Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

HK: "OBEY" MAYBURY'S TWO "SPIRITUAL LAWS"

Expand Messages
  • prometheus_973
    In the Spiritual Duties of the ECK High Initiate Klemp suggests that the ECK High Initiate... Obeys the Two Spiritual Laws discovered by Maybury: Do all you
    Message 1 of 5 , Jun 13, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      In the "Spiritual Duties of the ECK High Initiate"
      Klemp suggests that the ECK High Initiate...

      "Obeys the Two Spiritual Laws discovered by
      Maybury:

      Do all you have agreed to do, and

      Do Not encroach on other persons
      or their property"


      Doesn't Klemp "encroach" upon ECKists'
      property (money)? Sure, all the time!
      Why require (recommended) membership donations?

      Does Klemp (the LEM/Mahanta) Protect and
      Heal ECKists as he claims? No! HK (the LEM)
      doesn't do what he has agreed to do! Klemp
      always side-steps the issue by placing authority
      (and attention) onto the "inner" Mahanta! Yet,
      the 12th Plane LEM should have the ability
      to Protect and Heal (at least) his chelas! But,
      it doesn't happen! More promises are deferred
      to the elusive Mahanta via imagination and hope!

      Since when did Maybury, who was born a few
      years after Klemp, reach ECK Master status?
      How did these become "Spiritual Laws?" Don't
      these two views/rules/laws pertain to the Lower
      Planes and are, therefore, within the domain
      of KAL!

      Why didn't LEM Klemp write or "discover" these
      so-called "Spiritual Laws" before Maybury did?
      Actually, Klemp promoted these Laws of Man
      to "Spiritual" status! So, once again, why didn't
      Klemp "discover" and write down these important
      laws/opinions before Maybury?

      HK's a poser and a phony! Klemp can't even write
      poetry to equal Rumi's! And, Rumi's poetry was
      directed toward and inspired by a 4th Plane God
      (i.e. Kal/Satan). ["Autobiography of a Modern
      Prophet" page 385].

      Below is an Amazon review of Maybury's book, What
      ever Happened to Justice? Klemp has suggested that
      ECKists read this book. However, the more one reads
      (and listens) the more one can see Klemp's (LEM)
      flawed and limited thinking. He is more a KAL agent
      than a "Master!"

      **************************************************
      "Flawed but helpful enlightenment thinking--

      Mr. Maybury does a wonderful job of explaining
      the differences between natural "scientific" law
      (also known as "common law") which can be
      discovered because it is universal and given by
      God, and resides universally in the hearts of men,
      and "political law" which is created by men and
      which almost always violates Maybury's Two
      Laws (which form the basis of scientific common law):

      1) Do all you have agreed to do; and

      2) Do not encroach upon another's person or property.

      Maybury then illustrates how much of the current
      social and even economic problems we now experience
      are due to the erosion of natural common law. I agree
      with him wholeheartedly.

      I subtract one star for the following reason: Maybury
      is close to greater light, but loses it by embracing the
      enlightenment thinking that exalts the reason of man
      to such a degree that it shares the throne or even eclipses
      the acknowlegment of God. When we forget God, and cease
      to be grateful, our downfall is assured. I believe
      enlightenment thinking was our first unwitting step down
      as a nation. The two laws which Mr. Maybury advances
      are very good ones, but they are less than the two laws
      upon which all else hangs:

      1) Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul
      and strength; and

      2) Love your neighbor as yourself.

      I do not think Mr. Maybury has forgotten God, and
      he cannot be accused of being ungrateful - for he
      loves this country and recognizes our unique blessings,
      but his enlightenment thinking is slightly off the mark.
      As an example of this, I cite Mr. Maybury's correct
      assertion that right-to-life questions are of utmost
      importance - as the ultimate violation of encroachment
      against another's person. However, and true to his
      enlightenment thinking, he grounds our natural right
      to life in our intelligence (which is surely one of the
      attributes of God we share, but which is fallen).
      Logically, Maybury goes on to question what degree
      of intelligence would be required before our right
      to life would no longer be protected by common law!

