Following the comments above, Booktalk Owner Chris OConnor has acted to ban biomystic. This decision was taken in view of information about biomystic's previous behavior on other forums, and assessment that his behavior here would inevitably follow the same disruptive path.

Robert Tulip wrote:Following the comments above, Booktalk Owner Chris OConnor has acted to ban biomystic. This decision was taken in view of information about biomystic's previous behavior on other forums, and assessment that his behavior here would inevitably follow the same disruptive path.

This seems a bit harsh to me. Are you, or Chris, saying that "behavior," as it applies to expressing an opinion or participating in a debate, can be censored here? I'd like to hear some detailed justification of this. I have no interest one way or another in biomystic, but I do have an interest in censorship, which I abhor. Please enlighten me on this situation so I can continue to contribute with a clear conscience. Otherwise (not that I think this will cause concern for anyone), I am afraid I will have to quit posting here.

"What the research eventually demonstrates is that there are continuities within religious ideation that date back to extremely early times and that reflect much about the human psyche in general."

This a quot from Murdock on a different blog but I would like to apply it here to the Baptizer. Can someone direct me to some reading that might quench the burning question in my mind: "Why?" What is it in the human psyche that requires a baptism? What is it we are trying to rid ourselves of?

Sorry if I am off topic. I am really just looking for some direction so I can better assimilate this information. Thanks

R. LeBeaux wrote:

Robert Tulip wrote:Following the comments above, Booktalk Owner Chris OConnor has acted to ban biomystic. This decision was taken in view of information about biomystic's previous behavior on other forums, and assessment that his behavior here would inevitably follow the same disruptive path.

This seems a bit harsh to me. Are you, or Chris, saying that "behavior," as it applies to expressing an opinion or participating in a debate, can be censored here? I'd like to hear some detailed justification of this. I have no interest one way or another in biomystic, but I do have an interest in censorship, which I abhor. Please enlighten me on this situation so I can continue to contribute with a clear conscience. Otherwise (not that I think this will cause concern for anyone), I am afraid I will have to quit posting here.

Information sent to us indicates that biomystic is a "cyberstalker", with an obsessive interest in the general topic of this book, but an inability to engage in logical discussion due to a focus solely on promoting his personal views, and a tendency to insult others who question him or seek to base opinion on evidence. This is a one-off case, due to the related prior history at other boards.

Booktalk also has precedents. As Tat mentioned above, earlier Booktalk experience with proselytizing trolls has been difficult, with one such case leading many sensible people to leave, after he was allowed to preach young earth creationism here for several years. This is a judgment call by the board owner.

Free speech here is entirely due to the enormous effort and expense that Chris OConnor has put in to build Booktalk as a community where free thought is welcomed. No one has a right to abuse this platform by making it difficult for others to participate. The board rules require politeness and engagement. When individuals persist in posting comments that do not engage with others and are rude, they put themselves on a path towards being banned.

He's cyber stalked Murdock to the point where it's become uncomfortable for her. Biomystic has become rather obsessed with her and it's gone a bit beyond a playful fascination. Chris must be aware of this history and has, as I can see now, made some decisions based on what he's learned about it. And I stand behind and support the decisions that have been made thus far.

R. LeBeaux wrote:Please enlighten me on this situation so I can continue to contribute with a clear conscience. Otherwise (not that I think this will cause concern for anyone), I am afraid I will have to quit posting here.

For starts, just do a search on "biomystic banned": http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=Amp ... r=ush-mail

reetz28 wrote:"What the research eventually demonstrates is that there are continuities within religious ideation that date back to extremely early times and that reflect much about the human psyche in general."

This a quot from Murdock on a different blog but I would like to apply it here to the Baptizer. Can someone direct me to some reading that might quench the burning question in my mind: "Why?" What is it in the human psyche that requires a baptism? What is it we are trying to rid ourselves of?

Purification, for one thing. Have you read the chapter yet? In all seriousness, that's a good place to start. The chapter begins on p.233:

Anup the Baptizer