Politics and harvest

[APeacefulWarrior]

Actually I see it a bit differently, I think it creates a confrontational environment, which I at least am beginning to find tiring, because it has become a pattern with you. It doesn't matter what a person presents you with, you simply continue to disagree.

Please tell me you at least understand that you're being just as disagreeable towards my views.  This is a two-way street.  Yet you're acting as though I should refrain from providing my view on the situation just so that you don't have to see someone having a differing opinion.

For that matter, I've agreed with you on things in this very thread!   And it's a little disingenuous to say "it doesn't matter what a person says" as though I'm chronically disagreeable with everyone. This is really only about you and me.

So despite the fact that this is a forum dedicated to the Ra material, and I have used Ra's words to speculate about world events, you once again become condescending like in the other thread, this time by saying I'm "looking for confirmation that the world is doomed". So perhaps you can see why I don't consider these exchanges with you constructive, which eventually leads to my sarcasm, because I think you are more vested in disagreeing than any sincere exchange of ideas.

So you think that simply posting a Ra quote means the discussion is over?   And that if I disagree with your interpretation of it, I must be doing so solely for the sake of being disagreeable?  At this point, you're basically calling me a liar by implying I'm arguing in bad faith.  Which I'm not.  I've even been explaining my motivations, but you're just ignoring that.

And I didn't write that line about 'looking for confirmation' in response to your Ra quotes, which I addressed in a different reply.  I wrote it in response to a biased and inflammatory RT article, which I spent quite a bit of time deconstructing in hopes you would see how heavily-spun it was.  Instead, you wrote an incredibly heavy handed reply telling me to "click the X in the corner" if I see something I disagree with, while simultaneously accusing me of trying to stifle discussion.   Then you deleted that response's entire text and replaced it with a Hillary video after I replied to it.

What really makes me sad here is that I thought we'd reached an amicable conclusion.  You asked about RT and Al-Jazeera in America, I answered, and that was that.  Then I go to bed, and when I wake up, I discovered you had continued the argument hours later with a post that was almost nothing but personal attacks against me.

Yes, we clearly disagree on many things.  The difference is, I still respect your right to hold differing opinions and I'm not going to take it personally that you're disagreeing with  me.  And I certainly wouldn't accuse you of insincerity just for disagreeing!   I'm simply posting my own honest views on these things.  But your last reply to me makes it sound like you're taking it as a personal affront that I have other points of view on these matters and I'm capable of expressing them.  We both have just as much right as the other to hold different opinions and post our views in a public discussion.  And again I ask, what is a discussion if it isn't an exchange of different points of view?  

It's entirely possible for us to agree to disagree without anyone calling anyone else insincere.  And i really hope that if you pay attention to nothing else I say, you'll at least take THAT message to heart because, seriously, attacking my motives for having a different opinion than you is not cool.