Have you taken me under your wing? Am I a project of yours? Let me make it as clear as I can to you: If I never read another word that you typed for as long I lived, it wouldn’t affect me in the slightest, except, perhaps, positively.

In fact, you know what? I think that from now on, I won’t even read your posts. Yeah, that’s the ticket! I’m dropping out of “Leo school”

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God almighty, I’m free at least!

Type away, Leo!

Doesn’t all this sound vaguely familiar? A word to the wise is sufficient.

If, as you conservatives like to argue, the only meaning in lanugage is the meaning which the author of that language intends, then you have clearly misconstrued what I wrote.

You say I m wrong for using a tactic other conservatives have used

That’s not even close to what I said. More distortion.

You do, however, employ many common right-wing tactics in your posts. Chief among which is whining about people treating you the way you treat other people. Usually this tactic is used to distract attention from an untenable argument. Boring. Listen, Frank, this is the sound of me declaring victory and going home too.

You say I’m wrong for using a tactic other conservatives have used, when not only is that irrelevant, but I didn’t even do it.

You moved on to other topics. Still awaiting an answer on those.

Keep waiting, if you choose. I did all the answering I’m going to do. If you’re not satified, read them again, until you understand what I wrote.

Then, if you truly have a question, ask away

Until then, quit while I’m ahead.

Yes, which is different from saying you openly advocated the use of religion for this despicable purpose.

I do find that discourse despicable& You just facilitate. In some ways your role here is a bit less despicable than Massie s & but I do find it despicable. You did say that?

Yes, which is different from saying that you yourself are despicable. Sometimes perfectly nice people play despicable roles and say despicable things. It’s up to the people who care about them to point it out so they can mend their ways. I care, Frank. I really do.

My first post, as you can see, did not  Take [you] to task for criticizing Massie s idiocy?: One guy indicts all black conservatives == liberal  fairness

Yes, your first post took Oliver to task for usurping the tried and true right-wing-tactic of argumentum ab extremo. How dare a liberal do that! But I wasn’t asking about your first post. You moved on to other topics. Still awaiting an answer on those.

What s wrong with  despicable ? It s  holier – than – thou ; sanctimonious  to me, anyway.

Physician, heal thyself.

I do find that discourse despicable… You just facilitate. In some ways your role here is a bit less despicable than Massie s … but I do find it despicable. You did say that?

My first post, as you can see, did not “Take [you] to task for criticizing Massie s idiocy?: One guy indicts all black conservatives == liberal  fairness

What’s wrong with “despicable”? It’s “holier – than – thou”; sanctimonious — to me, anyway.

That’s what I’m saying…

I did not say that you suggested that religion be used ‘to keep people in their place’.

I did not say that you were despicable.

I did not suggest that words do not mean things.

Perhaps these distortions are deliberate, perhaps they are a result of careless reading, or perhaps you read carefully but your brain cognitively slotted what I said into the pigeonhole for ‘what liberals usually say’. Those things can happen. In any case, you can come down off your high horse and apply to yourself all those santimonious strictures you normally reserve for us benighted lefties.

But since you feel misrepresented, I’ll go ahead and ask: for what purpose did you come on here, Frank, and take us to task for criticizing Massie’s idiocy? Put it in your own words.

And what’s wrong with “despicable”? Would you prefer “contemptible”? “abominable”? “execrable”? “disgusting”? “revolting”? Take your pick.

That is, like, so 19th Century!

Your posts don’t upset me, Wilbur, I just like things squared away. I don’t liked to be told what my thinking is by other people, and, of course, it’s worse when they’re wrong — surely, you can appreciate that.

And, by the way, I wouldn’t hang my hat on the word “despicable.” It is a very pretentious and overblown word.

Yes, I know you’re wrong, but I’m not calling you despicable. All you lefties on this ‘blog need to understand that words mean things. And, if you’re going to disgree with someone, stick to basics: Don’t say a person is despicaable, for saying something you think they said.

If I say “a”, you can say “saying ‘a’ is despicable.”

If I say “b”, it is intellectually dishonest (and I’m being extremely diplomatic) to say, “You said ‘a’, and saying ‘a’ is despicable.”

By the way, you have tons of company on these threads, but its most common form is, “You’re saying ‘b’, but you’re a right winger, so we know you really mean ‘a’.”

You, Frank, apparently don’t agree with Massie, at least not totally, but instead of joining in the condemnation or finding something else to argue about, here you are tut tut tutting at us out of control liberals who, in your view, are just as off-base as Massie in our own way:

Massie is wrong to think that God did the Africans a  favor by putting them on the . Some of you are wrong to say that since slavery as an institution was wrong, no good came of it.

