[Vision2020] Leaflets and Silence
Rob Keenan
benjamin_barker@hotmail.com
Fri, 9 Jan 2004 05:52:17 -0800
And let us not forget:
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an
inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny.
Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly."
- Martin Luther King Jr., letter from the Birmingham Jail, April 16, 1963
Or perhaps this:
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the
pursuit of justice is no virtue."
- Barry Goldwater
I agree with Rose that it's not unliberal to stand for liberty and justice
for all, not just a privileged group (whether minority or majority). In
fact, preserving and defending the rights of all people would seem to be a
pretty *American* trait -- not just some cockamamie bleeding-heart liberal
claptrap.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Hansen" <thansen@moscow.com>
To: <jack@moscowusa.com>; <vision2020@moscow.com>
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 5:46 AM
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Leaflets and Silence
> "Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of
> others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of
> hope."
>
> Robert F. Kennedy
> (1925-1968, American Attorney General, Senator)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vision2020-admin@moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-admin@moscow.com]On
> Behalf Of Jack Van Deventer
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 7:59 PM
> To: vision2020@moscow.com
> Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Leaflets and Silence
>
>
> Lions and tigers and bears! OH MY!!!
>
> Have a beer, Rose, and enjoy a good book.
>
> Jack
>
> __________________________________
>
> Jack Van Deventer
>
> jack@moscowUSA.com
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --
>
> From: vision2020-admin@moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-admin@moscow.com]
On
> Behalf Of DonaldH675@aol.com
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 7:44 PM
> To: vision2020@moscow.com
> Subject: [Vision2020] Leaflets and Silence
>
>
>
> Visionaries:
>
>
>
> Tolerance is a two edged sword. We all enjoy and expect our first
> amendment rights to be protected. I don't believe that many Vision 2020
> readers wish to abridge those rights, even if we are offended (or enraged)
> by the content of some viewpoints. However, free speech is not the same
> thing as free speech used to mask a religious agenda that includes the
goal
> of destroying our Constitution. Ironically, that is the ploy employed by
> theonomists.
>
>
>
> Hiding behind their constitutional right of free speech they promote a
> philosophy that would effectively obliterate freedom of religion, freedom
of
> speech, gut our judicial system, and install a Big Brother in our living
> rooms. Are theonomists entitled to their pipe dreams? Absolutely --
> although under their rule I would not be entitled to mine. Gagged by the
> fear of appearing intolerant some of us are, in effect, doing the
> theonomists' work for them.
>
>
>
> Many V2020 contributors have suggested that those of us who speak out
> should mind our own business, live and let live, and not push our world
> views on others. Although my worldview may be offensive to some and
> celebrated by others, let me assure you that I don't have a far-reaching
> plan, much less willing disciples to inflict my worldview on the Palouse
or
> anywhere else. I hope our politically moderate and, particularly, our
> leaning-toward-the-left contributors/sympathizers will reflect on the
> following compare and contrast exercise.
>
>
>
> In 1999, Doug Wilson and Doug Jones dreamed up the notion of blanketing
> the University of Idaho with their (yes, sigh, once again self-published)
> leaflets entitled "Topless and Proud." Wilson describes this behavior as
a
> "prank." In actuality this puerile, adolescent attempt at humor was a
> deliberate effort to mock and discredit the university and in the process
> ridicule Moscow's progressive community. (See: Credenda Agenda, Vol. 11,
> Issue 3, column headed "Rattle and Hum"
>
> <http://www.credenda.org/issues/11-3meander.php> for Wilson's jocular
> planning and execution of this "prank." Incidentally, you won't find any
> explanation of the Beavis and Butthead breast-related humor that seems to
be
> a reoccurring theme in other "skylarking" events and writings.
>
>
>
> Doug Wilson endorsed and helped create a lie, dismissed the lie as
> "high-jinks" and chortled over the resulting embarrassment to the
> University. But ah, the wheel turns. More recently, I am told, he is
> actively engaged in courting senior university and state officials in a
> sniveling bid for their support and sympathy against genuinely trained
> academics.
>
>
>
> In contrast, we have yet to have a gain a clear explanation from Doug
> Wilson about the purported slanders, lies, and distortions in the leaflet
> that accurately quoted Doug Wilson's and Steve Wilkins' historic
> interpretation on slavery and race relations in the ante-bellum south.
> Where are the lies? Where is the slander? Indeed, where are the
> historians?
>
>
>
> If any of you excuse your silence on the local theonomists by indulging
in
> the misguided notion that Doug Wilson and his comrades are just a little
> local church desiring only to be left alone to worship God in their own
> covenantal way, its time for you take your mind out of neutral and put it
in
> gear. You are engaged in wishful thinking and liberal lethargy.
Christian
> Reconstruction (aka) theonomy is a national movement. It has specific
long
> range goals. (Some of which you may have enjoyed reading about it in the
> recent theomonic laws thread.) Doug Wilson's guests at the forthcoming
> opinion conference, George Grant and Steve Wilkins, are enmeshed in the
> Christian Reconstructionist and the neo-Confederate movements. Note
> please: Doug denies that he is a card carrying Recon . It is perhaps just
a
> happy accident that his pronouncements and writings mirror the Recon
agenda
> and share religious doctrines. It is also the case that if information
> chasms can't be leapt, a slippery little rhetorical device known as "the
> covenantal lie" can bridge any awkward gaps. (For those of us who always
> thought a lie was a lie, it's not. It's not really a lie if a "Saint" is
> protecting or extending the covenant.)
>
>
>
> Those of you who mistakenly believe that by choosing silence you have
> staked a claim on the moral high ground, lets be clear, you haven't. For
> those delicate brothers and sisters among us who won't censure the local
> theonomists because they wish to retain an unblemished reputations as
> broadminded liberals, please reconsider your motives. Consider who and
what
> you are really defending.
>
>
>
> Rose Huskey
>
>