The Alphaville Herald

435 Responses to “Interview with Anonymous, on Alphaville’s Bondage, Discipline & Sadomasochism Community”

1. 

   toy
   

   Jan 2nd, 2004
   

   toy once again notices once again Your mentioning Gor, Dyerbrook..
   quote..

   “Lot-owners have said in some cases they boot people, especially the Goreans with the most cult-like behavior, from their lots, and there will be more of it.”

   toy has never been booted from any lot for being a Gorean… toy would also once again ask for some substance to Your uninformed ramblings…..
   toy is what she is and can revel in the fact that she found what she is toy has never been happier. toy could care less if there was only she in TSO as Gorean or if there were hundreds…… Goreans are a very small part of TSO… we live by certain rules and ideals that many do emulate but our numbers remain small… we dont care if the Gorean group grows, we dont care if others accept us. although many do

   You see Dyerbrook, we are what we are.. not a cult, not some subversive branch of BDSM.. Goreans are simply Goreans

   You should also start to understand that BDSM isnt a group either… BDSM is something one does, not what one is
   toy in the past has been told that this person or that person would set this girl free that this girl need not be a kajira…. it does give toy a good laugh simply because this girl would be denying to herself what she is
   toy has also been told that being a slave is no more than being someones ‘doormat’, a ‘mindless robot’… those who tell toy this, if she has a chance to have a serious talk with them that is, which toy has also noticed You do not wish to talk to this girl, either here or in game since You have had toy on ignore since this all started .. this is toy’s reply to those who may possibly think of her as a doormat or robot

   toy often wonders why obedience is considered akin to mindless behavior. This girl didn’t leave her brain at the door when she became someone’s property, she is every bit as intelligent as she always has been. Mistress uses her intelligence as much as She uses her body, or her skills, or her emotions, when it
   pleases Her. This girl’s conversations with Mistress involve a bit more substance than the occasional “Yes, Mistress” and “As you wish, Mistress”. Although if that is what She commands, toy reduces her verbal interactions to Her. toy is here to serve Her. This girl is strong willed, pasionate, firey, and high
   spirited. She chose to own her, knowing the kind of person she is. She simply owns a strong woman, who finds her greatest joys at Her feet. toy relishes the fact that even with her own inner strength, She brings her to her knees before Her. She challenges her to strive to meet Her bar of excellence, She does not keep lowering the bar to settle for less than what She wants. But while She does not break her spirit, She *allows* her to be playful and if it is not appropriate, She expects her to cease that behavior. It is, after all, about her being pleasing to Mistress. But because she puts Her first in all things… that does not make her a doormat. However, if She chose to wipe Her feet on her and use her as one, she would gladly lay still and revel in the chance to serve Her that way. toy would beg Her to be allowed the chance
   to be Her doormat. If She wants her to be silent and curl quietly on the floor for Her feet to rest upon, she does so. If by being obedient and docile, others consider her a doormat, let them frown upon it all they want- it cannot change who she is deep inside. This girl is Her
   possession, and proud of that. toy is neither brainwashed, nor mindless. And anyone who has met her knows she is not lacking in self
   assurance or esteem. She just hopes to be able to serve Her in any way She allows her, no matter how small. And that is where she finds her own happiness, her peace, her serenity, in her service to Her. This is *not* a sign of weakness by any means. If toy was weak, she would take the easy way out, and fight her own nature in order to live a life that is simpler and provides more comforts and rights than
   slavery does. toy would succumb to society’s pressures to be an independent entity. This girl would notsearch deep within the internal strength to bare herself, vulnerable and exposed, to others. toy would hide behind an external shield of false power, and lock away her soul. This girl would deny her personal
   accountability. toy would not lift her head high after being corrected, and take it to heart as a lesson, instead of getting defensive. This is *not* abusive. Nor is it abusive to have Her holding all the rights in the relationship. It is not abusive to be treated as property, rather than Her peer. Since being owned does mean She has the right to do with toy as She pleased, she took a very long time making sure she trusted
   Her with her life. That’s where it helps to have common sense and intelligence, because it truly was the last choice she made that matters. toy’s owner doesn’t want blind obedience… She wants her eyes wide open as she surrenders to Her, so that she can truly understand what she is giving up, and to what depth She controls her.

   kari braksa,
   falara kajira toy
2. 

   toy
   

   Jan 2nd, 2004
   

   murder is not allowing one to be who and what they are. it is taking away from someone what is theirs, very much as You and Dyerbrook wish to take away from others what and who they are
3. 

   Mikal
   

   Jan 2nd, 2004
   

   If a Christian, murder is wrong because it breaks one of the ten commandments. No where in the Bible does it say that BDSM is morally wrong. No where. And hmmm…in the Bible, if i’m not mistaken…weren’t there…….shocked look crosses my face……slaves?!?!? By George i do believe it was so. Oh well…such is life i do believe. Hmm..God, as i do believe in Him/Her…did give U/us the freedom of choice. Choice being key word here. i have to choice to participate or not to participate in BDSM and D/s activities. No one twisted my arm. No one came onto my lot seeking me. No one. How did i find out about it? i overheard some of my real life buddy’s one day talking about what they do. They were at their home, i had just arrived. i asked them about it and they answered only a few questions. i then, began looking to see if anything in game represented it. Here, in TSO, is where i wanted to start it. i am the seeker. i am the one that sought after it. Do i feel it’s wrong? No. Did i ever see it as wrong? No. There are things happening in society and in game that you should concentrate more on. Teen suicide because parents, teachers, friends, society puts too much pressure on them to be “perfect”. Very good friends of mine, are being targeted, beaten, raped, threatened with death. Hmmm….guess what?!?! Neither of them nor the ex are into BDSM. They are as vanilla as they come. More incidents arise as far as deaths, beatings, etc. with vanilla couples then with couples engaging in BDSM activites and the D/s lifestyle. You should also concentrate on making yourself happy in rl dyer..phil….if you did this, you wouldn’t have to need to try to make everyone else unhappy. As for myself..i’m very happy where i am. i am happy being a submissive and husband to my Mistress. i am also extremely happy being a submissive, soon to be married husband to my rl Mistress. Why don’t you try and figure out what went wrong in your life…learn from it….and move on? i know it can be hard, but only then will you ever find true happiness. Maybe, just maybe one day that will happen.
4. 

   emerald'
   

   Jan 2nd, 2004
   

   Hmmm it’s kind of interesting…all this talk of murder, Phin. First, explain to me how on earth you have managed to link murder with BDSM, and I am sure that we will be countless numbers of people here who will sit down with crayones and a picture book to explain everything to you. In fact, I will go and warm up the hot cocoa (do you like marshmellows in yours…or is this too much of a choice for you to decide?) and I will bring a blankie for you.

   I must warn you, however that I know of at least one on this thread who will be glad to discuss such things with you at great length. If you have never had the pleasure or opportunity to be an active participant in debate with Sir Catseye or Sir Royal, well, then you are in for a wonderful treat as I know he will very much enjoy conversing with you.

   Just remember that there is always 2 or more sides to every view.

   One question that must be asked…is this: What is your definition of “murder.”

   On that note…I must get to work. Yes imagine that one such as myself as a functioning member of society. I wish Y/you A/all a most wonderful day!
5. 

   Billy Bob Thornton
   

   Jan 2nd, 2004
   

   lets see if I can put this simply for you to understand phin…..Muder is taking a life w out consent of the second party….BDSM…is a ~Consentual~ act….do I REALLY…need to explain that further?…I mean…that is pretty simple

   Be Well
6. 

   Lady Julianna
   

   Jan 2nd, 2004
   

   I am so glad that you found me my darling. I am very happy as your wife and Mistress in game. I love you and I do not want or need any other. *Big smile for my Mikal*

   One point that is being missed is that what we do is first and foremost about relationships. BDSM is something we do, or don’t do. Mikal and I have been happily together for more than six months now. We know each other and care for each other very much. When my Mikal is not around, my castle feels empty even if it is full to the brim. How often we scene and what we do is private.