      I quote from page 117 of Maybury's book: "Rights
      seem to be attached to intelligence. But we don't
      know what level of intelligence, or how to measure
      it. To be within the protection of the law, how smart
      is smart enough?" This sums up the weakness of the
      book to my mind. I would argue that the right to life
      is not grounded in our intelligence, but in our humanity
      created in the image of God.

      Incidentally, I am a lawyer and also the mother of
      a child who suffers from autism. Under Maybury's
      reasoning, my child's right to life is more questionable
      than his siblings and mine because of his reduced
      mental capacity. If I have learned anything from my
      autistic son, it is that human life is valuable because
      it is made in God's image, even though the image
      is marred by our fallen state."

      ******************************************************

      It's really no wonder that Klemp would latch onto
      something like these "Two Laws" since HK's also
      quoted Paul Harvey and other conservatives and
      isolationists in the past. However, Klemp's opinions
      tend to lack empathy even though he talks of love.
      The difference is Klemp merely talks the talk without
      walking the walk. Klemp's nasty words and actions,
      as well as, fear/control tactics toward ECKists (and
      others) speaks volumes as he too "misses the mark!"

      Here are two Wikipedia links that explain Maybury's
      stand on "Common Law" and "Austrian Economics."

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Law

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_economics

      Prometheus
    • prometheus_973
      Hello All, How many ECK Masters have created Spiritual Laws? I don t know of any except for Richard Maybury! Maybe RM is just an honorary EK Master like
      Message 2 of 5 , Jun 19, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello All,
        How many ECK Masters have created "Spiritual
        Laws?" I don't know of any except for Richard
        Maybury! Maybe RM is just an "honorary" EK Master
        like all of those people in history that Twitchell
        claimed were EK Masters! Still, it is interesting
        that Klemp would give a non-ECKist such an
        honor by making his two laws into ECK "Spiritual
        Laws" for the H.I.s to "obey." And, it's even more
        interesting since Maybury is a baby-boomer (born
        1946) because Klemp has a dislike for baby-boomers
        as a whole!

        However, it could be that Maybury is a Full ECK Master!
        Who else could have created these two ECK Spiritual
        Laws if not a 12th Initiate and ECK Master! Does this
        mean that Maybury is the Co-LEM? At least he's male
        and, therefore, fulfills this qualification too! Perhaps
        Richard Maybury should be the next Mahanta as well!

        Prometheus

        prometheus wrote:

        HK: "OBEY" MAYBURY'S TWO "SPIRITUAL LAWS!"

