[Vision2020] Arrogant, Insincere Con Artistry Answers
Art Deco
deco@moscow.com
Tue, 9 Dec 2003 13:42:21 -0800
So after the so-called town meeting cult*** leader Wilson is quitting Vision
2020. How cowardly!
If his performance at the town sermon on Thursday follows his past general
trend of his evasive, arrogantly dishonest (he assumes that none of can read
can read or reason) responses to be hyped at a forum at which he completely
controls the flow of the so-called discussion, it is easily understandable
why he will cravenly retreat from the resulting community outrage.-- And
from the community outrage and disgust that has arisen over his and his
cult's anti-egalitarian, sexist, homophobic, racism tainted neo-confederate,
crackpot theological rantings.
Out of the several thousand Christian sects/cults in the world, how
stupendously egotistical and megalomaniacal it is for Wilson and his cult
with a few hundred members (whose critical but not rhetorical skills are
greatly diminished) to apodictically maintain they have THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH;
that the rest of us are all wrong about everything spiritual, and that they
alone are some alleged god's sole arbiter of all things religious.
If Wilson were not so cowardly in the first place, he would have suggested a
debate like forum whose subjects and give and take were controlled by an
experienced, neutral moderator -- a forum at which both pre-published and
spontaneous questions could be entertained and the forum moderator would
insist upon non-evasive answers from all.
***cult:: a group, which in actual practice, focuses upon, bonds with, and
worships their worldly leader as much or more than the god(s) and godly
beliefs they profess to worship.
Wayne A. Fox
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas" <dougwils@moscow.com>
To: <vision2020@moscow.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 12:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Arrogant, Insincere Con Artisty Answers
>
> Visionaries,
>
> I would like to take this opportunity to invite everyone to a town hall
> meeting that we are having. We are meeting at the Kenworthy on Thursday
> night at 7 pm. Hope to see you all there.
>
> If you come to ask questions, you will not be greeted with a welcoming
> raspberry. We want to answer honest questions, not create them. While
Wayne
> Fox and Amy Smoucha want to represent my answers to Nick Gier as a sample
> of what will happen at our town meeting, it will not be that way at all.
> Nick taught philosophy at UI for many years, and he really ought to be
> ashamed of himself for typing out a list of "Have you stopped beating your
> wife yet?" questions. "Yes or no" to serve the cause of straightforward
> answers, indeed!
>
> To use the language of praise and blame that he appears to care most
about,
> it is unscholarly. More than that, it is the utter, frozen limit. But most
> importantly, it is dishonest. We will be providing *genuine* answers at
the
> town hall meeting, and, as a philosophy professor ought to know, this
> requires a vocabulary of more than two words.
>
> We are delighted with honest questions -- and honest questions are *not*
> defined as those coming from "our side." Adam Wilson of the Trib has done
a
> very good job of asking real questions, and writing down the answers
> accurately and fairly.
>
> On a related front, here is some good news for everyone. I want to do my
> part in putting this controversy to bed, but not by refusing to answer
> honest questions. We will answer them all on Thursday night -- or at least
> we will have done everything we could reasonably do to get every honest
> question there. After that, my plan is to stop participating in this
> controversy. I will be unsubscribing from Vision 20/20 on Friday morning.
> And I will be quoting the Grateful Dead as I do -- "what a long, strange
> trip its been."
>
> Cordially,
>
>
> Douglas
>
>
>
> At 09:52 AM 12/9/2003 -0800, you wrote:
> >If the arrogant, insincere, con artistry answers below by cult leader
Wilson
> >to Nick Gier's questions are a sample of what's going to be served up as
> >answers at the Town Sermon on Thursday, why would anyone outside of a
cult
> >member want to attend unless they are masochists who wish to be abased,
> >belittled, and insulted?
> >
> >Wayne A. Fox
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Douglas" <dougwils@moscow.com>
> >To: <vision2020@moscow.com>
> >Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 9:20 AM
> >Subject: [Vision2020] Fwd: Re: Articles for Repudiation
> >
> >
> > >
> > > >Dear visionaries,
> > > >
> > > >Before answering Nick's questions, allow me to invite you all to a
town
> > > >hall meeting we are having at the Kenworthy, Thursday night at 7. We
> >would
> > > >love to see you there. We will genuinely attempt to answer all the
> >serious
> > > >questions seriously. For more on frivolous questions, see below.
> > > >
> > > >And as a preface to answering these questions, allow me to commend
Nick
> > > >for this great new development in Socratic dialog. One party
contributes
> > > >the monosyllables while the other front loads all the questions.
"Simple
> > > >yes or no, Mr. Wilson. Do you repudiate your knavish behavior?" *Yes*
> > > >means that I acknowledge my knavish behavior in the past and *no*
means
> > > >that I intend to continue it. Easy peasy, and philosophy looks around
for
> > > >new ways to obscure the truth.
