[Vision2020] Arrogant, Insincere Con Artistry Answers Answer to Mike Lawyer
Art Deco
deco@moscow.com
Wed, 10 Dec 2003 12:47:28 -0800
Mike, et al,
I have never discouraged Douglas Wilson from talking. The more he talks,
the more he contradicts himself and known facts. I have lots of material
that shows that. Bill London and Steve Wells recently exposed a few of
these contradictions.
I am not a professional speaker as is Wilson but in the right forum arranged
and conducted by professional neutral parties and under particular, enforced
rules of procedure I might be willing to participate in a forum along with
several others sometime in the far future.
Such a forum is now quite premature. The drama around the Christ Church is
just starting to enfold. I anticipate in the coming months more interesting
issues being raised and a more careful examination of those already raised,
especially when the cult's views are examined for logical and factual
consistency.
We had a Vision 2020 debate a few months back. It ended with cult spokesmen
repudiating logic when their views did not hold up to critical examination.
The debate continues in the newspaper with Wilson getting the lion's share
of ink.
Professional historians refuse to debate Wilson probably for the same reason
professional physicists would not debate someone who holds that the moon is
made of green cheese. It would be a waste of time and would appear to give
credence to a crackpot view.
The word "homophobic" now seems to be generally used not only as fear of
homosexuals but additionally prejudice against or hatred toward.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Lawyer" <mike_l@moscow.com>
To: "'Art Deco'" <deco@moscow.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 10:37 AM
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Arrogant, Insincere Con Artistry Answers
> Wayne,
>
> You're pretty funny. I thought you and the other folks wanted Doug to stop
> writing and talking. You were yelling at him for talking all the time, now
> you're yelling at him for not talking all the time.
>
> Why don't you challenge Doug to a debate? I think your ideas for a debate
> would be a great idea. Will you debate him?
>
> Doug challenged the "professional" historians on the U of I campus to a
> debate. Perhaps you could pick up for them and debate in their stead?
>
> Just as an aside, what exactly does homophobic mean? I thought it meant
> "afraid of homosexuals." But you and others seem to be using it
differently.
>
> And why does being accused of being homophobic cause most people to
retreat
> into themselves like little scared turtles?
>
> Thanks for your time.
>
> Mike Lawyer
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vision2020-admin@moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-admin@moscow.com] On
> Behalf Of Art Deco
> Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 1:42 PM
> To: vision2020@moscow.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Arrogant, Insincere Con Artistry Answers
>
> 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
> >
>
> _____________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>