Starbucks and White Guilt

[Aquila]

CONTINUED...

Others are the villains. You're multifaceted, deep and incredibly brilliant. Others of us are too dumb to truly understand and appreciate your google-sourced wisdom.

You're a good man N David. I don't see you as a villain. In fact, if I did, I could choose to put you on ignore. If I thought that any of you were really that bad, I'd have left this forum a long time ago. I do think there are times when you act in a manner that is below your calling. I'm not throwing stones here, because I have too. I'm just trying to say that I don't see you as a villain. Nor do I think that you're too dumb to understand or appreciate anything I have to say. In fact, I wish my ability to communicate was better because I would like to believe you'd not misunderstand me so often.

Yet you made him the subject by calling him "vulgar" and saying he used "vulgar" words.

I made him anonymous because he's not the subject. The vulgarity of his words were only an example of what I was trying to say regarding political hero worship.

Sometimes we don't see things that are all around us, especially if we're not directly effected. If you'd like, I have a friendly challenge. Go to an Apostolic discussion forum out there, just pick one, and create an ID and pretend to be a democrat. Pretend to be more moderate on some things. And experience the hate filled private messages, the venomous defamations of your character, the cold mockings of your reasoning regarding liberty for all men and women, and perhaps even their right to health care. Count the names that you're called. Read as they tear into criticize your every motive.

Maybe you'll walk away understanding what it is like to not be so... "conservative" in a movement that has made "political conservatism" a litmus test for belonging.

Don't cry or get upset, but I don't believe you.

So, you'll call me a liar again? I assure you that again, I'm not lying. I did indeed send all that information to a third party in our conversation whom I trust has ethical principles to judge. And should he decide to look into it, I trust he'll be fair and balanced in his assessment. In addition, I trust that he'll not needlessly drag the poor man into a discussion that isn't about him personally.

One thing that complicated the matter is that the post was on a different man's wall. So, I'd have to openly state whose wall it was on, and who the poster was. I know you'd feverishly track the man down and drag everyone and their cousin into this to try to make me look bad. And you'd get everyone so worked up they'd fail to see that in the end it was actually YOU that wanted to have them personally named and displayed publically for all to see... not me. They'd fail to see that I originally did my best to make the man anonymous. Are you seeing it yet? I'm the one seeking NOT to slander a person. I was only offering an anonymous quote to illustrate a point. You guys seem to want blood. That's a bit manic. That's rather over the top. And I'd ask why anyone would want to go through all that trouble... over just a post wherein I shared an opinion?

There's something else at work here. Certainly one man's opinion can't be worth so much trouble. I've never read an opinion expressed by any of you that would make me go through so much trouble to refute you. For example, EB once mentioned some things that transpired in a counselor's office. I didn't berate him over his point. I didn't demand he reveal who the counselor was. Nor did I demand to even know the name of the practice. Nor did I demand to know the very issue that might have brought him there. He shared an encounter that to him exemplifies how silly psychology can be. And that's cool. He has a right to that opinion. He has a right to those facts. I see my role as only responding to his point, given the information he has posted. I'd be a bit manic if I wanted to go on an inquisitional fishing expedition to prove the counselor didn't exist. lol If someone lies about something like that, guess what... they own it. It would catch up to them in the judgement. I'm just going to respond with my thoughts on what is shared. Nothing more, nothing less.

Even if you did,

So, above you think I'm lying. But even if I'm telling the truth... accusation, accusation, accusation.

Please tell me you are seeing this in your words bro. This is manic. It's not normal.

Even if you did, you did so because you know the person you sent it to will not try to contact the person you blasted here and check the story. You knew I would find the person and contact him. You knew it wouldn't look good on you to be blasting someone behind their back on AFF. That's the real reason you didn't send me the name.

I actually don't know what he'd choose to do with the information. He'd not someone who I agree with 100% of the time. However, whatever he'd choose to do, I trust his judgment. And I also trust that he'd approach it ethically and even handedly. And if he wishes to disclose the information I gave him, that's his choice. My goal is not to be included in openly disclosing anything about the man personally. Because what I posted to you is indeed what the man said.

Re-read your statement above.

You knew I would find the person and contact him. You knew it wouldn't look good on you to be blasting someone behind their back on AFF. That's the real reason you didn't send me the name.

That's why I felt that it wouldn't be wise to send it to you. Because you'd say that I was blasting someone behind their back on AFF. You seem to forget that I have striven to keep him anonymous and only to consider the implications of what was said. By striving to keep the man anonymous, I demonstrated that the last thing I wanted to do is slander a person or blast them behind their back. I only wanted to show the words that someone caught up in political hero worship used to illustrate how we can all too easily compromise ourselves in our political hero worship. And that is true of both the left and the right.

Seriously? By claiming you sent the name to someone else, you believe you made good on your pledge to send me the name? That's not how that works.

No. I said that I only took a "step" in fulfilling your request. I might not be the step you desired. But I reconsidered my statement about sending it to you personally. I don't believe it would be wise. You're too emotionally caught up in the need to refute me that you'd drag us all into WWIII to do it. lol

You already blasted the man and called him "vulgar." Don't try to pretend you're innocent. You brought him into the discussion, no one else.

A brought the anonymous words of a man into this discussion to illustrate my point about political hero worship. It is YOU who doesn't want him to remain anonymous. And my concern is that you'd cause pain and leave a man feeling slandered. No one knows who said that. If you let it go, and refocus on my point, no one will have any pain or feel slandered. Why do you guys want to see pain?

As I post this, my Gear watch tells me my heart rate is at a steady 68 bpm. I'm certainly not heated nor "spastic," as you wish to portray me. Were we having a conversation face to face, you could see for yourself that while I am being blunt, I'm very calm. I rarely raise my voice at anyone. I find it most effective speaking in a clear, concise and even voice.

If that's true, why aren't you being more rational?