> > > >
> > > >But in keeping with the spirit of the thing, I will try to keep my
> >answers
> > > >as brief as possible. After all, *yikes* is a monosyllable. My
answers
> >are
> > > >in ALL CAPS for ease of identification. I am not shouting. Some might
> > > >think I have a right to be SHOUTING BY THIS POINT, but they would
wrong.
> >I
> > > >am viewing the current events in a philosophical spirit, much as
Boethius
> > > >might have amused himself by counting his toes.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>TWELVE ARTICLES FOR REPUDIATION
> > > >>Article 1. Christ Church member Roy Atwood now states that
"Southern
> > > >>Slavery, As it Was" is not a scholarly work. This concession
implies
> > > >>that it is not as credible as a scholarly work. When any press
> >publishes
> > > >>a Monograph Series, it usually means that this is the best
specialized
> > > >>work that it can find. What is the status of this essay? What is
the
> > > >>status of other works published by Canon Press?
> > > >>
> > > >>a. Scholarly or unscholarly, are you responsible for the work? Yes
or
> > > >>No? YES, YES! I CONFESS IT1
> > > >>b. Do you repudiate this work and your support for Southern Slavery?
Yes
> > > >>or No? NOT THE FIERY TONGS AGAIN! YES, I REPUDIATE IT ALL!
> > > >>c. Are other works published by Canon Press credible? Yes or No?
CANON
> > > >>PRESS? VILE STUFF, ALL OF IT.
> > > >>
> > > >>Article 2. R. L. Dabney is cited favorably in the slavery booklet
and
> > > >>its co-author Steve Wilkins is an instructor at the Dabney Center
for
> > > >>Theological Studies in Monroe, Louisana. Dabney was a racist and
> > > >>condemned interracial marriage, something the Bible celebrates.
Dabney
> > > >>also condemned the education of African Americans, something the New
> > > >>Testament advocated. But your neo-Confederate friends have proudly
> > > >>republished Dabney's works, which have blatantly unscriptural
positions?
> > > >>
> > > >>Do you repudiate Dabney and all that he stands for? Yes or No? NO .
. .
> > > >>WAIT! I MEANT YES!
> > > >>
> > > >>Article 3. Your position on slavery is equivocal. As a moral
> >absolutist
> > > >>you must say that it is always wrong, but your support for biblical
> > > >>slavery and Southern slavery implies that it depends on culture and
> > > >>therefore is relative. Dabney's position is very interesting: the
> > > >>righteous Anglo-Saxon Christian has a duty to enslave people that
cannot
> > > >>govern themselves. The "evil is not slavery, but the ignorance and
vice
> > > >>in the laboring classes, of which slavery is the useful and
righteous
> > > >>remedy. . . . ("A Defense of Virginia," page 207).
> > > >>
> > > >>a. Do you repudiate this Dabney on this point? Yes or No? WHAT IS
THE
> > > >>RIGHT ANSWER HERE?
> > > >>b. Do you believe that owning another person is always wrong? Yes
or
> >No?
> > > >>IT CAN'T BE ALWAYS WRONG BECAUSE YOU WON'T LET ME OUT OF HERE . . .
NO,
> > > >>WAIT! NOT THE RACK!
> > > >>
> > > >>Article 4. Steve Wilkins is the director of the League of the South.
It
> > > >>stands for the repeal of the 14th Amendment (guaranteeing equal
rights
> > > >>for all Americans) and the secession of 15 Southern States to form a
New
> > > >>Confederate States of America. Some would call this treason.
> > > >>
> > > >>Do you repudiate the League of the South? Yes or No? TREASON IS
BAD,
> >RIGHT?
> > > >>
> > > >>Article 5. George Grant and Steve Wilkins support the novel
"Heiland,"
> > > >>which has been compared to the "Turner Diaries," the book that
inspired
> > > >>the bombing of the Oklahoma Federal Building. The book's hero leads
a
> > > >>violent overthrow of a "godless" federal government.
> > > >>
> > > >>a. Do you believe in the violent overthrow of the U. S. government?
Yes
> > > >>or No? NO!
> > > >>b. Do you repudiate the ideas contained in the novel "Heiland"?
Yes or
> > > >>No? YES! ESPECIALLY THE KOOKY PARTS ABOUT CHELATION THERAPY.
> > > >>
> > > >>Article 6. George Grant and Steve Wilkins are regular guest
speakers at
> > > >>annual meetings of your Association of Classical and Christian
Schools
> > > >>and Colleges.
> > > >>
> > > >>a. Do your unscholarly views of the Civil War appear in the
> > > >>curriculum? Yes or No? NOT ONE OF MY UNSCHOLARLY VIEWS APPEARS IN
THE
> > > >>CURRICULUM.
> > > >>b. Do your schools support neo-Confederate and Christian nationalist
> > > >>views? Yes or No? MY SCHOOLS? I DON'T HAVE ANY SCHOO . . . . OKAY,
> >OKAY.
