Re: Re:the rapture and anti-environmentalism

Hi Tim,

This one has "off-list" written all over it. I'll send you an email.

peace,
curt


t.whid wrote:

> xx going way, way off the subject of new media art xx
>
> ++++
>
> I would be interested to hear from Curt, who seems to be (perhaps not
> moderate, but at least) a rational christian, why do oppose gay
> marriage?
>
> Is it simply because of the 'abomination' passage in the bible? If
> so,
> how do you square the fact that it seems that there are plenty of
> laws
> in the old testament of the bible that modern christians happily
> ignore.
>
> But yet they get stuck on this one. I'm curious why.
>
> I won't reply or try to argue with you (we've both over the years
> probably come to the conclusion that that is not very productive on
> either side).
>
> Just curious.
>
> If you feel open, I would be interested to hear your thoughts on
> evolution as well. The opposition to which I don't understand one
> bit.
> Being raised catholic and attending catholic schools, I can tell you
> that evolution and catholicism seem to coexist with no problem.
>
> take care,
>
>
> On Mar 22, 2005, at 3:33 PM, curt cloninger wrote:
>
> >
> > I'm probably not what you'd call a moderate Christian. I walk up
> to
> > strangers on the street and pray with them. You and I disagree
> about
> > most of the issues you mention (abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage,
> > Christian intention of US founding fathers). The point is, there's
> a
> > way to love and respect people with whom you disagree.
> >
> > As far as being the defender of orthodox Christianity versus
> > contemporary misunderstandings and oversimplifications of it, no
> > thanks. It's taken me two days to refute 1 Bill Moyers
> overstatement.
> >
> > http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew13:9-17
> >
> > peace,
> > curt
> ===
> <twhid>http://www.mteww.com</twhid>
> ===
>
>

Actually, I'm sure many of us would be interested in seeing the
response. If that's not possible, I would be interested in knowing why not.

Pall

curt cloninger wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> This one has "off-list" written all over it. I'll send you an email.
>
> peace,
> curt
>
>
> t.whid wrote:
>
>
>>xx going way, way off the subject of new media art xx
>>
>>++++
>>
>>I would be interested to hear from Curt, who seems to be (perhaps not
>>moderate, but at least) a rational christian, why do oppose gay
>>marriage?
>>
>>Is it simply because of the 'abomination' passage in the bible? If
>>so,
>>how do you square the fact that it seems that there are plenty of
>>laws
>>in the old testament of the bible that modern christians happily
>>ignore.
>>
>>But yet they get stuck on this one. I'm curious why.
>>
>>I won't reply or try to argue with you (we've both over the years
>>probably come to the conclusion that that is not very productive on
>>either side).
>>
>>Just curious.
>>
>>If you feel open, I would be interested to hear your thoughts on
>>evolution as well. The opposition to which I don't understand one
>>bit.
>>Being raised catholic and attending catholic schools, I can tell you
>>that evolution and catholicism seem to coexist with no problem.
>>
>>take care,
>>
>>
>>On Mar 22, 2005, at 3:33 PM, curt cloninger wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I'm probably not what you'd call a moderate Christian. I walk up
>>
>>to
>>
>>>strangers on the street and pray with them. You and I disagree
>>
>>about
>>
>>>most of the issues you mention (abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage,
>>>Christian intention of US founding fathers). The point is, there's
>>
>>a
>>
>>>way to love and respect people with whom you disagree.
>>>
>>>As far as being the defender of orthodox Christianity versus
>>>contemporary misunderstandings and oversimplifications of it, no
>>>thanks. It's taken me two days to refute 1 Bill Moyers
>>
>>overstatement.
>>
>>>http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew13:9-17
>>>
>>>peace,
>>>curt
>>
>>===
>><twhid>http://www.mteww.com</twhid>
>>===
>>
>>
>
> +
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>

–
_______________________________
Pall Thayer
artist/teacher
http://www.this.is/pallit
http://pallit.lhi.is/panse

Lorna
http://www.this.is/lorna
_______________________________

Hi Pall,

1. It's way off-topic.
2. If I email tim, it's just two people talking. If I post it here, it has the makings of a big emotional debate.
3. I don't want to have a big emotional debate (particularly on gay rights and creationism).