        > In the "Spiritual Duties of the ECK High Initiate"
        > Klemp suggests that the ECK High Initiate...
        >
        > "Obeys the Two Spiritual Laws discovered by
        > Maybury:
        >
        > Do all you have agreed to do, and
        >
        > Do Not encroach on other persons
        > or their property"
        >
        >
        > Doesn't Klemp "encroach" upon ECKists'
        > property (money)? Sure, all the time!
        > Why require (recommended) membership donations?
        >
        > Does Klemp (the LEM/Mahanta) Protect and
        > Heal ECKists as he claims? No! HK (the LEM)
        > doesn't do what he has agreed to do! Klemp
        > always side-steps the issue by placing authority
        > (and attention) onto the "inner" Mahanta! Yet,
        > the 12th Plane LEM should have the ability
        > to Protect and Heal (at least) his chelas! But,
        > it doesn't happen! More promises are deferred
        > to the elusive Mahanta via imagination and hope!
        >
        > Since when did Maybury, who was born a few
        > years after Klemp, reach ECK Master status?
        > How did these become "Spiritual Laws?" Don't
        > these two views/rules/laws pertain to the Lower
        > Planes and are, therefore, within the domain
        > of KAL!
        >
        > Why didn't LEM Klemp write or "discover" these
        > so-called "Spiritual Laws" before Maybury did?
        > Actually, Klemp promoted these Laws of Man
        > to "Spiritual" status! So, once again, why didn't
        > Klemp "discover" and write down these important
        > laws/opinions before Maybury?
        >
        > HK's a poser and a phony! Klemp can't even write
        > poetry to equal Rumi's! And, Rumi's poetry was
        > directed toward and inspired by a 4th Plane God
        > (i.e. Kal/Satan). ["Autobiography of a Modern
        > Prophet" page 385].
        >
        > Below is an Amazon review of Maybury's book, What
        > ever Happened to Justice? Klemp has suggested that
        > ECKists read this book. However, the more one reads
        > (and listens) the more one can see Klemp's (LEM)
        > flawed and limited thinking. He is more a KAL agent
        > than a "Master!"
        >
        > **************************************************
        > "Flawed but helpful enlightenment thinking--
        >
        > Mr. Maybury does a wonderful job of explaining
        > the differences between natural "scientific" law
        > (also known as "common law") which can be
        > discovered because it is universal and given by
        > God, and resides universally in the hearts of men,
        > and "political law" which is created by men and
        > which almost always violates Maybury's Two
        > Laws (which form the basis of scientific common law):
        >
        > 1) Do all you have agreed to do; and
        >
        > 2) Do not encroach upon another's person or property.
        >
        > Maybury then illustrates how much of the current
        > social and even economic problems we now experience
        > are due to the erosion of natural common law. I agree
        > with him wholeheartedly.
        >
        > I subtract one star for the following reason: Maybury
        > is close to greater light, but loses it by embracing the
        > enlightenment thinking that exalts the reason of man
        > to such a degree that it shares the throne or even eclipses
        > the acknowlegment of God. When we forget God, and cease
        > to be grateful, our downfall is assured. I believe
        > enlightenment thinking was our first unwitting step down
        > as a nation. The two laws which Mr. Maybury advances
        > are very good ones, but they are less than the two laws
        > upon which all else hangs:
        >
        > 1) Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul
        > and strength; and
        >
        > 2) Love your neighbor as yourself.
        >
        > I do not think Mr. Maybury has forgotten God, and
        > he cannot be accused of being ungrateful - for he
        > loves this country and recognizes our unique blessings,
        > but his enlightenment thinking is slightly off the mark.
        > As an example of this, I cite Mr. Maybury's correct
        > assertion that right-to-life questions are of utmost
        > importance - as the ultimate violation of encroachment
        > against another's person. However, and true to his
        > enlightenment thinking, he grounds our natural right
        > to life in our intelligence (which is surely one of the
        > attributes of God we share, but which is fallen).
        > Logically, Maybury goes on to question what degree
        > of intelligence would be required before our right
        > to life would no longer be protected by common law!
        >
        > I quote from page 117 of Maybury's book: "Rights
        > seem to be attached to intelligence. But we don't
        > know what level of intelligence, or how to measure
        > it. To be within the protection of the law, how smart
        > is smart enough?" This sums up the weakness of the
        > book to my mind. I would argue that the right to life
        > is not grounded in our intelligence, but in our humanity
        > created in the image of God.
        >
        > Incidentally, I am a lawyer and also the mother of
        > a child who suffers from autism. Under Maybury's
        > reasoning, my child's right to life is more questionable
        > than his siblings and mine because of his reduced
        > mental capacity. If I have learned anything from my
        > autistic son, it is that human life is valuable because
        > it is made in God's image, even though the image
        > is marred by our fallen state."
        >
        > ******************************************************
        >
        > It's really no wonder that Klemp would latch onto
        > something like these "Two Laws" since HK's also
        > quoted Paul Harvey and other conservatives and
        > isolationists in the past. However, Klemp's opinions
        > tend to lack empathy even though he talks of love.
        > The difference is Klemp merely talks the talk without
        > walking the walk. Klemp's nasty words and actions,
        > as well as, fear/control tactics toward ECKists (and
        > others) speaks volumes as he too "misses the mark!"
        >
        > Here are two Wikipedia links that explain Maybury's
        > stand on "Common Law" and "Austrian Economics."
        >
        > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Law
        >
        > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_economics
        >
        > Prometheus
        >
      • prometheus_973
        Both Klemp and Maybury Miss the Mark! Baby-Boomer Maybury discovered these Two ECK Spiritual Laws before LEM Harry Klemp! Why is that? Are these two laws
        Message 3 of 5 , Jun 21, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Both Klemp and Maybury Miss the Mark!