   What I like most about our lifestyle is the intense focus of each on the other. Mikal keeps us both on the same green schedule, reminding me when I need to green, and offering me a plate. He cares for our home. And he does this because he loves me and wants to please me. I am ever watchful of Mikal’s moods, attuned to his needs. I can tell when he is not happy or when something is on his mind, and I meet his needs and listen and talk when he needs it. We both serve the other. I encourage his creative efforts, and celebrate his native heritage with him. It is just not as obvious how the Dom/me serves the sub, but we do.

   This is what it is really all about. I accept responsbility to look after my beloved Mikal, tend to his needs, nurture growth, and look out for his welfare. Whips? Spanking? Hot Wax? CBT? These are fun, but they are not the main focus of our relationship. I love my Mikal, my sim hubby, my submissive, and my friend. And I am very proud of him. He has truly blossomed in the lifestyle.

   Phin, I am not responding to your request to justify murder simply because it is irrelevant to the discussion here. You are trying to take us off on some wild tangent, and we are simply not going to follow you on that.
7. 

   Catseye
   

   Jan 2nd, 2004
   

   hmm where to start on that Phin.. first off let me correct Mikal on the commandment it is thou shalt not Kill it is a common aspect to group killing and murder in the same basket but they are different…

   Now Murder is as Billy bob has stated Knowingly taking life from another human is this wrong? yes and no both…

   if we all went out and murdered our neighbors daily we would end up with no society and no growth for the human race therefore it would be wrong in that reguard…

   now I am a firm believer in one life for ten rule meaning simply if one man must be murdered to save the lives of ten others then it is not wrong to take that one life…

   ah the biblical aspect of the debate is even more shades of grey thou shalt not kill… an eye for an eye… ye with no sin cast the first stone.. seems to be such a riddle that no one can truly justify anything or justify anything with the scriptures and that is just christianity I am not an authority on the other religions of the world to even begin discussing them in rationail methods oh wait… maybe if I use dyer as an example I am a expert in talking about something I have no idea about hmm..

   but Phin if you wish it discussed further the murder thing I believe it is your turn to post
8. 

   Mikal
   

   Jan 2nd, 2004
   

   Sir Catseye, i stand corrected. It does state though shalt not kill. Thank You for correcting that.
9. 

   Darksoul
   

   Jan 2nd, 2004
   

   Catseye, it seems that We may have lived in the same state in the Bible Belt. IIRC, the blue laws were repealed there in the mid-80′s. If it was the same state, I lived in the upstate region. Feel free to email me if you don’t want to specify in a public forum.

   Be Well
   Darksoul
10. 

    Paul "Phinehas" Schwanz
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    Julianna> “Phin, I am not responding to your request to justify murder simply because it is irrelevant to the discussion here. You are trying to take us off on some wild tangent, and we are simply not going to follow you on that.”

    I’m not trying to take anyone on a tangent. I stated that BDSM is morally reprehensible. I get the impression you don’t agree. So I’m trying to figure out on what you base your view of morality. A good way for me to understand where you are coming from is for me to understand why you believe something like murder is wrong. Once I understand why you think murder is wrong, I should then have a context for discussing why some other thing may or may not be wrong.

    Catseye> “Now Murder is as Billy bob has stated Knowingly taking life from another human is this wrong? yes and no both…”

    A bit cryptic, but let’s see where you go with it.

    Catseye> “if we all went out and murdered our neighbors daily we would end up with no society and no growth for the human race therefore it would be wrong in that reguard…”

    So it is a frequency issue then? If we only murder one person every year or so, then the human race should survive just fine and therefore it wouldn’t really be wrong? Maybe that’s still too frequent though. What about one person every decade? Surely if everyone just picks one person that they really don’t like and murders only them it would be OK. We could spread it out over a decade just to make sure the human race didn’t feel the impact all at once. Besides, what with overpopulation and all, such a thing could actually be good for the human race.

    Catseye> “now I am a firm believer in one life for ten rule meaning simply if one man must be murdered to save the lives of ten others then it is not wrong to take that one life…”

    Does this mean you are against self-defense? I mean self-defense usually only results in the saving of one life instead of ten. Or perhaps self-defense is a special exception?

    Why one life for ten and not one life for five? In other words, ten seems a bit arbitrary, doesn’t it? It is a nice round number in a ten-base number system, but do you really think this should all end up so totally dependant on how many fingers we have? Exactly how “firm” a believer are you in one for ten vs. one for nine?

    Catseye> “ah the biblical aspect of the debate is even more shades of grey thou shalt not kill… an eye for an eye… ye with no sin cast the first stone.. seems to be such a riddle that no one can truly justify anything or justify anything with the scriptures and that is just christianity I am not an authority on the other religions of the world to even begin discussing them in rationail methods”

    So you think it is much easier to consider morality without appealing to God or religion? Religious writings or guidelines are more trouble than they are worth, and thus, instead, we should look to…what? Our own vaunted intellect? You don’t agree with Sugar’s statement that humans are warped?

    –Phin
11. 

    toy
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    toy would ask You Phin… is abortion also morally wrong to You? toy has no idea where Your going with Your thoughts….. perhaps You are trying to bring everything down to basics… perhaps not, this girl sure isnt seeing Your biased point

    toy and others here feel no compulsion to answer to You or Dyerbrook… we are adults and make our own decisions on what we believe in… You and Dyerbrook do the same, so toy sees it as a rediculous attempt to draw attention to Yourselves……. Both of You know You will get no where, You both dredge up the same statements over and over, a bit like cultists do

    toy would suggest You both leave us alone and we would gladly do the same. Believe in what You believe to be truths, we shall do the same.

    Your constant arguing obscure ideas is becoming rather boring to this girl.

    toy doesnt need Your thoughts or ideals, toy is a happy individual…… perhaps You two arent. toy could really care less.

    in closing…… “People who live in glass houses shouldnt throw stones”

    falara kajira toy
12. 

    Catseye
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    Ah but Phin who decides who gets to commit the murder? there is the catch there would be no logical way to control the aspect of who would murder and who would be the victim to control the once a decade would it hence it would be wrong in that aspect..

    ah yes I knew you would pick at the term 1 for 10 see as a former semi driver it was a code that we lived by one life for ten is a gerneric appitude taking a life to save other lives is the root meaning i.e. taking the lesser to save the greater numbers one for ten…

    self defense is not murder therefore has no bearing on this issue you wished to discuss why is murder wrong not self defense not killing but murder please stay on topic..

    ah Phin please tell me who is the correct god? is it Jesus’s father as in the bible? is it Mohammad? is it the goddess of the wicca? ah soo many aspects of the surpreme being but yes I agree that it is much simpler to fall back on our intelligence which I believe is set up by what we are taught as youths by reviewing history and writings of such history… Man sets what is moral and unmoral this is based on the region you grew up at and the vaules that were passed down from father to son mother to daughter… what makes us experts in judging a group/race of people that we have no knowledge of? what allows us to sit in our holy towers and judge what others do? I stated murder is wrong and not wrong depending on the situation it is not able to be lumped into a neat package for mankind to assimilate in one easy setting it is a situation that needs to be defined by each and every instance of the matter…

    you are wanting a neat little package in a chaotic world that will never happen..

    in closing I wish to correct my earlier post about murder yes I make mistakes and I call myself on them when I see it can you or Dyer state the same?

    Murder is the Planning of knowingly taking another humans life for sport or amusement…

    by that definitation it is wrong… using that above defination I await your argument why it is not wrong instead of you discussing my words let’s hear your own side of the debate subtle shades of grey again in this matter all depending on what is the definitation of murder which I believe that you ignored emerald’s questiohn of your definitation….
13. 

    Lady Julianna
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    Gads.. This has really gotten off topic. We could go on forever debating morality. If you wish to do so, find another forum. We could go so many different directions with this and get absolutely nowhere.

    Should we obey the law? What if the law is a bad law? Are those who employ civil disobedience as protest criminals? What is the value of a rule? Who gets to make the rules? What clashes with a rule? Would you break the law or a rule for the sake of your family? Is marijuana evil? Is monogamy natural or unnatural for the human race?

    Puhlease… if you want to play academic games, find an academic forum to do so.

    Do I care if you find me morally reprehensible? No, I do not.
14. 

