Accountability of the laws spirit beyond its letter

More
13 Jun 2019 13:52 - 13 Jun 2019 13:58 #339673 by ZealotX

ren wrote: To my knowledge, the knights have supplied no evidence of kyrin's incompatibility with totjo, no evidence of correlation between kyrin's behaviour and participation at totjo, no evidence of other prejudicial effects, and no evidence of considerable contemplation regarding her fate.

That being said I am sure they will provide it if asked to.


I guess this is what bothers me. I have to agree with Kelrax in recognizing the right of TOTJO to simply ban for whatever arbitrary reason it chooses. But in my opinion, as someone who grew up in a church, it's seems bad form to kick out a guest unless they are disrupting service.

As a wise Israelite once said in Matthew 7:2,

For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged:
and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.


the back drop of this was a "god given" or legal power/authority of the Pharisees to judge people while at the same time being guilty of offenses themselves. When this wise man pardoned the woman caught in adultery there was no question that she had broken the law. And he didn't know her to know whether or not she would do it again. But he said to her "go and sin no more". What this did was show the character and grace of the person in the position of power to forgive, rather than focus on the criminal so that we would emulate a better judge.

Of course this wise man provoked the ire of those in power because he spoke truth to power. He wasn't concerned about their feelings when he told them they were wrong. He called them a brood of vipers among other things. And yet he is thought to be one of, if not the nicest people to have ever lived and someone that the majority of people claim to want to meet. He had enemies but his ability to have friends and followers continues to this day. This wise man was asked how many times we should forgive and he said 70 x 7 as a play on numbers. In other words, don't even keep track. So if we're going to act like a church, and I left churches partly because of corruption, can we please act like a better church? Can we please not copy the parts that push people like me away?

I'm struggling to understand how it is even relevant that someone who is on this site as a "guest" can be "incompatible". If their beliefs are incompatible then they shouldn't be teachers. I'd agree with that. I'd agree they shouldn't be knights either. They shouldn't be allowed to represent TOTJO in any official capacity if deemed to be incompatible with TOTJO's doctrines. The PUBLIC forum should be another matter. There should be no assumption that any guest on the public forum has the intention of doing the IP and eventually becoming a knight. If a guest comes over your house to eat do you vet their entire belief system before you feed them? Do you kick them out when they say something you disagree with? I have a lot of issues with Old Testament characters but their hospitality is not among them.
( www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/7905-hospitality )

One of the issues I have is with people judging the intentions of others. It's basically judging a person's very heart and mind. It seems arrogant of anyone if they presume to know what is in another person's head without proper examination which includes questioning that person. This scares me, in fact. The proclamation does mention disagreeable behavior, which to me says that regardless of what any stated/posted rules and policies are, if you don't get along with certain people, we can vote you off the island. And of course that extends to watching what you say because you don't know who might be watching and who could get offended. And there's no lawyers, no independent judges, no jury of your peers.

And there seems to be a bit of a "scarecrow" argument that Kyrin is scaring potential new members away. What's interesting to me about that is I believe Kyrin was here before me (as one poster surely pointed out) and yet I'm defending Kyrin. Is there something wrong with me? Or is it fair to say that farmers use scarecrows for a good reason; to protect their crops against birds. Why then assume that the people who aren't here are supposed to be here? Why then assume that the people who aren't here would have all been good and productive members? Why bring up a thread where a knight was rightfully punished for going after Kyrin's gender identification as if Kyrin did something wrong? What about all the people who leave because of perceived corruption in leadership? If those in power aren't going to remove themselves for causing people to leave, quit, etc. then why use this as just cause to suspend a guest? What if our scarecrow was doing TOTJO a service by scaring away people who were so emotionally tied to bad ideas or delusions that they couldn't emotionally separate those ideas from their potential membership and participation? What if they were using or going to use TOTJO as a platform and a soapbox for those ideas that may or may not be "incompatible" with our teachings?

Yes, I'd like to see all the evidence in question; only because the action was so extreme as to call for an "indefinite suspension". I want to be sure that this decision wasn't tainted by corruption, emotion, or bias. Please show us the evidence so that we can justify the faith we have in our leaders.