          Baby-Boomer Maybury "discovered" these Two
          ECK Spiritual Laws before LEM Harry Klemp!
          Why is that?

          Are these two "laws" by Maybury really all that
          "spiritual?"

          Isn't the first (1) of Maybury's & Klemp's two (DO)
          "laws" more KAL like (lower plane) in nature, thus,
          involving things or words and acts of a generalized
          nature!

          Where's the "LOVE the Lord your GOD with all your
          Heart, Mind, Soul, and Strength?!

          And, isn't the second of Maybury's & Klemp's two
          "laws" a rewrite of "Love your neighbor as yourself,"
          BUT without the LOVE!

          Actually, neither of Maybury's & Klemp's Two Spiritual
          Laws include the word LOVE! They begin with DO and
          DO NOT!

          Klemp does a lot of talk about love, but look at the Two
          Spiritual Laws HK has adopted from Maybury!

          It's no wonder (to me) that KLEMP is even more clueless
          than Maybury! ECKists need to believe in something,
          but is Klemp the best they can do! Pitiful! WAKE UP!

          It's okay to question and disagree with what one hears,
          sees, and reads regarding Klemp's leadership views!
          Sometimes "Change" must first come from the individual
          ECKist and Not from the entrenched views of those in
          the upper echelons of the Hierarchy (i.e. pecking order,
          multi-level marketing (ziggurat) pyramid). This is, also,
          why many EK Leaders have rebelled and disregard the
          ESC/HK Guidelines!

          Maybury/Klemp:

          1) DO all you have agreed to DO; and

          2) DO NOT encroach upon another's person or property.

          ----------------VERSUS---------------

          1) LOVE the Lord your GOD with all your Heart, Mind,
          Soul and Strength; and

          2) LOVE your neighbor as yourSelf.



          prometheus wrote:

          ---Maybury Must Be An ECK Master!---

          Hello All,
          How many ECK Masters have created "Spiritual
          Laws?" I don't know of any except for Richard
          Maybury! Maybe RM is just an "honorary" EK Master
          like all of those people in history that Twitchell
          claimed were EK Masters! Still, it is interesting
          that Klemp would give a non-ECKist such an
          honor by making his two laws into ECK "Spiritual
          Laws" for the H.I.s to "obey." And, it's even more
          interesting since Maybury is a baby-boomer (born
          1946) because Klemp has a dislike for baby-boomers
          as a whole!

          However, it could be that Maybury is a Full ECK Master!
          Who else could have created these two ECK Spiritual
          Laws if not a 12th Initiate and ECK Master! Does this
          mean that Maybury is the Co-LEM? At least he's male
          and, therefore, fulfills this qualification too! Perhaps
          Richard Maybury should be the next Mahanta as well!

          Prometheus

          prometheus wrote:

          HK: H.I.s are to "OBEY MAYBURY'S TWO SPIRITUAL LAWS!"

          ***In the "Spiritual Duties of the ECK High Initiate"
          Klemp suggests that the ECK High Initiate...

          "Obeys the Two Spiritual Laws discovered by
          Maybury:

          Do all you have agreed to do, and

          Do Not encroach on other persons
          or their property"

          Below is an AMAZON review of Maybury's book, What
          ever Happened to Justice? Klemp has suggested that
          ECKists read this book. However, the more one reads
          (and listens) the more one can see Klemp's (LEM)
          flawed and limited thinking. He is more a KAL agent
          than a "Master!"

