Hi Whitty
I kind of understand where you are coming from when you say you reject “fluffy, overblown expression” because I also feel somewhat uncomfortable in the presence of people who are a bit, as Fractelle so beautifully put, ‘mawkish’. Perhaps for that reason I have a dislike of most poetry unless it’s funny and light.

But I do like the topic, and spirituality, even of the atheist kind, has everything to with emotions, philosophy, and self-realisation rather than with intellectual issues.
It doesn’t help that spirituality is a vague term and therefore people, who like this topic, need to be able to describe what it specifically means to them.
There doesn’t seem to be an alternative way to discuss spiritual feelings without making use of somewhat fluffy language to be able to describe what the term ‘spirituality’ means to them.

I sincerely appreciate your opinion, but you’ve got to live and let live as well and as Fractelle says, we sometimes just need to change the channel if we don’t like the program.

I notice some of Fractelle, CJ Morgan and my own posts have been deleted. Not sure whos handy work it is, but I'm glad there isn't any more posts about my mother on OLO.

BTW: I think for transparency the system should display a note in place of the deleted posts (and who requested them to be deleted) after they are removed.

I was on my way out of OLO for good anyway, but with this further risk of me/my arguments being misrepresented or misconstrued by the missing content I am even happier with my decision. I wanted to advise others of this problem though.

I deleted the posts Whitty, and sent you an email telling you so at 1:16 p.m., just more than an hour before you made this post.

We used to put a note when we made a deletion, but for reasons of economy we don't anymore. When we did make a note we didn't reveal who had complained. That is irrelevant as the decision to remove is made by the editorial team here - primarily me.

I thought you would have been happy that content critical of you had been removed.

For the record, I thought that the posts constituted flaming. Best way of dealing with flames is not to flame back, but to complain to the moderator to take action.

I have had wonderful discussions about philosophy, religion, art and spirituality with people of every gender. When I made my observation that more females than males had made more posts pertaining to the spiritual – it was simply that, an observation I did not mean it as a criticism. I never intended my discussion to be a gender war and that I regret any comment that may have inferred such.

I am aware some people see things in a very ‘us and them’ fashion. I feel sorry for them and wonder just where they do find joy – it must be difficult to be constantly at war with so many differing opinions. I have no doubt that there are things in Whitty’s life that make him happy and content.

As Vonnegut would say, “so it goes”.

Cleverly worded Fractelle. I feel sorry for you too. Yes I know I said I am leaving OLO, but I'm sure you find it more satisfying that I have taken the bait.

Re the earlier contribution by David Boaz

David wrote: "In Biblical terms, the central issue is nothing about control, power or status in male female relationships.. its about 2 complementary identities coming in from the cold of alienation from God, and rejoining that beautiful fellowship that can only be understood by those who have savoured it. Yes.. God does place a structure in the male female marriage relationship. But that structure is in marriage."

Permit me to add a few additional comments. When God created men and women as "complementary" he also created two other kinds of human beings (though the holy books are by and large generally quite ignorant of this one).

He created men who have the capacity to love one another. He did this deliberately - to demonstrate that man's innate tendency to murder his brother was not the only option. On the contrary, men can love and care for one another just as men and women do, and their relationship is in no manner inferior to that of "marriage". Such men are peaceable, not warlike, artistic and sensitive, not brutish or unfeeling. They are spiritual while not necessarily being religious, and by their presence in society God made the world a far, far better place than it would otherwise have been.

He also created women with the capacity to love other women, to demonstrate that women do not have to be chattels and slaves to men, but they can manage their own lives and determine their own destiny without men determining it for them. Such women are strong, self-determined, tenacious and demanding of respect for who they are in their own right. They were given to the world as a message to all other women that life has far, far more to it than being a mere receptacle for a man's semen. By their presence also, the world is a much better place than it would otherwise have been.

That's all. I trust it makes sense?