Saturday, 21 May 2016

Creation Ministries International and One Critic were Not Clear on Who had been Hateful

I saw this today:

CMI : Wagging a finger at creationists
Published: 21 May 2016

W.L. in US
I was talking about how slow the evolutionary process is compared to time scales that humans are used to dealing with on an open forum recently and you wouldn't believe the hateful replies I got from some creationists.

Keaton Halley
Since we weren’t privy to the conversation, we have no way of knowing whether your assessment of the replies is accurate. Sadly, in our culture, the “hater” charge is often recklessly leveled against those who show the slightest firmness in their response, even if they do so in love, as the Bible defines that term (1 Corinthians 13:4–13). But, if these people were genuinely “hateful”, then they were acting inconsistently with the teachings of Jesus, who told us to love not just our neighbors, but even our enemies (Matt. 5:44).

Close up:

W.L. in US
... on an open forum ...

Keaton Halley
Since we weren’t privy to the conversation, we have no way of knowing ...

Conclusion about forum conversation:
If the forum was open, W.L. could easily have linked to the thread.

Also, he could have documented by copy-pasting the arguments or posts in order, reposting on a blog of his.

That is the best way of knowing who has been hateful, unless anything is forged on his blog, and as long as forum is open and as a comment once in place cannot be edited, that is easy.

If comments can be edited, the one who has been hateful could leave the hateful words there for some time and then edit them away to a civilised comment.

If forum is not open, outsiders cannot check.

Now, there is a thing about the feedback rules of CMI.

They say they don't allow links, won't publish comments having such. Perhaps W.L. could not link or his link was edited out because of that.

Or perhaps some forum admin had deleted the thread (though W. L. doesn't say so).

These problems are one major reason why I try to copy debates I think important, and as important themes are usually not personal - at least not about others involved, or I can anonymise those who could be personally exposed - I am basically giving my adversaries in debates exposure to their ideas.

Only, I am giving it along exposure to my criticism of their ideas.

That is what blogs like these are about, in English and other languages:

HGL's F.B. writings

Correspondence de / of / van Hans Georg Lundahl

And in English alone:

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere

Though on this one I also simply comment on one or several aspects of a video, without first getting into debate, and when I do both on same video, usually it's for different posts.

Similar blogs to this last one are there in French:

Répliques Assorties

And in German:

Antworten nach Sorte

For Swedish and Spanish (best and worst of my usuable languages) I tend to do it on the language specific blog, so far no debate specific blogs for those languages:

Débat om skolpligten
på bloggen På Svenska og på Dansk på Antimodernism

Sostén sectario a Bergoglio en el grupo Exorcismo Católico
en el blogue En lengua romance en Antimodernism y de mis caminaciones

And in case you wonder about morality behind this thing, some few times people mind getting quoted without permission:

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : I was Given Advice …

But if someone thinks of the economic aspect, well, I have thought of being honest about that too:

Copyright issues on blogposts with shared copyright
on Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere

I think my method actually makes for more honesty than the method which either W. L. or possibly even Keaton Halley is using.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
Ember Sabbath
of Pentecost Octave

No comments:

Post a Comment