    Catseye
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    Darksoul I lived in arkansas at that time Conway Greenbrier Russellville all depends on the time I have no fear posting this in an open forum for simple reason I no longer live there

    I would also apologise to those who do not wish to hear the debate on the murder issue mayhaps Yahoo messenger would be better?

    Phin sure kteak is the name feel free to come hold an intelligent conversation on the matter in private heck Dyer you can come as well to ask your questions about my BDSM life virtual and real
15. 

    xxxMorganxxx
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    ~smiles brightly seeing Sir Cat~
    Greetings Sir Cat. i hope that A/all is well for You and Yours. i also hope that You and sister had a wonderful begining in the New year

    i continue to sit and read on of Sir Dyers babbling. Seeing how much hatred He has. ~wonders if maybe it is because He Himself once was a Dom and was a Dom in the matter He so much talks about and thinks that is what A/all in the BDSM lifestyle do. One that beats, kills, and so forth.~
    It seems to me that maybe that is why He has so much hatred. For He more than likely abused His own sub in those matters and she left. For He over stepped His limits? Hmmmm
    i do know. That all the hatred stuff You sit and say Sir Dyer of the lifestyle is untrue. As stated before in my comments. i myself was not complete til i found the lifestyle. Was taken in by so M/many that are so loving, caring and so much more. T/they have no hatred towards the way You live. For that was Your choice in life. So please get over it!!!! It is O/our life and W/we chose to live it that way.

    The choice O/one makes of T/their lifestyle is T/their choice. That is why God made U/us all different. You live how You please. W/we live how W/we please.

    i hope that not O/one person is getting upset over the childish comments made from Sir Dyer. For that is exactly what they are. Words of from S/someone that has not one drop of knowledge on the lifestyle.

    Peace to A/all my fellow F/friends.

    P.s Sir Dyer.
    Not only does AV have T/those in the lifestyle.
    So does all the other cities. They also have those that chose to be Vampires…Mafia…and much more… Are You planning on bashing them as well when they have a forum to do so in? GET A LIFE! Or atleast worry of Your own. Cuz in my eyes You have no life and that is why You bash O/others!

    xxxMorganxxx
    Blazing Falls
    submissive….Now and Forever!
16. 

    Mistress maria LaVeaux
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    Good Morning.

    Normally, one tries to remain above this sort of thing, but i admit, i have been getting curious having heard so much about this interview around the community. (Much from my Beloved toy)Firstly,, Anonymous, I know who you are now,, certain things you said identified you to me, Chere,, there is not, and never was a need for you to hide yourself, you Know we value discussion in the community. (Do not worry chere, I will respect your wish for privacy.) and also, Thank you for prefacing your comments about the Gorean lifestyle with the statement that you know little of us, it shows That you are a reasonable person, I would, however have been even more pleased had you left it at that rather than commenting on things you did not fully understand. I know you did your best with what you had chere, but really, you should have deferred.

    Dyerbrook, name calling aside chere, I have heard numerous invitations for you to expand your knowledge, (Such as the invitation from my toy to attend our home) about our community. I have also heard numerous requests, couched in varying language, (Unfortunatly, not always polite) that you Present the evidence, and witnesses of whom you speak. A reasonable request given the claims you have made. As yet, you have not availed yourself of either opportunity. A condition, chere, that causes people to doubt the veracity of your claims, and the Validity of your stand point. You note, I do not challenge your opinions specificly, only the method in which you present and support them.

    I will freely admit, I am at odds with most of your opinions and I would welcome the chance to discuss them with you. The Invitation to come to Dark Virtues stands, Come in disguise if it makes you more comfortable, but come.
    There IS one statement you made I would like to address here.

    “I have various testimony that the Rose Thorn and other communities did not spring up “organically” by people who were already in this lifestyle and just “happened” to find each other in the Sims. It is a planned, organized, conscious assault. It was deliberately done to arrive with a big splash as a large group, precisely, as one person put it, because they knew they were “wierd” and could expect some static from the community.”

    When I came to AV some 8 months ago, there was a small BD/SM community, as now, loosely knit by common interests. My own arrival was by chance, and had nothing to do with being driven out of another community. By chance since then I have met other migrants. I was present at the Inception of what is now the largest of three or four neighborhoods. It was not an Invasion, as you have envisioned sir, but a slow process of growth. Why here? Why Now? Who can say,, this place felt right to us. Other communities in other cities have experienced such growth, Blazing Falls for example, and have also experienced declines. It is not impossible that the AV community will decline as well. Nothing in these sim societies is static. I am not saying this to give you hope that your Bizzarre view of Normalcy will eventually prevail, I only state a fact of community evolution.
    Your other claims made here, are too numerous, and in my view, too spurious to address so I will leave them until we can have a longer face to face chat. I will leave you with one thought however,, Part of discussion is Listening. I have heard you, and I want to hear more. Open your ears and your mind and hear what others are saying, you may learn some startling realities.

    Rory Galligher,,,
    “If you didn’t have profiles like that flaunting the BDSM thing, you wouldn’t get those types of IMs, would you,hmmm?”

    So,, Harassment is the fault of the Victim for daring to be different? And Bullying is the fault of the bullied child? I am Gay Rory,, Is it OK with you as long as I hide it?? I am also black, is that also OK with you as long as I wear a mask so no one will be offended by my colour?? Rory, You can claim not to be a Bigot as long, and as loud as you wish, but as long as statements such as these are indicitave of your thinking processes chere, you might as well buy the white sheet. That sort of hatred is more insidious than the type that burns a cross. It says that Intolerance in our society is OK, it is the people who dare to be different who actually cause the problem rather than the narrow minded individuals who fear anything that is new or different. Say it any way you like chere,, you have exposed yourself for what you are.

    Now to members of my own community, both Gorean and Non-,,
    Master Billy Thornton, Not everyone is used to us as Goreans full on chere, While I agree entirely with your points of view, With Respect my Brother, I DO think they could have been presented a little more diplomaticly. I understand your frustration, I also do not suffer fools easily, but others, more inclined to listen to us with an open mind might be made uncomfortable by such displays.

    Shi, Brigit et al.
    I know all of you my dears, and you have presented yourselves in a fashion that should make your Masters proud. You have proven your love, and your loyalty, and MOST of all, your Intelligence. One of the Biggest arguments used against us is that we as Dom/mes Break your spirit. I think anyone reading this thread would be hard pressed to proclaim your spirits broken. Bravo ladies.

    My Lady Julianna, and mikal. As always my friends you demonstrate your grace. I noticed My Lady, that you refrained from posting here for a long time before commenting, but when you did,, you proved yourself, as always, a lady. You have delt with this sort of thing a long as I have, and we both know how hard it can be when they come looking for us, then damn us for what they find. We have both tried to educate people, and we have both told them, “if you don’t like it, by all means stay away.” And we both know, people like Dyerbrook will always be out there. And “Out There” is where I prefer they stay if they cannot conduct themselves properly.

    My Precious toy.
    What higher praise can I give you?
    Mistress is proud of you.

    I have traveled all over AV at various times, I have been to many and varied houses. I have had everything from polite questions to indecent proposals, but I have never been harassed, and I have never been invited to leave. I do not know where all these houses of intolerance Dyerbrook speaks of, are located. The greatest majority of people I have encountered have been open, polite, welcoming, and in many cases mildly curious of me. I have even had pleasant experiences with Mafias, and the SSG. I think Dyerbrook is judging the world by his own example.

    I have said here, precious little of Gor, and what it means. Anonymous did us the greatest disservice by introducing the concept of us as a cult to you all. To people like Dyerbrook, and Rory, there is no real way to make them understand if they choose to continue closing their minds to alternate possibilities, but the rest of you, as always, I say, come and talk to us if you are curious. We are not monsters. We welcome any visitor whether you are in our community, or just visiting. All we ask of you is respect and courtesy.

    There,, Mistress Maria LaVeaux has had her say, for what it is worth, for all the good it will do for some. I am sorry if I have carried on a little long, but since this is such a long thread, people should be used to it by now. Respond if you wish, I probably won’t see it, I prefer to interact live in game anyway. Dyerbrook, prove me and my community wrong about you, Come to my home and just listen a while.