          **************************************************
          "Flawed but helpful enlightenment thinking--

          Mr. Maybury does a wonderful job of explaining
          the differences between natural "scientific" law
          (also known as "common law") which can be
          discovered because it is universal and given by
          God, and resides universally in the hearts of men,
          and "political law" which is created by men and
          which almost always violates Maybury's Two
          Laws (which form the basis of scientific common law):

          1) Do all you have agreed to do; and

          2) Do not encroach upon another's person or property.

          Maybury then illustrates how much of the current
          social and even economic problems we now experience
          are due to the erosion of natural common law. I agree
          with him wholeheartedly.

          I subtract one star for the following reason: Maybury
          is close to greater light, but loses it by embracing the
          enlightenment thinking that exalts the reason of man
          to such a degree that it shares the throne or even eclipses
          the acknowlegment of God. When we forget God, and cease
          to be grateful, our downfall is assured. I believe
          enlightenment thinking was our first unwitting step down
          as a nation. The two laws which Mr. Maybury advances
          are very good ones, but they are less than the two laws
          upon which all else hangs:

          1) Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul
          and strength; and

          2) Love your neighbor as yourself.

          I do not think Mr. Maybury has forgotten God, and
          he cannot be accused of being ungrateful - for he
          loves this country and recognizes our unique blessings,
          but his enlightenment thinking is slightly off the mark.
          As an example of this, I cite Mr. Maybury's correct
          assertion that right-to-life questions are of utmost
          importance - as the ultimate violation of encroachment
          against another's person. However, and true to his
          enlightenment thinking, he grounds our natural right
          to life in our intelligence (which is surely one of the
          attributes of God we share, but which is fallen).
          Logically, Maybury goes on to question what degree
          of intelligence would be required before our right
          to life would no longer be protected by common law!

          I quote from page 117 of Maybury's book: "Rights
          seem to be attached to intelligence. But we don't
          know what level of intelligence, or how to measure
          it. To be within the protection of the law, how smart
          is smart enough?" This sums up the weakness of the
          book to my mind. I would argue that the right to life
          is not grounded in our intelligence, but in our humanity
          created in the image of God.

          Incidentally, I am a lawyer and also the mother of
          a child who suffers from autism. Under Maybury's
          reasoning, my child's right to life is more questionable
          than his siblings and mine because of his reduced
          mental capacity. If I have learned anything from my
          autistic son, it is that human life is valuable because
          it is made in God's image, even though the image
          is marred by our fallen state."

          ******************************************************

          It's really no wonder that Klemp would latch onto
          something like these "Two Laws" since HK's also
          quoted Paul Harvey and other conservatives and
          isolationists in the past. However, Klemp's opinions
          tend to lack empathy even though he talks of love.
          The difference is Klemp merely talks the talk without
          walking the walk. Klemp's nasty words and actions,
          as well as, fear/control tactics toward ECKists (and
          others) speaks volumes as he too "misses the mark!"

          Here are two Wikipedia links that explain Maybury's
          stand on "Common Law" and "Austrian Economics."

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Law

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_economics

          Prometheus
        • Andrew
          So true...Klemp has run outof ideas and has actively promoted flawed thinking from other s for a long time. There is nothing here to learn from. At least
          Message 4 of 5 , Jun 21, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            So true...Klemp has run outof ideas and has actively promoted flawed
            thinking from other's for a long time. There is nothing here to learn
            from. At least Darwin could pen a few good lines himself, but all
            have been easily surpassed by simple and pure thought stripped of the
            dogma by writers like Eckhart Tolle and his comtemporaries...
            After of 20 years in Eckankar I look back and see it as a step to
            where I am now but I wince when I see the brainwashing of current
            members...


