Reply #42: Still cant answer a single pertinent question re your own pov?

[ironbark]

That’s ok…I’ve done enough psychology to understand ‘withholding’.
I’m asking a question and your withholding the answer…that gives you a minimal sense of power and control over the argument and decreases the risk of looking even sillier with lame answer.

“1. The links you have provided show exactly how you are misconstruing my arguments….”

You have this compulsion for unfounded unsubstantiated claims and allegations.
Simply saying something does not make it so. To have any credibility at all you need to be able to back up what you claim/assert with provision of example.

You have a great capacity for flinging lame insult and hollow mockery-“full of shit”, “hilarious”, “stupidity”…but you >never< provide the examples that would warrant, justify or even explain your pov.

“…to link to them as some sort of proof of your incredible spin.”

You waste an entire paragraph on insult and calling clear evidence “misconstruing” and “spin” but cannot provide a single word of example as to how you have been misrepresented.
Why is that?
Because, now as before, you have >nothing< to validate your assertions.

The links provided prove beyond doubt exactly what you said and in what context.

“2. I happen to know many counselors, behavioral therapists, relationship therapists, and standard psychologists. Every one of them required training, and every one of them is quite adamant about the need for a professional demeanor and distance in their job.”

Such is your familiarity that you cannot correctly spell Counsellor or behavioural.
As has already been pointed out- In many countries and states it is possible to set ones self up as a Counsellor or Therapist without formal training or minimal training. The law is far less strict in this regard than it is for Psychology/ Psychiatry.

“a professional demeanor and distance in their job.” Refers to professional boundaries and the nature of the therapeutic relationship. Once again you cut/ ignore what has already been said and repeat what has already been established.
For some professions (Psychiatrists/Psychologists) the boundaries and therapeutic relationship are ridged and distant for others (and depending on their client group) the boundaries and ‘distancing’ is far less ridged.

Once more you display zero interest in understanding or exploring professional boundaries beyond your black and white mindset. You cannot even conceptualise Youth Counsellors with much broader professional parameters.
Go watch a couple of episodes of ‘Brat Camp’ or even ‘Patch Adams’ and come back with some glimmer of a humanised welfare practice that does not always demand “distance”


“Your example of a child who requires a closer relationship is a red herring, because while there might be someone in the orphanage who provides that familial closeness, it should never be the counselor whose job it is to guide that child in the proper direction.”

Youth Workers/Youth Counsellors are often required to work with a far greater degree of “familial closeness”…it is an essential aspect of the therapeutic relationship and the surrogate family/community. When the State or Church Agency becomes the surrogate parent the child is not brought to adulthood by professional clinical DSM diagnosis or exclusively “professional demeanor and distance in their job”.
Some one is going to have to hug and comfort the child when hurt/sad and/or hold them down or back when furious/angry…those “familial” tasks can fall to the Residential Worker, Counsellor or Supervisor at hand.

I fully understand you have no interest whatsoever in exploring or understanding these dynamics and simply wish to find the next avenue to slag and slander >anything< remotely associated with religion.


Your next gambit is straw man false psychic projection-
“Oh, but next you'll tell me...”
Then having falsely projected you pronounce sentence on your own fabrication-
“oi. You really do love smokescreens and falsehoods.”

“3. Everybody makes simple spelling mistakes….”

Yea. And most people have the decency to ignore them and focus on the point/ issue/ argument. You however demonstrate anal retentive obsession with spelling/grammar and engage thereby in flame itself contains spelling errors.
Rank hypocrisy.


“… which allows you to take complex sentences and paragraphs and turn them into "the Fire Brigade is responsible for defending children against child abuse."

LOL!

What is “complex” about your clear rejection of schools being in the front line protecting against child abuse and your succinct declaration that the “REAL” protective agencies in this regard included the Fire Brigade?


“It would be obvious to anyone with a middle-school equivalency that your assertion is NOT what I said”

It IS what you said. Here it is, clear as day, yet again-

“…the REAL role that protective agencies like police, fire, and EMT organizations’.



You are desperately avoiding and rejecting >any< role or recognition of church funded Schools and Agencies in the front line protection of children from abuse and you are allocating the “REAL” protective role to “police, fire, and EMT”

That is just another example of fanatical and obsessive anti religious bigotry.

“4. Finally, that link I showed you isn't someone else's POV, it's yours…”

Lying cant get more blatant than that.

There are at least three posts of mine on this board praising the charitable works of the Sisters of the Order Of Perpetual Indulgence
http://www.universaljoy.com.au/MG2010.htm

And you lie and falsify that there is any “comparison” or link between anything I have posted and the crap you linked to-
“…there is no meaningful public charity work performed by homosexual groups”

You have sunk to depths of deception and falsification hitherto unseen on this board.

No wonder you flagged your retreat before spewing it up…because you certainly cant stand and defend it.