    Maria LaVeaux
17. 

    Lady Julianna
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    Well said Maria, ma belle amie. If I have any grace at all, it is because I have had a wonderful role model in you my friend. I admired you from the day I met you. You are a great Lady, and and great Domme. I am proud to call you friend.
18. 

    Mikal
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    i was reading around and came upon some interesting reading. Are you roman catholic by chance Dyer? Or perhaps a member of the Jehovah’s Witness’s? Hmmm…from what i’ve been reading, just about anyone can claim some group, organization, what have you a cult. Here are a few examples.

    Cult name: Roman Catholicism

    Founder: Emperor Constantine, organized in early 300′s A.D.
    Overview: The largest, most respected cult in the world. But God don’t respect it. It centers around the worship of a pagan goddess which has been renamed Mary and a cracker god named Jesus.
    Cult Tenets/Characteristics: See The Catholic “Church” is not Christian which is on this website. You may also go to our home page and peruse our section on Catholicism.

    Cult name: Christian Science/The Church of Christ Scientist
    Cult Tenets/Characteristics:
    1. There is no such thing as sin. It is an illusion.

    2. There is no such thing as sickness. It is an illusion.
    3. Sick people must be convinced that they are not sick. Then they will get well. (funny, Eddy went to the doctor when she had a toothache and had the nerve to get anesthesia)
    etc.

    Cult name: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints/Mormons
    Cult Tenets/Characteristics:
    1. Bible inferior to the Book of Mormon
    2. God was once a man.
    3. God has a physical body with which He cohabits with wives
    etc.

    As long as someone says something, or doesn’t follow what you or someone else believes to be the one and only truth…then it must be a cult? That seems to be what is being said by you. And also…just to clarify some information in regards to being a cult
    Three ideas seem essential to the concept of a cult. One is thinking in terms of us/them with total alienation from them. The second is the intense, though often subtle, indoctrination techniques used to recruit and hold members.And the third is the charismatic cult leader. Cultism usually involves some sort of belief that outside the cult all is evil and threatening; inside the cult is the special path to salvation through the cult leader and his teachings.
    W/we are not trying to alienate O/ourselves from others. You are. W/we invite all to come as long as are respectful and curtious. Does this mean that they have to believe or practice what W/we do? No. Just tolerant as W/we are of their life choices. Was i “indoctrinated”? Was i recruited? As i have stated above in a previous post, i am the one that went looking for BDSM, D/s not the other way around. Do W/we practice some sort of belief that outside the cult all is evil and threatening; inside the cult is the special path to salvation through the cult leader and his teachings? No. If i did, i most certainly wouldn’t expose myself to skill lots, money lots, stores that weren’t inside the BDSM, D/s community. Hmmm…based on this…..how then is what i do a cult? As was stated, when being married, the wife is told to obey…or being told to submit to her husband….well….? Why can i not choose to submit to my wife instead? Why is that so wrong? It’s what i want, need and wish for. As as been stated before, BDSM is something that is done. D/s and M/s is a lifestyle. Once doesn’t necessarily include the other. Get the facts straight before hand.

    i always enjoy reading and listening to what You have to say, Ma’am Maria. i only wish i could phrase my words and ideas as well as You do.

    Be well A/all.
19. 

    Darksoul
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    Maria, so good to see You finally post here. Your words are more highly valued by AV than You can imagine. Maybe You will be able to talk to dyerbrook in a way that he can understand. the rest of U/us have done O/our best, but as You can see, the thread is getting uglier by the day. I’m quite embarassed that I lost My temper above, but have been told by a few that T/they were quite surprised that I didn’t earlier. If the rest of U/us were as balanced and well spoken as You, AV would be a much better place.

    Darksoul
20. 

    Darksoul
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    Quoting Catseye:

    “I lived in arkansas at that time Conway Greenbrier Russellville”

    Oh well, I was wrong. Your experience there sonuds greatly like Mine did tho growing up and spending most of My 20′s in South Carolina. At least 4 christian colleges in the metro area (Greenville), 3 baptist, 1 church of god, extreme blue laws until the mid 80′s. The church ran everything and to step out of line was deemed evil, especially in the smaller towns, such as the 4 street wide, 2 block long village I lived in as a teen. I believe many of U/us here share many of the same experiences, both in the south and in other areas of the world (yes world, there are P/people in the community from other countries that were and still are ruled by the religions right reich). I see lots of fundamentalism in _yerbrook….I only hope this little man mellows with age and realizes the world at large is not such a threat to him as he thinks. If not he will live a long, painful, paranoid life. (not gonna mention tho that some of the churches near where I live now still espouse snake handling….oops I did)

    Be Well A/all
    Darksoul
21. 

    Catseye
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    Ah yes Draksoul the south is the same all around unfortunally.. quick to point out the evil around them then embrace it when no one else is looking that is why I stopped going to church..

    anyway I know I invited both Phin and Dyer to chat via Yahoo but the invite is to all out there reading this I dont mind it I am secure in myself enough to invite blindly I mean if you misbehave there are ways to ignore

    back to cooking yes see even Us Doms have to cook clean and keep the childern in line while the sub makes a living
    
22. 

    urizenus
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    Hey all, I just posted an interview with Maria LaVeaux and Toy covering some of these issues, but also looking at their practice of Gor. Maybe we could read that and move our discussion over there, since this thread is getting LONG! –Uri
23. 

    Stella Luna
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    This thread has gotten so long, with so little actually spinning it, it’s bizarre. It might have been a tad shorter without all the attempts at being ‘silver-tongued’, which, when provoked, get reduced to an eloquent ‘hold yer tongue’ and ‘STFU’, but, that’s another story.

    I repeat my original point, which is short and easy to grasp. This large BDSM presence does not belong in a teen-rated game.

    I’m surprised at some of the outcry, but then again, rational discourse became impossible when you BDSM folks hijacked the language,and make words mean whatever you want. Why worry about being called ‘coercive’, for example? Whether or not it’s true, why not just say ‘to us, coercive means, um, poetic!’

    I’ll make my point my own way, lol. As someone playing a completely unimportant sim who pops in from time to time to run dive diner and say hi to friends, I’ve pasted on my bio that I don’t recognize any sim to be a ‘slave’, which by the way, to me, means what it has traditionally meant. You know, the ‘old fashioned’ kind, lol. And I’ll IM and speak to whomever I wish, or feel I need to. It won’t make a difference in the game, I’m quite confident of that, but most of the people in this world who refused to listen to the nonsense of others trying to package evil as good, or darkness as light, did so alone. I can deal with that.

    Oh, and of course, I’ll continue to write to Maxis, voicing my concerns.
24. 

    Darksoul
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    I package darkness as darkness stella….come, embrace the darkness, know the darkenss, find the darkness within yourself, only then can you know yourself.
    What is darkness you ask…look inside you, your deepest darkest secret, those thoughts that only you know that come to you in the middle of the night, the evil and hatred that dwells within the human heart, the worst sin you ever committed, the worst sin you could wish to commit. That is darkness, that is your own darksoul. Darksoul is me, darksoul is you, darksoul is all around you, within, without. Does this make you fear for your own safety…..or is it oddly….enticing? Tell me stella………On a hot summer’s night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?
25. 

    Darksoul
    

    Jan 2nd, 2004
    

    Well well, I just came across a thread at the stratics.com tso site that _yerbrook is participating in, thought a few things he said were quite interesting.

    Quote:

    “Players should form neighborhoods, free of pressure or harassment”

    “Most people just want to have fun and don’t want the boring and time-consuming trappings of RL. They want hedonism and anarchy. Let them alone!”

    “all I can say is, glove away, folx, I need the visitor traffic now as my place is slipping on the top 100 list LOL. ”

    _yerbrook, live by your own words and STFU!

    We see now what this is all about, luring P/people to your house to increase your rating. You cowardly little pissant. If you want ratings, make your house something that’s worthy of a visit.
    Here’s the url folks, see what he’s all about…ohhh and he’s quite polite to a general from SSG.

    http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/sims/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=alphavillemain&Number=32261&page=2&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=1&vc=1&what2=postlist&selv=&vwhich=
26. 