            --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "prometheus_973"
            <prometheus_973@...> wrote:
            >
            > Both Klemp and Maybury Miss the Mark!
            >
            > Baby-Boomer Maybury "discovered" these Two
            > ECK Spiritual Laws before LEM Harry Klemp!
            > Why is that?
            >
            > Are these two "laws" by Maybury really all that
            > "spiritual?"
            >
            > Isn't the first (1) of Maybury's & Klemp's two (DO)
            > "laws" more KAL like (lower plane) in nature, thus,
            > involving things or words and acts of a generalized
            > nature!
            >
            > Where's the "LOVE the Lord your GOD with all your
            > Heart, Mind, Soul, and Strength?!
            >
            > And, isn't the second of Maybury's & Klemp's two
            > "laws" a rewrite of "Love your neighbor as yourself,"
            > BUT without the LOVE!
            >
            > Actually, neither of Maybury's & Klemp's Two Spiritual
            > Laws include the word LOVE! They begin with DO and
            > DO NOT!
            >
            > Klemp does a lot of talk about love, but look at the Two
            > Spiritual Laws HK has adopted from Maybury!
            >
            > It's no wonder (to me) that KLEMP is even more clueless
            > than Maybury! ECKists need to believe in something,
            > but is Klemp the best they can do! Pitiful! WAKE UP!
            >
            > It's okay to question and disagree with what one hears,
            > sees, and reads regarding Klemp's leadership views!
            > Sometimes "Change" must first come from the individual
            > ECKist and Not from the entrenched views of those in
            > the upper echelons of the Hierarchy (i.e. pecking order,
            > multi-level marketing (ziggurat) pyramid). This is, also,
            > why many EK Leaders have rebelled and disregard the
            > ESC/HK Guidelines!
            >
            > Maybury/Klemp:
            >
            > 1) DO all you have agreed to DO; and
            >
            > 2) DO NOT encroach upon another's person or property.
            >
            > ----------------VERSUS---------------
            >
            > 1) LOVE the Lord your GOD with all your Heart, Mind,
            > Soul and Strength; and
            >
            > 2) LOVE your neighbor as yourSelf.
            >
            >
            >
            > prometheus wrote:
            >
            > ---Maybury Must Be An ECK Master!---
            >
            > Hello All,
            > How many ECK Masters have created "Spiritual
            > Laws?" I don't know of any except for Richard
            > Maybury! Maybe RM is just an "honorary" EK Master
            > like all of those people in history that Twitchell
            > claimed were EK Masters! Still, it is interesting
            > that Klemp would give a non-ECKist such an
            > honor by making his two laws into ECK "Spiritual
            > Laws" for the H.I.s to "obey." And, it's even more
            > interesting since Maybury is a baby-boomer (born
            > 1946) because Klemp has a dislike for baby-boomers
            > as a whole!
            >
            > However, it could be that Maybury is a Full ECK Master!
            > Who else could have created these two ECK Spiritual
            > Laws if not a 12th Initiate and ECK Master! Does this
            > mean that Maybury is the Co-LEM? At least he's male
            > and, therefore, fulfills this qualification too! Perhaps
            > Richard Maybury should be the next Mahanta as well!
            >
            > Prometheus
            >
            > prometheus wrote:
            >
            > HK: H.I.s are to "OBEY MAYBURY'S TWO SPIRITUAL LAWS!"
            >
            > ***In the "Spiritual Duties of the ECK High Initiate"
            > Klemp suggests that the ECK High Initiate...
            >
            > "Obeys the Two Spiritual Laws discovered by
            > Maybury:
            >
            > Do all you have agreed to do, and
            >
            > Do Not encroach on other persons
            > or their property"
            >
            > Below is an AMAZON review of Maybury's book, What
            > ever Happened to Justice? Klemp has suggested that
            > ECKists read this book. However, the more one reads
            > (and listens) the more one can see Klemp's (LEM)
            > flawed and limited thinking. He is more a KAL agent
            > than a "Master!"
            >
            > **************************************************
            > "Flawed but helpful enlightenment thinking--
            >
            > Mr. Maybury does a wonderful job of explaining
            > the differences between natural "scientific" law
            > (also known as "common law") which can be
            > discovered because it is universal and given by
