The only thing that makes sense to this psychologist is . . .REACTIVE ATTACHMENT DISORDER . . . probably a very serious case of it . . .
mostly unresolved and unhealed . . .blah blah blah
In what way is alledging that one's opponents are mentally ill, and/or demon influenced, not "making it personal"?
For instance, on an open RF thread, one may claim that Scientologists are irrational. That would not be "making it personal."
It is however considered tacky to suggest, even indirectly, that another poster is mentally ill - commonly, "did you forget to take your meds?"
Those kinds of posts may be removed at the discretion of any moderator.
BTW, I don't construe RAD (Reactive Attachment Disorder--something I've owned as having myself) to be a mental illness. I doubt most psychologists do. It's a syndrome very problematic to self-esteem, self-worth and relationships.
A refresher course . . . The end of which is most appropos to these issues.
ENGLISH LESSONS FOR NAYSAYERS RE INSULTS AND DIFFERENT VS SAME:
It appears that a major proportion of the naysayers need some ENGLISH REFRESHER LESSONS:
“personal”
IS NOT REALLY that difficult a concept.
It comes from the word “person.”
A “PERSON” is
DIFFERENT from
1. A GROUP
2. THEY
3. Y’ALL
4. THEM
5. SOME OF THEM
6. CADRE
7. A COLLECTION OF
WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM [i.e. NOT the SAME as]:
A “PERSON” IS directly associated with
1. YOU
2. HE
3. SHE
I realize that the more chronic naysayers tend to have a dreadfully difficult time distinguishing between
DIFFERENT
VS
SAME
but it does make it a lot easier when some of them try.
AND, I realize that the more chronic naysayers have this THING about
OBSESSIVE, ADDICTIVE EXTRAPOLATING, ASSUMING, INFERRING . . .
however, as I understand things . . .
EXTRAPOLATING, ASSUMING, INFERRING
[accurately or not]
PERSONAL “INSULT” DOES NOT COUNT.
The rules have to do with plainly written PERSONAL insult.
We will return screens to regularly scheduled programming after the following freebie additional refresher lesson:
This English Comprehension lesson has concluded.
DISTINCTIONS REALLY ARE IMPORTANT.
DISTINGUISHING
THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN
THE CHURCH AGE
VS THE MILLENNIAL AGE
IS IMPORTANT IN SCRIPTURE. It could rationally be considered important in life.
DISTINGUISHING
THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN
AN INDIVIDUAL
VS
A GROUP
IS IMPORTANT.
DISTINGUISHING
THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN
calling even a group idiotic vs a belief, perspective, idea, doctrine idiotic
IS IMPORTANT.
I’m beginning to wonder if it’s something in the holy water that REPLACEMENTARIAN, preterist, amil’s might drink that renders them incapable of making important distinctions.
Of course, the awake, aware and alert need no such lessons and the otherwise will not heed them but . . . just for the record, there they are! LOL.