Thank you, and may the Force be with us.
Last edit: 13 Jun 2019 13:58 by ZealotX.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Kelrax Lorcken

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
13 Jun 2019 15:09 #339677 by steamboat28
Also? In regards to the OP? "Incompatibility" is grounds enough for a divorce in many localities. Why wouldn't it be grounds enough for ejection from a house of worship?
The following user(s) said Thank You: Eleven, Carlos.Martinez3, Athena_Undomiel, Kelrax Lorcken

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
13 Jun 2019 16:36 #339680 by ZealotX

steamboat28 wrote: Also? In regards to the OP? "Incompatibility" is grounds enough for a divorce in many localities. Why wouldn't it be grounds enough for ejection from a house of worship?


divorce suggests marriage just as Excommunication suggests membership. And I was recently at an excommunication last year where my cousin was lied on by the pastor and they were told they would have an opportunity to present character witnesses but that was a lie too... people involved and affected are still not over it. Neither should ever apply to someone who is a guest. And I get it. There are people who don't care because of who this is happening to. Let's be real. So the process doesn't matter. The evidence doesn't matter. The justification doesn't really matter because at the end of the day there are people who just don't like the person it's happening to and it isn't happening to them. What if it thought... the same thing happened to you?

And couples can say "irreconcilable differences" because there are things married couples have to do together and need to agree on (like who gets the house). Now if you have a house guest you don't like you can ask them to leave because it's your house. That's part of the privilege of ownership. But if that's the case then they should say that so everyone knows where they stand. Because depending on how guests are treated other guests may want to go too. If you say rules were broken and it wasn't arbitrary then you can point out the rule and the evidence of when and how it was broken. But all of the justifications I've heard to date I haven't seen evidence even though the accusations warrant the existence of such evidence. Removing access to the forums is basically censure. Persons unknown to me are using other people leaving as justification for a forced removal. Where is the evidence of this? And could anyone simply make up justifications as he said she said basis for campaigning to remove people they disagree with?
The following user(s) said Thank You: Vaziel_Sorel, Kelrax Lorcken

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
13 Jun 2019 17:59 #339684 by steamboat28

ZealotX wrote: What if it thought... the same thing happened to you?


If you'll remember, it did. Just before Senan's memorial. It was a whole thing.

And, honestly, if you're curious I'll tell you exactly how and why I voted the way I did. That information, in my opinion, should be open to people from me, especially Kyrin. Other people may not have the balls to say it, but I will. If anyone's curious, they can either PM me or ask me here in public. I'm not going to hide behind a wall of secrecy.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
13 Jun 2019 19:43 #339694 by Proteus
The rules here are not just technical policy. They exist by principle, one of the most important being that the church has a certain function for people to feel welcome and supported. So the point of the rules are not for the sake of them being explicitly followed but for the principle that they exist which is to support the church and its function. The rules being broken in most situations assume that what has taken place promotes the compromising of that function. There is a reason I am pointing this out..

If one is smart enough, they can undermine the function of the church without technically breaking any rules. In this case, people stopped participating here because someone who was technically not breaking rules were still somehow discouraging people from feeling welcome here when they post. On top of this, a history of painting the temple in just the right way to ensure that banning them would make the temple look hypocritical by regularly injecting statements into their posts about it being corrupt was their ongoing shield. They could insult newcomers and authority alike but because they did it in just the right way, they would be exempt from breaking rules and would even be protected by them and the people who were influenced by agreement of protest about the the temple.

In short, the principle of the rules spoke in this event through the voting of the knights, in the event that someone was undermining them without breaking them and compromising the function of the church.

So what is more important here? The rules themselves or the principle behind them?

It seems that I know that I know.
What I would like to see is the 'I' that knows me when I know that I know that I know.
- Alan Watts
The following user(s) said Thank You: Neaj Pa Bol, steamboat28, Avalon, Athena_Undomiel, Kobos, Seeksthelight, Kelrax Lorcken

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
13 Jun 2019 21:11 #339697 by elizabeth

Proteus wrote: The rules here are not just technical policy. They exist by principle, one of the most important being that the church has a certain function for people to feel welcome and supported. So the point of the rules are not for the sake of them being explicitly followed but for the principle that they exist which is to support the church and its function. The rules being broken in most situations assume that what has taken place promotes the compromising of that function. There is a reason I am pointing this out..

If one is smart enough, they can undermine the function of the church without technically breaking any rules. In this case, people stopped participating here because someone who was technically not breaking rules were still somehow discouraging people from feeling welcome here when they post. On top of this, a history of painting the temple in just the right way to ensure that banning them would make the temple look hypocritical by regularly injecting statements into their posts about it being corrupt was their ongoing shield. They could insult newcomers and authority alike but because they did it in just the right way, they would be exempt from breaking rules and would even be protected by them and the people who were influenced by agreement of protest about the the temple.