            > God, and resides universally in the hearts of men,
            > and "political law" which is created by men and
            > which almost always violates Maybury's Two
            > Laws (which form the basis of scientific common law):
            >
            > 1) Do all you have agreed to do; and
            >
            > 2) Do not encroach upon another's person or property.
            >
            > Maybury then illustrates how much of the current
            > social and even economic problems we now experience
            > are due to the erosion of natural common law. I agree
            > with him wholeheartedly.
            >
            > I subtract one star for the following reason: Maybury
            > is close to greater light, but loses it by embracing the
            > enlightenment thinking that exalts the reason of man
            > to such a degree that it shares the throne or even eclipses
            > the acknowlegment of God. When we forget God, and cease
            > to be grateful, our downfall is assured. I believe
            > enlightenment thinking was our first unwitting step down
            > as a nation. The two laws which Mr. Maybury advances
            > are very good ones, but they are less than the two laws
            > upon which all else hangs:
            >
            > 1) Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul
            > and strength; and
            >
            > 2) Love your neighbor as yourself.
            >
            > I do not think Mr. Maybury has forgotten God, and
            > he cannot be accused of being ungrateful - for he
            > loves this country and recognizes our unique blessings,
            > but his enlightenment thinking is slightly off the mark.
            > As an example of this, I cite Mr. Maybury's correct
            > assertion that right-to-life questions are of utmost
            > importance - as the ultimate violation of encroachment
            > against another's person. However, and true to his
            > enlightenment thinking, he grounds our natural right
            > to life in our intelligence (which is surely one of the
            > attributes of God we share, but which is fallen).
            > Logically, Maybury goes on to question what degree
            > of intelligence would be required before our right
            > to life would no longer be protected by common law!
            >
            > I quote from page 117 of Maybury's book: "Rights
            > seem to be attached to intelligence. But we don't
            > know what level of intelligence, or how to measure
            > it. To be within the protection of the law, how smart
            > is smart enough?" This sums up the weakness of the
            > book to my mind. I would argue that the right to life
            > is not grounded in our intelligence, but in our humanity
            > created in the image of God.
            >
            > Incidentally, I am a lawyer and also the mother of
            > a child who suffers from autism. Under Maybury's
            > reasoning, my child's right to life is more questionable
            > than his siblings and mine because of his reduced
            > mental capacity. If I have learned anything from my
            > autistic son, it is that human life is valuable because
            > it is made in God's image, even though the image
            > is marred by our fallen state."
            >
            > ******************************************************
            >
            > It's really no wonder that Klemp would latch onto
            > something like these "Two Laws" since HK's also
            > quoted Paul Harvey and other conservatives and
            > isolationists in the past. However, Klemp's opinions
            > tend to lack empathy even though he talks of love.
            > The difference is Klemp merely talks the talk without
            > walking the walk. Klemp's nasty words and actions,
            > as well as, fear/control tactics toward ECKists (and
            > others) speaks volumes as he too "misses the mark!"
            >
            > Here are two Wikipedia links that explain Maybury's
            > stand on "Common Law" and "Austrian Economics."
            >
            > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Law
            >
            > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_economics
            >
            > Prometheus
            >
          • prometheus_973
            Hello Andrew, Welcome to the site! Yes, it seems Klemp has/is running out of ideas as to how to promote Twitchell s CONvoluted religion! One would think that
            Message 5 of 5 , Jun 22, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Hello Andrew,
              Welcome to the site! Yes, it seems Klemp
              has/is running out of ideas as to how to
              promote Twitchell's CONvoluted religion!

