For the sake of argument, confrontation and anger can be very productive.
Tell me it ain't so .
You guys are just too nice. Thats why I leave on occasion . If it is a flaw in my character so be it probably why I have yet to become the Christian some demonstrate on here. Oh well I am trying to become as good a Christian as SOME
didn't mean to butt<no pun> in or........
Confrontation is facing a person or issue with presumably an opporcing or opposite idea or belief. Providing a good explanation of why a person's view is wrong or should be changed and then offering a logical alternative choice can be productive if it's done peacefully. If it's done in anger, people may take longer to accept the logical reasoning and even if they accept the reassoning, they are now angry at the anger displayed and a new (and avoidable) problem has been created.
As for being nice (or not displaying anger), my professional experience has shown me that it's generally much better to start "nice" or not in anger and that once you get to an angry stager, it's much more difficult for both sides to get back to the nice or peaceful stage, regardless of whether they now agree on the original issue or not.
People who prefer anger often think that being nice takes too long or you're somehow subordinating some of your position, authority or even justification to the other person and that they will take advantage of you. If the peaceful approach works, it often saves time and even results in a lower blood pressure. And if the peaceful process doesn't work, Teddy Roosevelt said it best--Speak softly and carry a big stick. The complete adage was "Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far." At any rate, Teddy's thought of using a soft approach first was very wise.
__________________
Jesus Christ--The reason for the season!
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a veteran.
If you're certain you know everything, there's little opportunity to learn anything.
"once you get to an angry stager, it's much more difficult for both sides to get back to the nice or peaceful stage, regardless of whether they now agree on the original issue or not. }
Cal Hunter
AGE
I was right. I am substantially older than you are. I"™m not going to claim the title of Master Po however since I probably don"™t possess the other qualifications.
Substantially older and still starting a new career? My hat is off to you and I yield the title of Master Po in a deferential way.
PRODUCTIVITY
I"™m sure people who vow to leave the forum often lurk to see what"™s going on. When I saw a post in which you seemed to have put some effort, I felt it would be rude not to respond. I suspect that people who simply stop logging on are more sincere about leaving Huntingnet than those who make a point of saying "I"™m done."
Bickering and arguing has its place on this forum. But it need not be the only activity. When my wife first signed onto this forum, she was considering converting to the Catholic Church. When she mentioned that she was greeted with nothing but grenades hurled at Catholics. I had to tell her to stay off the Religion forum. She came back later and found a somewhat friendlier setting. But I think she"™s given up on her own now.
It"™s easy to think that "truly brilliant" people have difficulty communicating. But I think the problem is that often the non-truly brilliant person is not trying to listen. I"™m no dummy, but my wife is one of those "truly brilliant" people. When you discuss a topic where she is in her element, you have to concede that she knows more than you do and listen.
Difficulty communicating? I hate to bring up evolution, but when someone states "If man descended from monkeys, how come there are still monkeys?" and then sits back smugly believing they have won the debate, there is no way to communicate.
I realize this is a summary of a lot of people posting here and not specifically me on each item. For the record, I am not anti Catholic and once was a member of that church. My parents still belong and I happen to have 2 ex-priests (they left and got married) in the family who are still practicing catholics. I have a lot of respect for all people in the Catholic church, including his holiness the Pope. There is a difference between bashing a religion (Catholic or otherwise) and discussing or even debating some of its' shortcomings). Obviously, I don't condone bashing and think each person has to choose and follow their own religious convictions, whether I agree or not.
FAMILY LAW, ETC.
My experience with divorce comes primarily from people I know who are getting divorced or have been divorced. The bitterness and lack of willingness to reason are appalling. My internship supervisor was retained as a mediator between one such couple because of the children. I didn"™t agree with her perception completely. She felt the wife was being totally unreasonable, which she was. I thought though that the wife was reacting out of fear of a completely dominating husband.
My internship supervisor is a guardian ad litem and I spent 50-60 hours a week working with her. I became very familiar with the role one plays. Yes, your clients are all victims of varying degrees of abuse and/or neglect.