    Paul "Phinehas" Schwanz`
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    Catseye> “Ah but Phin who decides who gets to commit the murder?”

    Who gets to decide? I don’t think your read my post very carefully. I was proposing that we’d all get to commit murder, but only every decade or so. There’s no deciding who gets to and who doesn’t. On the other hand, since it seems we are basing morality on the survivability of the human race, perhaps the best approach would be to let people murder someone for every child they had. That way, we’d still be certain that the human race would survive. In any case, although I can see how taking a survivability approach to morality might mean we need to limit murder to some extent, I don’t at all understand why we must assume that all murder is wrong.

    Catseye> “there is the catch there would be no logical way to control the aspect of who would murder and who would be the victim to control the once a decade would it hence it would be wrong in that aspect..”

    Well, I thought we were just talking about what is right or what is wrong and not really about controlling things. Nonetheless, it seems to me that it would be pretty easy to control. We already have a legal concept of, “three strikes and you’re out,” and I can’t imagine it would be much more difficult to have a “one free murder and then the rest are wrong” sort of system. But again, I think you may be confusing law with morality. Morality doesn’t need to be easily enforceable. Whatever is right is right and whatever is wrong is wrong, whether enforced or not.

    Catseye> “ah yes I knew you would pick at the term 1 for 10 see as a former semi driver it was a code that we lived by one life for ten is a gerneric appitude taking a life to save other lives is the root meaning i.e. taking the lesser to save the greater numbers one for ten…”

    So then taking one life to save two would be OK?

    Catseye> “self defense is not murder therefore has no bearing on this issue you wished to discuss why is murder wrong not self defense not killing but murder please stay on topic..”

    Hmmm. I didn’t bring up self-defense in response to murder, rather I brought it up in response to your 1 to 10 scheme. I was assuming that you considered killing one to save ten something other than murder (like justifiable homicide). Was I wrong in this? Since I thought you’d moved from murder to something like justifiable homicide, I thought the self-defense question was quite appropriate.

    Catseye> “ah Phin please tell me who is the correct god? is it Jesus’s father as in the bible? is it Mohammad? is it the goddess of the wicca?”

    I didn’t figure you’d put any faith in my answer to these questions, which is why I thought I’d make better headway by trying to figure out your basis for morality instead of trying to convince you to believe mine.

    So you don’t look to God or religion for your basis for morality. That’s all well and good. On the other hand, it appears so far that your only appeal for morality is whether or not the human race survives. I must admit at this point that I don’t really see how such an approach to morality can condemn all murder. Mass murder, perhaps. But not once-in-a-lifetime murder. In other words, your human survivability approach to morality seems lacking in even the simplest of tests against an act I’m pretty sure both of us would agree is immoral.

    Catseye> “ah soo many aspects of the surpreme being but yes I agree that it is much simpler to fall back on our intelligence which I believe is set up by what we are taught as youths by reviewing history and writings of such history… Man sets what is moral and unmoral this is based on the region you grew up at and the vaules that were passed down from father to son mother to daughter… what makes us experts in judging a group/race of people that we have no knowledge of? what allows us to sit in our holy towers and judge what others do?”

    Indeed. Who are we to sit in our holy towers and label someone a murderer who has only killed one person in his lifetime while also fathering many children, obviously doing much more to further the survival of the human race than to harm it?

    Catseye> “I stated murder is wrong and not wrong depending on the situation it is not able to be lumped into a neat package for mankind to assimilate in one easy setting it is a situation that needs to be defined by each and every instance of the matter…”

    Yes, but what rules will we use to help us decide those instances? Is the survivability of the human race the only one? In that case, it would seem unjust to say I am wrong if I only kill one person in my lifetime, while fathering many children.

    Or, suppose I take out a nice large life insurance policy against someone so that I can then kill them and donate half the money I get toward cancer research. Maybe I do this to a million people, ending up with enough funding to find a cure for cancer. Tens of millions are saved, thus surpassing your one to ten test for morality. Surely, in such an instance, I would not have done anything the least bit immoral?

    Catseye> “you are wanting a neat little package in a chaotic world that will never happen..”

    Well, it certainly looks like the package that is your morality isn’t very neat at this point in time. I’d settle for a modicum of philosophical coherence, to be honest.

    Catseye> “Murder is the Planning of knowingly taking another humans life for sport or amusement…”

    Ah, so my life insurance scheme to cure cancer isn’t in any danger of being termed immoral by you, since it isn’t targeted toward either sport or amusement. Come to think of it, maybe a more direct approach would be just to use homeless people for testing medical procedures and drugs. In the end, I’m sure we’ll save many more lives than are lost. The whole notion of not being able to do lab testing on humans is surely holding us back.

    Catseye> “by that definitation it is wrong… using that above defination I await your argument why it is not wrong instead of you discussing my words let’s hear your own side of the debate subtle shades of grey again in this matter all depending on what is the definitation of murder which I believe that you ignored emerald’s questiohn of your definitation….”

    Well, I’m perfectly willing to discuss this based on your own philosophical approach to morality and not my own…at least, I am once I figure out what that approach actually is. I wouldn’t want to be accused of trying to force my morality on someone else. As for a definition of murder, I’m happy to go with Webster’s, “The killing of a human being with malice aforethought.”

    –Phin
27. 

    Linderella
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    “I’m surprised at some of the outcry, but then again, rational discourse became impossible when you BDSM folks hijacked the language,and make words mean whatever you want. Why worry about being called ‘coercive’, for example? Whether or not it’s true, why not just say ‘to us, coercive means, um, poetic!’” ~Stella Luna~

    We get our definitions for words from our Cult Handbook, it is a big fat book full of lots and lots of pages with letters and pictures on it. You have seen it in schools and librarys and even offices across the world. It is called Webster’s Dictionary. You might want to burn your copy now, since you now know it is our Cult Handbook.
28. 

    Catseye
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    AH I see you wish not to talk on Yahoo that is what I expected..

    but you asked why I thought it was wrong and I stated my beliefs.. and that is what I believe Murder to be wrong..

    again the once a decade would kill off the Human race but then remember this is my morality of murder you are asking opinion for… is abortion Murder? another great debate which I am not going to enter…

    see your once a decade argument keeping the human race going does not take into account the naturl causes deaths.. the accidental deaths the suicides.. the disasters so again I point out that chaotic Murders would leave us as a dying race to follow in the footsteps of other creatures that came before us to our destruction..

    is that all my argument is based on? no but it is a clear cut example of why I think it is wrong.. add the fact of imposing your will on another being in that and it adds to the belief HOWEVER I find it right to prevent others from doing mass murders serial killings etc… one life for two would be ok for me I know I would give my own life to save the lives of my sub and my son so yes..

    bring it to Yahoo Phin this may take a while
29. 

    Paul "Phinehas" Schwanz
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    Catseye> “AH I see you wish not to talk on Yahoo that is what I expected.. ”

    I see no reason not to discuss it here, since the whole point is to figure out how you come to the conclusion that BDSM is not morally reprehensible.

    Catseys> “but you asked why I thought it was wrong and I stated my beliefs.. and that is what I believe Murder to be wrong..”

    Well yes, but I’m trying to find out whether you believe that your belief is something like an opinion or whether it is based in any sort of philosophy that isn’t bankrupt.

    Catseye> “again the once a decade would kill off the Human race but then remember this is my morality of murder you are asking opinion for… is abortion Murder? another great debate which I am not going to enter…”

    I’m willing to discuss whatever you want to discuss in order to present some coherent philosophy of morality. It just seemed to me that murder would be the easiest, but I could be wrong.

    Catseye> “see your once a decade argument keeping the human race going does not take into account the naturl causes deaths.. the accidental deaths the suicides.. the disasters”

    Actually, this depends upon which decade you are talking about. Lately, world population growth seems to be flattening out, owing to the overpopulation I mentioned before. I think its is clear, however, that population growth would increase quickly if anything cut it back to half of what it is today. Even so, you are probably right that the once-a-decade approach might be too drastic to be overcome by normal population growth. So, evidently, someone killing a person every decade would be doing something immoral, but if they only killed someone once over a 50 or 75 year period, then that couldn’t be an immoral act, since normal population growth would be able to handle that. In addition, this doesn’t take into account the sheme where you can only kill someone if you’ve parented enough children. So, perhpas you can kill someone after having three kids? Surely, this wouldn’t be immoral?