> > > >>WE REPUDIATE ALL ICKY VIEWS. NEVER HEARD OF 'EM.
> > > >>
> > > >>Article 7. Grant, Wilkins, and you are the principal speakers at
the
> > > >>February conference. The conference is called a "history" conference
but
> > > >>no professional historians are speaking. The slavery booklet was
one of
> > > >>the publications of the first conference in 1994, but the fact that
this
> > > >>booklet is now declared "not scholarly" indicates that this
conference
> > > >>and its predecessors may not be scholarly conferences. Furthermore,
if
> > > >>you reject the neo-Confederates, why are you inviting them to
Moscow?
> > > >>
> > > >>a. Is your meeting scholarly and credible? Yes or No? YES. WE WANT
IT
> >TO
> > > >>BE SCHOLARLY VERY MUCH. ANYTHING FOR RESPECTABILITY.
> > > >>b. If No, would you consider moving it off campus so as to save
> > > >>embarrassment to academic community and North Idaho? NO, WE WANT TO
KEEP
> > > >>IT ON CAMPUS SO THAT THE CREDIBILITY WILL RUB OFF THE OTHER WAY.
PERHAPS
> > > >>WE CAN LEARN TO ASK YES OR NO QUESTIONS TOO.
> > > >>c. Doesn't this conference give credibility to a movement you
> > > >>reject? Yes or No? NO!
> > > >>
> > > >>Article 8. In your slavery booklet you condemn slave owners who had
sex
> > > >>with their slaves as "ungodly." But Abraham had sex with his
servant
> > > >>Hagar and was convinced by his wife Sarah to abandon Hagar and his
son
> >in
> > > >>the desert.
> > > >>
> > > >>Do you repudiate Abraham and Sarah as ungodly? Yes or No? IS IT ALL
> > > >>RIGHT TO SAY NO? OKAY, NO.
> > > >>
> > > >>Article 9. You have said that your main goal is to defend the Bible
in
> > > >>all that it says. Yahweh declared genocide against all the
inhabitants
> > > >>of Canaan and he made sure that it was carried out by the Israelite
> > > >>armies. Most people believe that slaughter of any group of people,
> > > >>regardless of their reputed sins, is always wrong.
> > > >>
> > > >>a. Do you repudiate Yahweh for commanding genocide? Yes or No? NO,
BUT
> >I
> > > >>ADVISED HIM AGAINST IT.
> > > >>b. Do you support the international conventions against genocide?
Yes
> >or
> > > >>No? THIS ISN'T A PRO-LIFE TRICK QUESTION, IS IT? IT IS? THEN NO.
> > > >>
> > > >>Article 10. In your slavery booklet you claim that since the Bible
> > > >>condones slavery but condemns kidnapping, it was not sinful for
people
> >to
> > > >>own Africans that they themselves did not ship from Africa. I
believe
> > > >>that is as absurd as Buddhists who rationalize meat eating because
they
> > > >>claim they were not involved in the slaughter of the animal itself.
> > > >>
> > > >>a. Do you agree with me? Yes or No? ALWAYS!
> > > >>b. Do you repudiate the owning of another person, any time, any
> > > >>place? Yes or No? CAN I GO NOW? NO? THEN NO.
> > > >>
> > > >>Article 11. In 1995 the Southern Baptist Convention passed a Racial
> > > >>Reconciliation Resolution requesting that members repent for the
evils
> >of
> > > >>racism and Southern Slavery. My understanding is that these are
> > > >>conservative evangelical Christians, are they not?
> > > >>
> > > >>Would you have voted for this resolution. Yes or No? CAN I READ IT
> > > >>FIRST? NO? WAIT, NOT THE BOOT! YES, I WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR IT.
TWICE!
> > > >>
> > > >>Article 12. When the League of the South was founded in 1994, it
> > > >>recognized, as a way of honoring both Confederate soldiers and
Scottish
> > > >>rebels, the Confederate flag as a Christian symbol, specifically as
the
> > > >>Cross of St. Andrews. In 1994 you founded your college and called
it
> >New
> > > >>St. Andrews.
> > > >>
> > > >>Is New St. Andrews a neo-Confederate and Christian nationalist
> > > >>college? Yes or No? NO! THAT WOULD BE BAD AND EVIL. DO YOU WANT ME
TO
> > > >>SIGN ANYTHING?
> > > >>
> > > >>Note: my information on the League of the South comes principally
from
> > > >>Edward H. Sebesta and Euan Hague, "The US Civil War as a Theological
> >War:
> > > >>Confederate Christian Nationalism and the League of the South,"
Canadian
> > > >>Review of American Studies 32:3 (2002), pp. 253-284.
> > >
> > >
> > > _____________________________________________________
> > > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
> > > ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
> > >
> >
> >_____________________________________________________
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
> >ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
>
>
>
> _____________________________________________________
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
> ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
>