Posted by Lou Pilder on July 9, 2011, at 7:24:54
In reply to fire and brimstone for the puritans, life for me, posted by desolationrower on July 8, 2011, at 23:17:11
> drug addicts are much better than other forms of 'seeker's, the workaholics and religous fundamentalists and other suchlikes.
>
> everythign in moderation, including decadent hedonism
>
> there is probably something to be said for people who don't leave adolescence. But the fire of youth for straightedge prickishness is wasted. one of the few good things about maturaty is acceptance of one's own weakness and needs and instantiation.
>
> -d/rd/r,
You wrote,[...drug addicts are much better than...].
I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean here. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
A. What criteria do you use to mark the difference between a religious fundamentalist and other people that are not?
B. If the drug addicts are {much better}, what are the areas in their lives that are better, if that is what you are wanting to mean? What is meant by {better}?
C. If a religious fundmantalist lives their life drug free, and the drug addict does not, could the religious fundamentalist's lives be compared to the drug addicts lives by a standard unbeknownst to you that could conclude otherwise from your statement here in question? If not, why not?
D.redacted by respondent
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:990387
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20110630/msgs/990607.html