    I do wish you’d addressed my schemes to cure cancer. I’m very curious to know whether such acts would be immoral or not.

    Catseye> “so again I point out that chaotic Murders would leave us as a dying race to follow in the footsteps of other creatures that came before us to our destruction..”

    Well of course they would. But it is just as obvious that orderly murders would not, and it could be set up so that it actually helps us with overpopulation issues. As things stand, a lot of people seem very concerned about running out of resources on earth because of overpopulation.

    Catseye> “is that all my argument is based on?”

    But it is the only thing you’ve chosen to share so far. If you have other philosophical reasons for why murder is wrong, please do fill me in.

    Catseye> “no but it is a clear cut example of why I think it is wrong..”

    Perhaps it is clear cut for you, but I still have all sorts of unanswered questions regarding it. Again, is there any sort of philosophical consistency in your belief that murder is wrong, or is it just some kind of personal opinion. In other words, is it perfectly legitimate for each person to have their own opinion of what is right and wrong? So, Hitler’s opinion of right and wrong is just as valid as yours? These are the sorts of things I’m still not sure I understand regarding your perspective on morality.

    Catseye> “add the fact of imposing your will on another being in that and it adds to the belief”

    Well this is a new angle. So imposing your will on someone else is wrong? I’m assuming you’d make an exception for imposing your will on a child who is playing in the street? So once again, sometimes it is wrong and sometimes it is right? That doesn’t leave us with much to work with in regards to philosophical underpinnings does it? Once again, we are down to Catseye simply making a judgement decision and declaring some things wrong and some things right based on seemingly arbitrary opinion. Again, I have to wonder if your judgement decisions regarding these matters have any more legitimacy than Hitler’s. If so, then why? That’s the philosophical structure that I’m trying to understand.

    Catseye> “HOWEVER I find it right to prevent others from doing mass murders serial killings etc… one life for two would be ok for me I know I would give my own life to save the lives of my sub and my son so yes..”

    Is taking someone else’s life any different than giving up your own? Is it morally OK to take someone else’s life to save the life of your son? That would just be a one-to-one ratio. Of course, the one-to-two ratio rule would make things even easier when it comes to curing cancer. It would then be OK to kill one million people in lab experiments even if we were only able to save two million. In the end, the survival of the human race is furthered. Right?

    Catseye> “bring it to Yahoo Phin this may take a while ”

    That’s OK. I’m in no hurry. I’m perfectly comfortable using these boards, and I also feel encouraged by the knowledge that its moderators are strongly anti-censorship.

    –Phin
30. 

    Catseye
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    Yes Phin it would control our population and since the Chinese are limiting their child births to one per family to control their growth and aborting the rest they are committing murder in that regurd so being that said they think it is moral to do so ..

    Canibals in the wild hunt kill eat Human flesh so they think it is Moral in that

    Osma thought the attack on the WTC was moral as is backed by a seemingly large margin of his people

    shall I continue?

    as I stated long ago morality is based on where you were brought up and what you chose to be right and wrong.. now since this choice is yours does that make anyone elses wrong? to you maybe but to them?

    Hitler thought he was Moral in ordering the deaths of th Jews

    the Salem witch trials were moral to those who held them

    Dyerbrook thinks he is Moral by flaming the BDSM community

    and you think it is moral to discuss why Murder is right since you wanted to know why it was wrong logically you belive it is right though you chose not to state your beliefs but merely question mine? how can I learn if no new information is coming into the conversation stating other facts not just what I post in a different question?

    I ask questions to learn and you ignore them to try to keep me ignorant maybe it is the way you are raised and where you are from that causes you to think this…
31. 

    Paul "Phinehas" Schwanz
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    Catseye, I’m not trying to keep you ignorant. I’m trying to understand your philosophical position regarding morality. I think I understand where you are coming from now, but I want to check to make sure.

    Are you claiming that the morality adhered to by Canibals, Osama bin Laden, and Hitler (to name a few) is no more or less legitimate than your own?

    It seems you were making this claim, but I just want to be sure.

    On the other hand, if you are not making this claim, then I’d like to understand why you think that your morality is more legitimate than theirs. That’s all. I’m just trying to understand where you are coming from.

    –Phin
32. 

    Catseye
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    I forgot to add one last thing back when I started I said murder is both right and wrong you said I was vauge let me clarify for you to understand..

    First the defination again The killing of a human being with malice aforethought.”

    under this definition lets play a senario Husband Wife

    Husband walks down the hall and blows wife’s head off – immoral

    Husband walks down hall and pulls the plug on his wife who has laid in coma suffering for 5 years Moral
33. 

    Catseye
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    Ah Phin see now we come full circle.. this thread was not about murder but about the BDSM community…. is it Moral for us to pratice this lifestyle? to us it is..

    just as it is Moral for you to choose which religion you wish to follow if any but think of this and yes again I fall back on religion as a staple since it is everywhere with so many religions which is the immoral and Moral ones? is it Christinanity? Buddism ? Athethism? church of science? is it the snake handler baptist? is it the methodist is it the catholic is it the Jews and do not these groups classify as a cult? in Dyerbrook’s argument? there is a leader there are recruitments where they try to get you to give them possessions? there are some of these saying if you belive any way but this you are evil and are damned… they tell you how to dress how to act they try to make you into a cookie cutter persona…

    which one is right tell me please
34. 

    Paul "Phinehas" Schwanz
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    Perhaps you missed my last post? Here it is again.

    Catseye, I’m not trying to keep you ignorant. I’m trying to understand your philosophical position regarding morality. I think I understand where you are coming from now, but I want to check to make sure.

    Are you claiming that the morality adhered to by Canibals, Osama bin Laden, and Hitler (to name a few) is no more or less legitimate than your own?

    It seems you were making this claim, but I just want to be sure.

    On the other hand, if you are not making this claim, then I’d like to understand why you think that your morality is more legitimate than theirs. That’s all. I’m just trying to understand where you are coming from.

    –Phin
35. 

    Catseye
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    I do not think it is more legimate than theirs.. that is what lead to this thread Phin who am I to judge them? do I agree with them no.. but return to the location of being raised and what was taught to them as right and wrong..

    but I am intelligent enough to not group them all into a neat little package and judge all who are a part of the religions the same.. it is a case by case thing.. sterotyping a group w/o knowing that group and every member of that group is immoral as well in my eyes..

    I do not know you so how can I judge you?

    that is why I accepted your question and answered the best way I could with my limited schooling..
36. 

    Stella Luna
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    Lol, Darksoul, I can’t let this pass. You may have missed your calling! Can I recommend perhaps the Diamond Memorial Theater? You can strut and fret your hour upon the stage, then be heard no more…

    We agree on some points. I also believe there is darkness in all of us born on this earth. We diverge on where to go from there. Your way is to ‘embrace’ it, elevate it, celebrate it. On that path you have no choice but to prefer it, and call it ‘enlightened’. You sit in a dark room and refuse to see the candles you can no longer remember how to light. I reject that way, along with all those wolves and roses. For me, there’s no fear or enticement.
37. 

    Billy Bob Thornton
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    well I can see that this is getting nowhere….maybe its possible for the community to cease this posting any further as it is clear that the closed minded issues her ewill continue….and phin and stella…if you both wish to try the ~Moral~ approach…pls do not follow _yerbrooks lead…as I found it very immoral to preach his lil ways and then attack sub/slaves…but hey…lol let him lead his lil cult..and be well..as I ..(unlike _yerbrook) will Not post again …not in this artical ..so enjoy…..and I do hope you All find your path …which ever way it may lead
38. 

    shi
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    ~steps forward, arm in arm with her Master~

    ~smiles softly~

    Ms. Stella…

    This girl will say this to you..

    One’s ~darkness~ is Another’s candle..and One’s ~candle~ is Another’s ~darkness~ ~grins~

    How one chooses to “exercise” their ” imagination ” whether it be..~embracing~, ~elevating~ , or ~celebrating~..is not for you or anyone else to decide.