I hope that's OK.

curt



Pall Thayer wrote:

> Actually, I'm sure many of us would be interested in seeing the
> response. If that's not possible, I would be interested in knowing why
> not.
>
> Pall
>
> curt cloninger wrote:
> > Hi Tim,
> >
> > This one has "off-list" written all over it. I'll send you an
> email.
> >
> > peace,
> > curt
> >
> >
> > t.whid wrote:
> >
> >
> >>xx going way, way off the subject of new media art xx
> >>
> >>++++
> >>
> >>I would be interested to hear from Curt, who seems to be (perhaps
> not
> >>moderate, but at least) a rational christian, why do oppose gay
> >>marriage?
> >>
> >>Is it simply because of the 'abomination' passage in the bible? If
> >>so,
> >>how do you square the fact that it seems that there are plenty of
> >>laws
> >>in the old testament of the bible that modern christians happily
> >>ignore.
> >>
> >>But yet they get stuck on this one. I'm curious why.
> >>
> >>I won't reply or try to argue with you (we've both over the years
> >>probably come to the conclusion that that is not very productive on
> >>either side).
> >>
> >>Just curious.
> >>
> >>If you feel open, I would be interested to hear your thoughts on
> >>evolution as well. The opposition to which I don't understand one
> >>bit.
> >>Being raised catholic and attending catholic schools, I can tell
> you
> >>that evolution and catholicism seem to coexist with no problem.
> >>
> >>take care,
> >>
> >>
> >>On Mar 22, 2005, at 3:33 PM, curt cloninger wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I'm probably not what you'd call a moderate Christian. I walk up
> >>
> >>to
> >>
> >>>strangers on the street and pray with them. You and I disagree
> >>
> >>about
> >>
> >>>most of the issues you mention (abortion, euthanasia, gay
> marriage,
> >>>Christian intention of US founding fathers). The point is, there's
> >>
> >>a
> >>
> >>>way to love and respect people with whom you disagree.
> >>>
> >>>As far as being the defender of orthodox Christianity versus
> >>>contemporary misunderstandings and oversimplifications of it, no
> >>>thanks. It's taken me two days to refute 1 Bill Moyers
> >>
> >>overstatement.
> >>
> >>>http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew13:9-17
> >>>
> >>>peace,
> >>>curt
> >>
> >>===
> >><twhid>http://www.mteww.com</twhid>
> >>===
> >>
> >>
> >
> > +
> > -> post: [email protected]
> > -> questions: [email protected]
> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
> > +
> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > Membership Agreement available online at
> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> >
>
> –
> _______________________________
> Pall Thayer
> artist/teacher
> http://www.this.is/pallit
> http://pallit.lhi.is/panse
>
> Lorna
> http://www.this.is/lorna
> _______________________________

curt cloninger wrote:
> Hi Pall,
>
> 1. It's way off-topic.
That's debatable. These are issues that are frequently addressed
throughout the history of art. Besides, previous discussions on the list
have pretty much shown that anything goes.

> 2. If I email tim, it's just two people talking. If I post it here, it has the makings of a big emotional debate.
But it wasn't initiated as a "two people talking" kind of thing and I
haven't seen anyone complain. I feel like I just rented a movie and the
last half is missing.

> 3. I don't want to have a big emotional debate (particularly on gay rights and creationism).
I see.

>
> I hope that's OK.
>
> curt
>
>
>
> Pall Thayer wrote:
>
>
>>Actually, I'm sure many of us would be interested in seeing the
>>response. If that's not possible, I would be interested in knowing why
>>not.
>>
>>Pall
>>
>>curt cloninger wrote:
>>
>>>Hi Tim,
>>>
>>>This one has "off-list" written all over it. I'll send you an
>>
>>email.
>>
>>>peace,
>>>curt
>>>
>>>
>>>t.whid wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>xx going way, way off the subject of new media art xx
>>>>
>>>>++++
>>>>
>>>>I would be interested to hear from Curt, who seems to be (perhaps
>>
>>not
>>
>>>>moderate, but at least) a rational christian, why do oppose gay
>>>>marriage?
>>>>
>>>>Is it simply because of the 'abomination' passage in the bible? If
>>>>so,
>>>>how do you square the fact that it seems that there are plenty of
>>>>laws
>>>>in the old testament of the bible that modern christians happily
>>>>ignore.
>>>>
>>>>But yet they get stuck on this one. I'm curious why.
>>>>
>>>>I won't reply or try to argue with you (we've both over the years
>>>>probably come to the conclusion that that is not very productive on
>>>>either side).
>>>>
>>>>Just curious.
>>>>
>>>>If you feel open, I would be interested to hear your thoughts on
>>>>evolution as well. The opposition to which I don't understand one
>>>>bit.
>>>>Being raised catholic and attending catholic schools, I can tell
>>
>>you
>>
>>>>that evolution and catholicism seem to coexist with no problem.
>>>>
>>>>take care,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On Mar 22, 2005, at 3:33 PM, curt cloninger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I'm probably not what you'd call a moderate Christian. I walk up
>>>>
>>>>to
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>strangers on the street and pray with them. You and I disagree
>>>>
>>>>about
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>most of the issues you mention (abortion, euthanasia, gay
>>
>>marriage,
>>
>>>>>Christian intention of US founding fathers). The point is, there's
>>>>
>>>>a
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>way to love and respect people with whom you disagree.
>>>>>
>>>>>As far as being the defender of orthodox Christianity versus
>>>>>contemporary misunderstandings and oversimplifications of it, no
>>>>>thanks. It's taken me two days to refute 1 Bill Moyers
>>>>
>>>>overstatement.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew13:9-17
>>>>>
>>>>>peace,
>>>>>curt
>>>>
>>>>===
>>>><twhid>http://www.mteww.com</twhid>
>>>>===
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>+
>>>-> post: [email protected]
>>>-> questions: [email protected]
>>>-> subscribe/unsubscribe:
>>
>>http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>>
>>>-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>>>-> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
>>>+
>>>Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>>>Membership Agreement available online at
>>
>>http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>>
>>–
>>_______________________________
>>Pall Thayer
>>artist/teacher
>>http://www.this.is/pallit
>>http://pallit.lhi.is/panse
>>
>>Lorna
>>http://www.this.is/lorna
>>_______________________________
>
> +
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>

