended you would have been if she had espoused the same viewpoint that you have? Besides, you didn't say anything to her about her action being offensive--you only made statements that disagreed with her position. All this probably did was re-enforce the perception she formed that you were a lost soul in darkness needing to be saved. Sorry, but I don't see anything in your response that would deter her from approaching others in this manner, or move her to modify her approach, if that was your intent (based on your reply quoted above).
You both made presumptions about each other--a potentially dangerous thing to do in a conversation with someone you don't know. Actually, it looks like you are the one who set the tone for the way the conversation developed. You used the phrase "religious fanatic" which carries with it negative connotations and is generally considered derogetory in our culture. Then you attached to it a description which she would not only consider very noble, but one she would identify with: "...I devoted myself entirely to thoughts and actions concerning the bible, what god's will was in my life..." and then the part about trying to convince others to do the same. So, essentially, what you did was call her, in her mind, a "religious fanatic" with all the negative baggage it carries. You PRESUMED it was a harmless statement. Now, in retrospect, you may actually feel that way, but so you understand, you fired the first shot. Whatever else you said after that about this phrase was lost; this is what stuck.
I noticed you went from claiming to be agnostic and not really knowing, to making a very authoritative statement about the "empty sky" and "silent room."
The reason I suggested in an earlier post that you should have mentioned that you came out of JW is that you probably sounded to her like a backslidden Christian missionary. Maybe it would have altered her response, maybe not, considering she didn't seem to adjust her approach based on your feedback, but I see it as an important part of the story. And the part about going to prison instead of fighting in Vietnam--if it had been me, I would have wanted to hear more about that, especially since I don't think that is a proper application of "Love your enemies."
Looks like she was also implying that you have cuckoo eggs in your brain. Was that the basis for your later topic?
There are things about her approach I don't agree with--and the marytrdom part is a little strange--but this looks like an example of two people talking but not listening. Not much is accomplished for either side that way.
Thanks again for the topic.
Regards,
Mike