In short, the principle of the rules spoke in this event through the voting of the knights, in the event that someone was undermining them without breaking them and compromising the function of the church.

So what is more important here? The rules themselves or the principle behind them?


I'm sorry but this erks me..
Not really sure why but I read this as, well we have rules and reasons behind the rules, you may not be breaking the rules outright, but if we feel strongly enougth that what you are doing is harmful then we can still vote as Knights to exclude you.
If people stop participating because of one person.. Couldnt topics been moved to where she couldnt participate? Are they actually leaving because of her or her style of questioning everything? Demanding facts? Because that begs the question of what this church would become if we all just slapped eachother on the back and agreed all of the time without questions or encouraging others to question/research for themselves..
Is that what we want Totjo to be?

Maybe I am not understanding your point, but your statement makes me unsettled.

To die would be a great adventure
The following user(s) said Thank You: Kobos, ZealotX

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
13 Jun 2019 22:00 #339700 by ZealotX

Proteus wrote: The rules here are not just technical policy. They exist by principle, one of the most important being that the church has a certain function for people to feel welcome and supported. So the point of the rules are not for the sake of them being explicitly followed but for the principle that they exist which is to support the church and its function. The rules being broken in most situations assume that what has taken place promotes the compromising of that function. There is a reason I am pointing this out..

If one is smart enough, they can undermine the function of the church without technically breaking any rules. In this case, people stopped participating here because someone who was technically not breaking rules were still somehow discouraging people from feeling welcome here when they post. On top of this, a history of painting the temple in just the right way to ensure that banning them would make the temple look hypocritical by regularly injecting statements into their posts about it being corrupt was their ongoing shield. They could insult newcomers and authority alike but because they did it in just the right way, they would be exempt from breaking rules and would even be protected by them and the people who were influenced by agreement of protest about the the temple.

In short, the principle of the rules spoke in this event through the voting of the knights, in the event that someone was undermining them without breaking them and compromising the function of the church.

So what is more important here? The rules themselves or the principle behind them?


You do see how this could go too far, don't you?

and by the way, if you remove everyone who says "there's corruption" then how many people do you have to remove before you have proven their point?

part of freedom of speech/expression in the US (and yes I know TOTJO is not on US servers) is the right to say "bad things" about people in power without fear of reprisal. Making this argument sounds like... there was reprisal.

And yes, a smart person could totally undermine the spirit of the rules and be condescending and arrogant. However I see this more from other people than I do from Kyrin who I debate all the time. With Kyrin you need to have a solid well thought out argument. If you don't then a good bit of what you're going to run into is on you. And a lot of people get into debates without being fully prepared and without good arguments. And some times people simply post their personal beliefs in the open forums which I've already talked about needs to have more of a warning because the rules are less restrictive there (according to Ren). However, people with relatively well thought out ideas are able to appreciate Kyrin because it makes those ideas better when you have to actually work harder to prove them. I consider myself among these people.

And if a person gets discouraged and feels unwelcome because one person didn't accept their idea... then the whole system has failed them. Where was everyone else? Knights? Apprentices? It should never, and is never, up to one person to determine whether or not people are welcome. Therefore it feels to me more like Kyrin is a scapegoat.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Manu

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
13 Jun 2019 23:13 - 13 Jun 2019 23:48 #339702 by Kohadre

ZealotX wrote:

Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]


I'm going to start by addressing your concern about "freedom of speech" mid way through your post.

In the U.S, we are afforded the constitutional right of public freedom of speech. The key word there however, is public. Private entities, organizations, corporations, etc are subject to a different list of legal restrictions. Because of that, public law does not carry over to freedom of speech within these organizations.

If I told my boss that I thought he was an overweight, bumbling oaf; with a propensity for inappropriate conduct and a disgrace to the department
Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]
- chances are I would be justifiably and immediately terminated from my employment within said company. My public right to freedom of speech does not protect me from ramifications or reprisal in such a situation.

Similarly, individuals who choose to engage in church or other spiritual services are not immune to reprisal if they decide to voice opinions or beliefs that go against the foundation, belief structure, or culture within said organization,


Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]


The problem with Kyrin's activity in the forum is two-fold. Because of her repeated suspensions/expulsions within the temple, a lot of her posted content has been removed or otherwise lost due to associated posts with the account being removed along with her expulsion. Her most current account only dates back to mid September of 2018. That does not accurately reflect the total tenure she has had here, nor the entirety of her authored content.