You definitely nailed it on the bitterness and lack of willingness in diivorces. The people are obviously divorcing because of whatever various reasons but what a powder keg. The peaceful divorces tend to get settled and and the judge or commissioner has little work to do other than making sure everything is legal. The contested ones, however, are often filled with fireworks and are a definte security concern.
Most of the child abuse I deal with at work involves either sexual abuse or murder. It is sickening and makes you wonder how in the world those people actually live with themselves. The kids, on the other hand, almost always seem to be survivors and just good kids. Unfortunately, these types of crimes often leave a ticking time bomb in the kids that surfaces years or even decades later. I would not want to do that full time and admire those who do.
ABORTION, EVOLUTION, ETC.
Those of us who accept evolution do not start these threads. But we do tend to respond. I"™m not sure why. After all we do not believe that people who reject evolution cannot be saved. There are some things that folks could keep in mind in order to further reasonable debate on the topic. First of all, I can"™t speak for everyone, but there are at least three people, my wife, the pope, and I, who see no conflict between Christian faith and evolution. Second, read up on evolution from people who know what it"™s all about. Some folks keep saying there are no transitional forms. There ARE transitional forms. But you have to read about evolution in order to find out what the theory is all about. Third, folks need to understand that if anyone ever comes up with a substantial modification or a replacement for the theory of evolution, it won"™t be a return to the Biblical account. Fourth, stop saying "It"™s JUST a theory." What constitutes a scientific theory has been explained here many times. To keep repeating that it"™s JUST a theory makes you sound a bit silly, like little kids who think they can convince someone by simply repeating something over and over. Fifth, decide who it is you"™re trying to convince. You"™re not going to convince me because I"™m aware of the scientific evidence which you have been taught, erroneously, doesn"™t exist. If your faith isn"™t strong enough to stick to the Biblical account without convincing me, you may need to reassess your faith.
I will readily admit that I am not a scientist and my eyes involuntarily begin to glaze over at some of the discussions about transitional life forms, etc. (no offense to people posting about this, it's just a subject matter thing). I honestly don't think either side is going to ever completely "prove" beyond any shadow of a doubt how we as a species evolved. I also think that this is likely one of those mysteries that God isn't going to give us all the answers to in this life and that our meager ability to comprehend the bible is probably also limiting us in reaching a complete understanding. Since God "created" us, he pretty much could have done it however he chose and I don't think any of us have a complete understanding of each sequential part of this event. This is JMHO and likely the rest of the forum will disagree.
I think folks on this forum tend to have similar opinions on abortion so not really much to discuss there.
My wife and I don"™t consider death much. Our focus tends to be on living the life we should live, the life that God has given us, the way we should. We figure what happens after death will pretty much take care of itself.
Living our lives according to God's requirements does prepare us for life after death. And it's actually a lot of fun.
I'll mention that to her. She's very non-confrontational. I'm a little more aggressive and adversarial. Didn't learn it in law school though.
You might tell her that you now have been accorded an official HuntingNet title of Master Po and if she's younger, will be required to show some modicum of deference to her elder.
I already get that. She even incorporated a vow to obey into the wedding vows. And she intends to do it again when we have our church wedding. *
* She believes it would be a sin if she failed to use the talents and abilities God has given her in pursuit of a career. However she also believes that God intended the wife to be subordinate to her husband as evidenced by a number of Biblical examples. And she is convinced that marriages would be more likely to be successful if couples entered marriage prepared to accept the traditional roles. But then I give her needs the utmost consideration and I also defer to her greater intelligence by making sure that I have the benefit of her thinking. God has given us the "one-flesh" concept as a blessing.
RE: Anyway, you guys can have the last word.
probably why I have yet to become the Christian some demonstrate on here. Oh well I am trying to become as good a Christian as SOME
She's very non-confrontational. I'm a little more aggressive and adversarial. Didn't learn it in law school though. 