    ~laffs~ ” still ” writing Maxis??? as girl figured..as the War on Drugs and Terrorism “still” remain as well. ~sighs~

    girl ~asks, standing all diplomatic-like~ third and final time…~smiling politely~

    Accept what you can not change.

    ” ‘Is it wrong for the tree to be a tree, the rock a rock, the bird a bird?’ I asked.
    ‘No, no,’ she said.
    ‘Why, then,’ I asked, ‘is it wrong for a slave to be a slave?’
    ‘I do not know,’ she said.
    ‘Perhaps it is not wrong for a slave to be a slave,’ I said.”

    John Norman, Explorers of Gor, p. 176

    “We make a living by what we get, we make a life by what we give.”
    Sir Winston Churchill

    this girl is finished here.

    ~kneels deeply at her Masters feet~

    ~whispering the words that so many hate, hiding her devilish little grin~

    Freedom is Slavery
    Pain is Pleasure

    Love Always,
    shi xo
39. 

    Paul "Phinehas" Schwanz
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    Well, Catseye. It looks like we’ve finally come to an agreement then. I also do not think that your moral stance on murder (or BDSM for that matter) is any more legitimate that Hitler’s. But if Hitler’s moral approach to the holocaust is just as legitimate as your moral approach to BDSM, I cannot imagine how it is even possible to have a reasoned debate on the subject. This is the epitome of pluralism it would seem, but I’ll give you credit for at least being honest and consistent in your approach: what you do isn’t wrong, but then neither was Hitler. Consistent indeed, but not for me.

    –Phin
40. 

    Catseye
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    Phin the point is this simple

    Hitler was a man
    Nazi’s were a group

    you noted all I named were people single enitites that the history taught us about..

    I did not say germany was immoral because of what Hitler did

    I did not say Muslims were immoral for what Osma did

    but all I ask is not judge a group by stories rumors and tall tales told to you.. in every bunch their are bad apples in every society there is some pretending to be a part of that society when they are not..

    I was not trying to recruit I was trying to enlighten is all do not sterotype ask questions judge case by case not in a lump sum..

    out beliefs in our in game lifestyle may differ

    but you do not know me so still how can you judge anyone by their beliefs

    actions speak louder

    watch learn grow is another belief I have.. when not sure ask with an open mind and learn…

    for if you shut out all light everything withers and dies
41. 

    Darksoul
    

    Jan 3rd, 2004
    

    stella, how can you truly see ligt unless you know the darkness, the way of the tao, balance in all things. Those of U/us who have known, embraced and accepted darkness see the light that much brighter. If you have plumbed the depths of hell on earth, then you will know the light of living, loving, laughing much more intensely. But, as i said…balance in all things….to reject the darkness in yourself is not to know yourself truly. And I have no desire to act, I usually stay in the background, just being Me unless My voice and presence is needed. I’m not here to get attention, simply to defend those W/whom I love, otherwise I would left this thread long ago, it takes waaaayyyyy too much of My time.

    Darksoul
42. 

    Paul "Phinehas" Schwanz
    

    Jan 5th, 2004
    

    Catseye, actions speak louder than words, but they grow out of, reflect, and reveal beliefs. One cannot have immoral actions while having moral beliefs, nor can they have moral actions while having immoral beliefs.

    Your discussion of groups vs. individuals merely deflects the point, but does not address it. I’m perfectly content to speak of individuals. You are an individual and Hitler was an individual, so I ask again:

    As an individual, are Hitler’s view and approach to morality, his beliefs, and his actions any more or less legitimate than yours?

    –Phin
43. 

    Mistress Maria LaVeaux
    

    Jan 5th, 2004
    

    Phin and stella both.

    Good Morning.
    Beleieve it or no, I do see your points. Each of you has been raised to hold certain moral beleifs as true for the world. Unfortunatly, if you travel a few thousand miles in any direction, you will run into a whole new set of Morals Common to all around you in which your outlook has no place. Look back in time 50 years,, thirty,, even ten and you will see a fundamental shift in the moral axis around which you revolve, look forward ten years, thirty, or fifty, and you will see further changes to Moral outlook. Many you will not agree with, but then, when they become widely held,, Who becomes the Immoral one? Morals are, for the most part determined by what society deems acceptable in current times. If this sounds to you like. *Gasp* there are no hard rules!! guess what chere,, that is right.
    You can quote any book of holy scripture you choose, the time and tide view still holds. Select any set of laws you like, Again, the weight of time, or the tolerance of the Masses will show you the fluidity of ALL you think solid and Immutable.
    To your way of thinking, Our Moral compass has deviated from true North,(Ok, done a complete 180) but what you don’t seem to recognize is that western society is changing, Yes,, altering to a point where we can be more free to be what we are.Who can say what will happen in fifty years really? We don’t know,, neither do you. Maybe there IS a place for us out in the open,, maybe not. But like any other group who hold similar beleifs, we WILL strive for acceptance, and we WILL defend our Right to strive for acceptance.

    Stella, Just for your information chere,, I am a devout Roman Catholic. (Surprise!) I Have seen the candles, as you put it. Phin,, I DO have a strong Moral upbringing. But i have also had a life that has taught me NOT to fear the Darkness. I Think for myself. I Bring my own candle in to it, Explore, and find for myself, at least, there is Nothing there to fear. Time and tide chere.
    In their own personal dark spaces people CAN find many things that would surprise them, (And frighten them terribly) they will find Ugly truths about themselves that they are reluctant to face. I am the first to admit, some of the things i have found about myself made me profoundly uncomfortable, but rather than trying to hide them away, i have brought the light to them, Not the light of any religious conviction, But the Hard Honest light of True self exploration I have dispelled the things that i Can’t live with, and learned to cope with the rest.
    That is why i am in the darkness. Why I can go where i like without fear.
    I have Grown as a person. As a Domme, i have helped others to grow. (If you REALLY saw how we interact, you could see how this really isn’t the contradiction it appears to be.)

    What we do isn’t right for you,, OK, I accept that. and i am perfectly willing to allow you to pass me by without my ever attempting to change your mind about it. All i ask, Indeed all i have seen others of my community ask, is that you also allow us to Pass. Put aside the thing in your mind that tells you that you MUST enforce your moral code on others. By all means BE who and what you are, and just allow us to do the same. If what we do makes you uncomfortable,, Well the universe is an infinite place, I am sure there is room for both of us.

    If on the other hand, you Are curious about us, If you Really wish to Understand, then talk to us with an OPEN mind, one that will allow that maybe,,Just Maybe you Don’t have All the answers.
    We are always open to The curiousity of others.

    Mistress Maria LeVeaux
44. 

    Paul "Phinehas" Schwanz
    

    Jan 5th, 2004
    

    Maria> “Morals are, for the most part determined by what society deems acceptable in current times.”

    So, what Hitler did was wrong at that point in time, since society deemed it so, but at some point in the future, killing and torturing thousands for the sake of ethnic cleansing might be OK? Am I understanding that correctly? In your opinion, under the right circumstances, ethnic cleansing might be perfectly acceptable?

    What do you mean when you talk about what society find’s acceptable? When you take this sort of opinions-based approach to morality, you’re never going to have 100% agreement. So do you think the concept of a moral majority is valid? If the majority of Alphaville citizens decides that BDSM is not morally acceptable, then you agree that it would be immoral to practice what society deems unacceptable?

    Of course, from Catseye’s perspective on morality, it would appear that it is unacceptable to ever deem anything unacceptable. How can society ever deem anything unacceptable, since the moment someone even raises an issue, she will be blasted for a bigot. How dare she imply that some belief or action may be unacceptable? She must be some sort of religious fanatic!

    –Phin
45. 