So for your repeated requests to be provided with links, references, and reasons as to why she was banned; the reason why it cannot be provided to you in it's entirety is that said content has been removed or otherwise deleted from public access. This however does not erase the memory that other temple members have of her prior conduct here, nor it's impact.

As far as posting personal beliefs within the forum is concerned; the reason why we currently have special interest groups is to attempt and accommodate different belief systems which choose to incorporate elements of TOTJO Jedi-ism into their own practices.

Where it concerns forum debates, not everyone on the forums is going to have the same level of understanding or interest in the topics being debated. On top of that, there is a wide spectrum of different educational proficiency within our membership. Some of our members are still in the K-12 system, while others have graduated college with Masters degree's and academic honors. Other's have opted for trade based careers and as such, their knowledge is based more on physical and logistical approaches.

For members to attack each other on a repeated basis because an argument isn't well though out enough; prepared in a pleasing enough format, or sophisticated enough for personal tastes is something I have a difficult time excusing. As an occasional thing, it's something that warrant's a reprimand or criticism. When it's habitual however, situations such as the above (OP) occur.

Edit: It seems I overlooked one last part of your post. I'd hate for you to feel I ignored it, so I'll add that in here.

And if a person gets discouraged and feels unwelcome because one person didn't accept their idea... then the whole system has failed them. Where was everyone else? Knights? Apprentices? It should never, and is never, up to one person to determine whether or not people are welcome. Therefore it feels to me more like Kyrin is a scapegoat.


I suppose that could go both ways.

We could apply it to Kyrin feeling unwelcome because her ideas and conduct/approach weren't accepted by the membership or leadership within the Temple. We could also apply it to the multitude of past, present, and potential members who have either discontinued activity within the temple's forums, chose to limit their investment and participation here, or chose to abandon TOTJO entirely.

Many Knights, Apprentices, and members have spoken out on both sides of this issue; both in support of Kyrin, as well as against her. Again, referencing the above statement about U.S freedom of speech & public law; being that we are a church and place of worship, we are subject to different legal restrictions and expectations about how we operate.

Philosophically, I don't have an argument as to why organizations and governments should be allowed to operate within dictatorships or other tyrannically governments. Additionally, I am not in argument with you where it concerns that point.

Practically however. Not only is it not within only one person's power to ban or expel membership within the temple, it never has been. Prior to Knights being granted the privilege to vote on matters such as above; the council was relegated such decisions and voted on them accordingly. Even in that case, there were still multiple individuals weighing in on such decisions.

However, even if it was one members sole responsibility and function to decide who to ban or expel from Temple membership, they are still within their rights to do so. Just as the (catholic) pope is the highest tier of said belief structure, if TOTJO decided that Br. John, or other council members were to be relegated the sole and primary power of banning or excommunicating membership - they would be entirely within their rights to do so. On top of that, there would be absolutely no valid argument (legally) permissible as to why they should then be subject to charges or other proceedings for those decisions.

Remember the doctrine; embody the code.
Live the creed; embrace the 16 teachings.
Honor your vows.
Last edit: 13 Jun 2019 23:48 by Kohadre.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Neaj Pa Bol

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
14 Jun 2019 00:47 #339706 by Carlos.Martinez3
If you like ... again this thread was a option granted to A past member to leave a goodbye statement - prolly not what it has become.

www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/open-...d-free-choice#339705

Create your own post if you like about anything you like. It ain’t hard. Feel free to join others. Just a invitation really nothing more...

Contact The Clergy
Pastor of Temple of the Jedi Order
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
The Block
Build, not tear down.
Nosce te ipsum / Cerca trova

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
14 Jun 2019 03:36 #339711 by Proteus

that begs the question of what this church would become if we all just slapped eachother on the back and agreed all of the time without questions or encouraging others to question/research for themselves..
Is that what we want Totjo to be?


What happened here had nothing to do with someone agreeing or disagreeing. It had to do with a level of very persistent and aggressive approaches, specifically for sport debate, toward people who were not here for such things, on top of numerous other issues, all of which had been pardoned again and again over years despite many people complaining as to why that is not fair to those who had been previously banned for less. Nobody is saying it is wrong to have a debates or questions. It's a matter of having a history of unnecessarily aggressive engagements which repeat again and again after numerous time-outs, warnings, mentoring, and walk-aways from those who have been offended by it again and again.

It seems that I know that I know.
What I would like to see is the 'I' that knows me when I know that I know that I know.
- Alan Watts
The following user(s) said Thank You: Neaj Pa Bol, Carlos.Martinez3, Kelrax Lorcken, KarrMando

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: KobosBrick