[btw: aside from the fact that none of actually said that, I have no idea what the link you put in that last sentence was supposed to prove]

In your other posts you exhibit sympathy with Massie’s way of thinking by reminding us sententiously of the inscrutibility of God’s designs, and by listing instances where good things have arisen from bad (Hawaii statehood from Pearl Harbor, etc.). For those of us with any political memory these are unmistakable elements of a tried and true reactionary discourse by which the Haves and their allies misuse religion to keep the Have-nots in their place: accept your lot because it is the lot that God has given you. Accept your suffering because God brings good things from suffering. I do find that discourse despicable. Massie buys into it whole hog. You just facilitate. In some ways your role here is a bit less despicable than Massie’s, and perhaps I should have made that distinction, but I do find it despicable.

Sorry if my posts upset you, Frank, but I say what I think. If it helps any you can understand “I believe…” at the beginning of all my posts, thus producing the exact same thing that you say that you wish I’d said in your last paragraph there. That’s all I’m doing here, saying what I think. If you think I’m wrong you’re free to let me know.

Most frequently, when people point out that past evil has led to good consequences, it is in an attempt to persuade people to put up with present-day evil.

That has nothing whatever to do with me, even if it were true — and I don’t believe it is. But, assuming it were true, why should that mean that that is what I have done. I did not “attempt to persuade [anyone] to put up with present-day evil.”

I can t divine all His purposes, but if He has created me with free will, then surely He wants me to use it to oppose evil when I see it.

That is correct, as far as I know. The question is, What if you can’t change it?

Do you “Curse God and die” as it says in the Book of Job (as you imply you would — “If He doesn t, then I d rather burn in hell forever than have anything to do with Him.”)?

If anything is unnecessarily wrong – headed (”evil” or “despicable” might be too strong — for me, anyway) — it’s the idea that you would take it on yourself to criticize me for what you believe to be true. I’m right here, reading the posts. How difficult would it have been for you to ask, “Are you attempting ‘to persuade people to put up with present-day evil’”?

Even easier: I believe that when people point out that past evil has led to good consequences, it is in an attempt to persuade people to put up with present-day evil. I think that is how Frank has used it in this thread.

That would have shown some intellectual integrity.

But what are the implications for our present-day actions once we recognize this? Would it make God happy if I did not oppose slavery, torture, war, poverty, oppression, on the grounds that He may be creating a future garden of delights from all these sufferings? I can’t divine all His purposes, but if He has created me with free will, then surely He wants me to use it to oppose evil when I see it. If He doesn’t, then I’d rather burn in hell forever than have anything to do with Him.

Most frequently, when people point out that past evil has led to good consequences, it is in an attempt to persuade people to put up with present-day evil. That is how Massie used it, and that is how Frank has used it in this thread.

That is what is despicable.

“I m pretty certain of the right thing to do” means just that — I’m “pretty certain.” Not absolutely certain, but I have a fairly well – working conscience.
It’s following the dictates of my conscience that presents the difficulty,as I alluded to above.

You were this close!

1) You don’t blame Him for everything bad, you thank Him for everything!
2) You are shifting the blame and gratitude — God made the people with free will — we can do whatever we want. God makes it turn out right. Which brings us to the next question.

Which seems like a more sane thought process?
1) If God made the world for Wilbur’s family alone, then what you’re describing might make sense. But, God made the world and everything in it, and everything has to be factored in — Pearl Harbor (Hawaii the 50 th State), the Russian Front (”the Cold War”), Concentration camps (the Holocaust = Israel), the “Red Ball” Express = the fight for Civil Rights, etc., etc., etc.

Quaker in a Basement Says:

That presents a difficult dilemma: what does God want true believers to do in response? How can you know?

Much tougher question: My own philosophy is this: I’m pretty certain of the right thing to do (hit a car in a parking lot — leave a note? y/n Get too much change back in the store — go back in? y/n) but it takes courage.

Sometimes, I grit my teeth and say, “I really don’t want to do this right thing, but I will.” Sometimes, it’s easy. Either way, the time comes, sometimes soon, sometimes not so soon, when something tells me I did the right thing, and God’s will was played out as it should be.

Much tougher question:

You forgot to ask the question. Instead, you gave me a statement: “I m pretty certain of the right thing to do.” Whence the certainty?

I recall a story that was big here in the Chicago media a few years ago: a near-term pregnant woman was murdered, her womb was cut open, and her baby was removed. The baby survived. Now, should we tell that child that she should thank God she was torn from her mother’s womb, because a dead mother’s womb is an awful place to live?

Saying that ‘African-Americans should be grateful for slavery because Africa’s messed up’ is just another lame attempt to try and diminish the stench of slavery in our historical record. It is also a lame attempt to divert attention from slavery’s tenacious legacy.

Just because the propaganda oozes from the mouth of a descendant of slaves doesn’t make it any more credible. After all, nearly every one of the thousands of revolts and mass escapes during the slavery era in the U.S. was betrayed by a ‘loyal’ slave. It should come as no surprise that we still have a few Sambos and Quimbos walking around today.

That presents a difficult dilemma: what does God want true believers to do in response? How can you know?