    Mistress Maria LaVeaux
    

    Jan 5th, 2004
    

    Phin,

    Obviously chere, at his time and place, Hitlers Morality was able to find enough universal support within his homeland, and let us face facts, Enough Tacit approval from the international comunity at large for some six Million Jews to meet a Ghastly end,(And so few mention the number of Catholics, Gypsies, Suspected leftists, Mentally Handicapped and other mixed and sundry races and creeds, he also found “Morally objectionable”)My point chere, was that YES, these WERE viewed as Moral acts by some, Ethnic cleansing today in Serbia and Bosnia and Iraq are viewed by their societies as perfectly acceptable. Are they?? No. but these people will still aregue in favour of it on Moral Grounds, and societies will continue to support them on Moral Grounds. This is why i usually am cautious about Enforcing my Moral standards on anyone, as you should be. These people do not believe themselves to be wrong either.
    I believe in a society where Rule of Law prevails, where persons are not deprived of basic human rights because they belong to a group, or classification that some person or group has defines as “morally inferior”
    Hitlers actions were, and are reprehensible by any standard of Civilization save for those few who still believe his actions to be Moral, and proper. Yet,, In a Modern society, we have chosen to allow these people to continue to have their say. As long as they remain within the law, their speech is protected. They should probably count their blessings in that our society is not ruled by others’ Moral Yardstick.
    It isn’t ideal, but if the alternative is Gas chambers and concentration camps, I think we are on the right track.

    “Morals” are a very Flexable, and dubious method of Judging people, because in the end, NO one can decide what is, or is not Moral.

    My own church was guilty of many and varied atrocities over the centuries because people within the churches structure saw a Moral foundation for their crimes against humanity.
    You asked about a Moral Majority, at one time the Catholic faith was the Majority in Europe. By your Logic, That made the Crimes of the Spanish inquisition OK.

    No chere,, Numbers do not make Right, any more than Might does. it only gives the person the ability to acheive their end, for good, OR for evil.

    My statements were never intended to set a Moral condition underwhich ANYTHING should be done, I only Illustrate the Danger when we allow “Morality police” to supercede rule of law.
    It would be like letting matters be decided by the movement of a feather in a light wind, in the end, Morals may be TOO flexable a guide to be of any use. THAT is my point.
    Others may not like us, but they MAY be wrong in their outlook, Only time will tell that, but in the mean time. LAW prevents them from doing anything that might, in the view of History, be viewed as evil, Just as the Law will prevent US from going too far with what we do. EQUAL protection chere, Dispassionate, and Nonsecular. Let your Morals be your guide, NOT your weapon to use against others.

    Maria.
46. 

    Paul "Phinehas" Schwanz
    

    Jan 5th, 2004
    

    Maria> “… Ethnic cleansing today in Serbia and Bosnia and Iraq are viewed by their societies as perfectly acceptable. Are they?? No.”

    Ummm. Why not? How are you not the “Morality Police” in saying so?

    Maria> “My own church was guilty of many and varied atrocities over the centuries because people within the churches structure saw a Moral foundation for their crimes against humanity.
    You asked about a Moral Majority, at one time the Catholic faith was the Majority in Europe. By your Logic, That made the Crimes of the Spanish inquisition OK.”

    Actually, I thought that was your logic, not mine. I’ve never stated that morality is dependant upon society’s acceptance. That is your claim.

    Maria> “No chere,, Numbers do not make Right, any more than Might does. it only gives the person the ability to acheive their end, for good, OR for evil.”

    If neither numbers or might make Right, then what does? I thought you’d indicated society’s acceptance made Right, and I am still confused about how much of society must accept something in order for it to be Right.

    Maria> “Hitlers actions were, and are reprehensible by any standard of Civilization save for those few who still believe his actions to be Moral, and proper.”

    Yes, but which view is Right? And what is this standard of Civilization you reference? It sounds to me like you are again making an appeal to the majority. Most people think Hitler’s actions were wrong, so they were therefore wrong? Those of us who like to think we are civilized think Hitler’s actions were wrong, so they were therefore wrong? How is this not an appeal to numbers, the majority, might, or some high-minded opinion of our own civilized nature? And why should the civilized have any more say in things than the uncivilized?

    Maria> “Yet,, In a Modern society, we have chosen to allow these people to continue to have their say. As long as they remain within the law, their speech is protected.”

    I think this is a bit of a red herring, since speech isn’t the same thing as torturing people. You seemed to indicate elsewhere that the international community shouldn’t have given Hitler as much leeway as they did. Should all the murderd Jews count their blessings that our society is not ruled by others’ Moral Yardstick?

    Maria> “‘Morals’ are a very Flexable, and dubious method of Judging people, because in the end, NO one can decide what is, or is not Moral.”

    But don’t you see that it is your own bankrupt philosophy that is at the heart of this flexibility that you assign to morals? When NO one can decide what is or is not moral, how shall we tell Hitler it is wrong to torture and murder people? And how could we possible fault the international community for its tacit approval, which then led to the death of so many. Isn’t tacit approval exactly what your philosophy says we should give to everyone? With such flexible morality, how can you explain to anyone why murder is wrong?

    My philosphy struggles not the least in declaring with decided inflexibility that murder is wrong. In the end, which philosophy is more inflexible? Mine, or the one that is so stonily certain that it is wrong to Judge people that it struggles to state with any clarity that murder or ethical cleansing is Wrong?

    –Phin
47. 

    Paul "Phinehas" Schwanz
    

    Jan 5th, 2004
    

    Gah! Ethnic cleansing, not ethical cleansing…which, of course, isn’t.

    –Phin
48. 

    Catseye
    

    Jan 5th, 2004
    

    hehe Phin

    How many Jews did hitler actually kill himself? I find it hard to believe that one man killed 6 million by himself..

    the argument is Society sets the Moral guidlines What is Moral in the US many not be Moral in the Middle East again region and how you were raised… Morals are passed down from Father to Son from Mother to Daughter there are no clear cut answers/ rules to this for each of us was raised different…..

    Is the ending of life of one in pain and suffering immoral? some think so I do not…

    Laws are not always moral again depends on the location you are in at that time..

    that is why I said what I did about the group vs individual aspect of it.. it is a case by case thing and I believe and please excuse me if I err but what Maria is saying what is Moral today in societies eyes may be immoral tomorrow by the same society ..

    we are forever growing and expanding our intelligence…
49. 

    Paul "Phinehas" Schwanz
    

    Jan 6th, 2004
    

    Catseye> “…we are forever growing and expanding our intelligence…”

    I do not mean this personally, but when you reach the point that you cannot say with any certainty or clarity that murder is wrong, I would not call that growth. And when you’ve placed such a premium on not judging people that you can no longer say with any certainty or clarity that murder is wrong, I would not call that intelligent. Don’t you see the irony in being able to state with such conviction that it is wrong to judge others? Don’t you see the self-referential incoherence in such a philosophical position?

    I judge that you should not judge.
    It is wrong to tell someone else that something is wrong.

    How can you even say such things with a straight face? I am amazed by the philosophical nonsense to which people will stoop in order to justify their own actions or in order to have no Authority to whom they must give an account.

    –Phin
50. 

    Catseye
    

    Jan 6th, 2004
    

    Phin you ignored my question above..

    How many did Hitler himself kill personally?

    where does the morality lie in stating the order or pulling the switch?

    How many times have we heard I am going to kill you? yet never see it followed through?

    Murder is a case by case judgement why do you think we have trials etc for such an event in most of the world?

    and yes it is a large topic first off we must look and determine if it fits murder second we must look to see if the person committing the action was of sound mind to realise it was murder then we must take a look at the situation of the murder….

    I judge that one must judge each case in it’s own not lump them into a neat little package i.e. for every rule there is an exception…

    your belief that those who have immoral ideas can not be moral wait let me fetch the actual quote I do want to be accurate..

    “One cannot have immoral actions while having moral beliefs, nor can they have moral actions while having immoral beliefs.”

    this in itself locks the doors to growth, groups in there is no chance for reform.. the man who committs murder in your argument can not EVER preform a Moral act

    Also I would like to learn your stance on the death penalty is this moral? is it murder? if yes to murder who is the one showing immorality? the ones on the Jury? the Judge? the Governor? the executioner? all of the above? does it change with each case?

    these are arguments I will wait to hear..

    Hitler ordered the deaths of the Jews but he did not carry them out personality so his actions were immoral? what immoral act did he preform? or was it just immoral thoughts? oh my what a can of worms that would be for I bet 90% of us have had immoral thoughts or actions and even ideas in our lives…

Leave a Reply