–
_______________________________
Pall Thayer
artist/teacher
http://www.this.is/pallit
http://pallit.lhi.is/panse

Lorna
http://www.this.is/lorna
_______________________________

Pall Thayer [+ pre.curt]wrote:
> > 2. If I email tim, it's just two people talking. If I post it here, it has
> the makings of a big emotional debate.
> But it wasn't initiated as a "two people talking" kind of thing and I
> haven't seen anyone complain. I feel like I just rented a movie and the
> last half is missing.

…i haven't been comprehensively absorbing the thread at all, but wanted to
com[a]ment on this type of reaction [both curts and palls] in relation to a/this
email list forum…

..i find it n.tensely n.teresting the dips + move.ments involved in thread
tra[e]jectories, especially where the topic could be construed as
inflammatory….. curts public announcement of c.king 2 withdraw to
b/channelling [mono-topic-response] + then reactions from the multidialogic
perspective from the [/lo-traffic/unseen/lurker] audience involved outlining
that this would like having removal of narrative elements really hi-lites [for
me] the nature/power of these forums…

..it also hi-lites the underlining asumption that emotiff responses are 2 be
avoided, + classed as somehow negative-n.fused rather than competent,
rational[ized] responses…?

e|a.ffectively,
][mez][

we should really think about taking this further - i agree, but maybe
not in the direction of writen dialogue.
Maybe this is the point where we try to map out this argument in a
visual or interactive form. Show me why you think what you do.
I can offer some server space.
I would like to see
why not take this further

This very type of exchange could really grow into something that has
more meaning. It is a little sad to see that this appeasrs to have lost
it's steam right where this debate always looses it steam. Sometimes we
need to look at the problem in different ways in order to progress.
It would be a good way to bring this topic back into the realm of new
media, and actually generate some?

-jeremy


[email protected] wrote:

> Pall Thayer [+ pre.curt]wrote:
>
>>>2. If I email tim, it's just two people talking. If I post it here, it has
>>
>>the makings of a big emotional debate.
>>But it wasn't initiated as a "two people talking" kind of thing and I
>>haven't seen anyone complain. I feel like I just rented a movie and the
>>last half is missing.
>
>
> …i haven't been comprehensively absorbing the thread at all, but wanted to
> com[a]ment on this type of reaction [both curts and palls] in relation to a/this
> email list forum…
>
> ..i find it n.tensely n.teresting the dips + move.ments involved in thread
> tra[e]jectories, especially where the topic could be construed as
> inflammatory….. curts public announcement of c.king 2 withdraw to
> b/channelling [mono-topic-response] + then reactions from the multidialogic
> perspective from the [/lo-traffic/unseen/lurker] audience involved outlining
> that this would like having removal of narrative elements really hi-lites [for
> me] the nature/power of these forums…
>
> ..it also hi-lites the underlining asumption that emotiff responses are 2 be
> avoided, + classed as somehow negative-n.fused rather than competent,
> rational[ized] responses…?
>
> e|a.ffectively,
> ][mez][
>
> +
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>