              One would think that this current negative
              World situation is fertile ground to plant the
              seeds of religious hope/promises for a better
              (after) life to come. Perhaps HK could suggest
              a better use and refocus of one's imagination
              in order to hide and ignore while denying the
              true tests of reality that Klemp, too, has no
              control over! Eckankar and other religions
              should be growing in large numbers due to
              the fearful masses of humanity!

              But, what's the point for these New Age ECKists
              or anyone to continue to believe in Klemp and
              other preachers or religious promises, as well as
              secular leaders?

              All religions (including Eckankar) are redundant,
              and fraudulent. Klemp's old time (Lutheran) religion
              and Christian/Radhasoami/New Age twist of Eckankar
              is a complex blend of more crap! Each on its own
              is crap and blended together is just a more CONfusing
              remake/CONversion of lies, myth, and fantasy.

              Twitchell based Eckankar upon other false teachings
              (Radhasoami and Ruhani Satsang) and the FACT That
              These "Resources" Too Are False, is overlooked by ECKists!

              Instead, Eckankar apologists focus on denying PT's
              plagiarisms Without looking at the Radhasoami/Ruhani
              "Living Master" similarities to that of Eckankar's LEM,
              and to the similar claims/distortions surrounding the
              "Master's" powers, etc.!

              The true seeker eventually realizes that he/she must
              become their own master without the permission
              of others.


              BTW- Here's an interesting article that I saw this
              morning that shows Why people are feeling lost,
              out of control, and fearful of the (very) near future.

              http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20080622/Out.of.Control/

              Prometheus


              Andrew wrote:
              >
              >
              So true...Klemp has run out of ideas and has
              actively promoted flawed thinking from other's
              for a long time. There is nothing here to learn
              from. At least Darwin could pen a few good
              lines himself, but all have been easily surpassed
              by simple and pure thought stripped of the
              dogma by writers like Eckhart Tolle and his
              comtemporaries... After of 20 years in Eckankar
              I look back and see it as a step to where I am
              now but I wince when I see the brainwashing
              of current members...
              >
              >
              prometheus wrote:
              > >
              Both Klemp and Maybury Miss the Mark!
              > >
              Baby-Boomer Maybury "discovered" these Two
              ECK Spiritual Laws before LEM Harry Klemp!
              Why is that?
              > >
              Are these two "laws" by Maybury really all that
              "spiritual?"
              > >
              Isn't the first (1) of Maybury's & Klemp's two (DO)
              "laws" more KAL like (lower plane) in nature, thus,
              involving things or words and acts of a generalized
              nature!
              > >
              Where's the "LOVE the Lord your GOD with all your
              Heart, Mind, Soul, and Strength?!
              > >
              And, isn't the second of Maybury's & Klemp's two
              "laws" a rewrite of "Love your neighbor as yourself,"
              BUT without the LOVE!
              > >
              Actually, neither of Maybury's & Klemp's Two Spiritual
              Laws include the word LOVE! They begin with DO and
              DO NOT!
              > >
              Klemp does a lot of talk about love, but look at the Two
              Spiritual Laws HK has adopted from Maybury!
              > >
              It's no wonder (to me) that KLEMP is even more clueless
              than Maybury! ECKists need to believe in something,
              but is Klemp the best they can do! Pitiful! WAKE UP!
              > >
              It's okay to question and disagree with what one hears,
              sees, and reads regarding Klemp's leadership views!
              Sometimes "Change" must first come from the individual
              ECKist and Not from the entrenched views of those in
              the upper echelons of the Hierarchy (i.e. pecking order,
              multi-level marketing (ziggurat) pyramid). This is, also,
              why many EK Leaders have rebelled and disregard the
              ESC/HK Guidelines!

              Maybury/Klemp:

              1) DO all you have agreed to DO; and

              2) DO NOT encroach upon another's person or property.

              ----------------VERSUS---------------

              1) LOVE the Lord your GOD with all your Heart, Mind,
              Soul and Strength; and

              2) LOVE your neighbor as yourSelf.
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.