[Vision2020] Angry Hens

Thu May 5 23:30:41 PDT 2011

Kai,

OK, I missed your point, and I'm still missing your point -- sorry.  What is
it, exactly?  That it's OK for one group to speak publicly about the evils
of some marriages (I surely don't recall you ever telling any of the
anti-gay marriage advocates to "butt the f-k out"), but it's not OK for
other groups to speak publicly about the evils of some marriages and the
hypocrisy of those who whine about the sanctity of marriage being desecrated
if we don't deny "immoral sinners" who are law-abiding, loving, consenting
adults equal protection under the law?  Or is it that you think it's peachy
to keep stunningly silent about the hypocrisy from theocracy cravers like
Doug Wilson while never missing a chance to ram the "hypocrisy" label down
the throats of those who have the nerve to point out Wilson's rank
hypocrisy?

We Get It, Kai, that you don't care about Wilson, or about what he's tried &
is trying to make our community into, or about his hypocrisy, or about any
of the rest of it, but what I don't understand is why those of us who do
care deserve your ire & insults?  Talk about childish . . . 

You are correct that there's an ideological clash - that's exactly what
Wilson wanted & engineered.  His congregation managed to exist here just
fine until it started in earnest (as opposed to organized boycotts of local
businesses they thought indecent) trying to ram their ideology down the
throats of us all.  Not that I expect you to care - you've made it crystal
clear that you really don't give a rip about the facts (and, BTW, it's
really childish for you to dispute the accuracy of attributed quotes simply
because you choose to "not care"), but for the sake of those who are coming
to the conversation late and who do care, I'll toss out the reminder that
Doug Wilson views the Moscow/Pullman area as a decisive point for his
strategic evangelism.  I'm going to repost something I wrote back in 2004 -
it's obviously no longer current as time has passed, but it's accurate up to
that point (I'll not include cites since you've clearly stated you don't
"care" to educate yourself, Kai):

I was aware of Doug Wilson almost from the beginning (of my time at the UI)
-- I used to listen to him speak/debate in the area I believe used to be
known as the Quad outside the UCC building on the UI campus.  I remember
well my reaction to his positions:  interesting, entertaining fellow with
some problems with his "philosophical" thinking . . . not my cup of tea, but
hey:  live and let live.  He's certainly entitled to his beliefs, just as
I'm entitled to my beliefs.

And, that's a position I held for many years whenever I heard rumblings
about what was going on with respect to CC/Logos/Cannon Press/Credenda
Agenda/ACCS/NSA et al.  That's a position I continue to hold, but I now
understand that in Wilson's World, he would use his theocratic power and his
minions and his twisted interpretation of the Bible to punish those who
don't share his views.  IMHO, that's a far cry from the tolerance I extend
to him and to those who have beliefs different from mine.

For years, in the name of tolerance, I mistakenly didn't look any further
than the difference of religion.  Now, my position has matured:  they are
certainly welcome to continue believe and worship as they choose, but I'm
drawing a big bold line between that and dishonesty, stealth candidates, and
theocracy.

According to Wilson and his minions, people who share his views are moving
to Moscow (he makes it sound like in positive droves, although I personally
think his perception is likely skewed given his interpretation of the Bible)
from as far away as Korea.  I don't think he's having luck recruiting a ton
of existing community members to his flock, although if local individuals
and families are finding his church "home" a fit for their beliefs, then
that's their right.

It's not Wilson's theology that's dangerous for our community (although I
certainly don't agree with his interpretation), it's his stated mission for
his flavor of theocracy that's the problem:  his religious beliefs and his
stated desire for theocratic rule cannot be separated from each other.  If
he was just expressing his beliefs by "preaching and teaching and persuasion
and so forth" and encountering opposition, I'd be standing up for his right
to believe the moon is made out of cheese.

But, in spite of what he tells us Intoleristas and/or Non-Believers (defined
as those who don't share his particular flavor of religion/theocracy), he
clearly wants to put the force of law behind his beliefs to tell others what
they can or cannot do, what they can or can't believe.  Either we live
according to his dictates of The Good Life or we're punished in this life:
he hopes he can convince us to repent to Save Our Souls for the hereafter,
but if not, then in his theocracy, there's always legal punishment in this
life to get what he wants.  That's his goal for our community.  And he's
actively recruiting people to move to this community to help him accomplish
his worldview here.

Do you think that by not knowing and discussing this that the threat will go
away?  You have to look no further than Moscow Ordinance 2002-13 to see the
effect Wilson and followers had with a seat on the City Council.  And, it's
not difficult to imagine the negative impact on public education in our
community had Kirker/anti-public education stealth candidate Mark Beuchamp
been successful in his 2002 bid for a seat on the public school board.

Bluntly put, Wilson and his followers are going to keep right on marching
towards their goal.  Period.  It seems to me that we, as a community, have a
responsibility to be aware of Wilson & his followers theocratic beliefs and
stated agenda and be vocal in our opposition (assuming you disagree with
theocracy and laws that reflect a fringe vocal minority's morality).

Wilson views Moscow as a decisive point:

"In the 60s, my father wrote a small but enormously influential book called
The Principles of War.  In it, he applied the principles of physical warfare
to what he called strategic evangelism.  This idea of warfare is necessary
in order to understand a central part of what is happening here, and by this
I mean the concept of the decisive point.  A decisive point is one which is
simultaneously strategic and feasible.  Strategic means that it would be a
significant loss to the enemy if taken.  Feasible means that it is possible
to take.  New York City is strategic but not feasible.  Bovill is feasible
but not strategic.  But small towns with major universities (Moscow and
Pullman, say) are both."

No, being silent is not the answer; you can see from the quote above that
Wilson et al view the existing community as the "enemy."  And he doesn't
hesitate to bully those who disagree with him by applying provocative and
divisive labels, insulting our intelligence, and accusing those who disagree
with his flavor of religion/theocracy of the very things he and his sheep
are:  intolerant.

[Note:  for those interested, the sermon referenced above was given by
Wilson on 12/28/2003.]

Kai, until you "care" enough to educate yourself, which hasn't happened yet,
it really is you who should shut the f-k up.  That's not something I'd
normally say, but since you think that kind of response to those with whom
you disagree is appropriate, then it seems appropriate to  meet you where
you feel comfortable.

BTW, I don't think I responded to your post (it fell into that category of
posts I thought deserved response but got lost in the shuffle of my life),
but I couldn't be more happy for you, your family, and your brother that you
reconnected.  

Saundra Lund

Moscow, ID

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do
nothing.

~ Edmund Burke

***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2011 through life plus
70 years, Saundra Lund.  Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or reproduce outside
the Vision 2020 forum without the express written permission of the
author.*****

From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
On Behalf Of Kai Eiselein
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 1:38 PM
To: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Angry Hens

Saundra, you seem to have missed my point.
The same people who engaged in much gnashing of teeth over anti-gay marriage
laws a few years ago are now gnashing their teeth over what appears to be a
marriage that is completely legal.
As I argued before, it is the community's right to choose what is socially
acceptable. That argument was met with plenty of derision right here on the
ol' viz. Now it seems that position has changed and a number of people who
disagreed with my argument then have proven my point, in spades, I might
add.
Anybody for a big steaming helping of hypocrisy?
As for Wilson, I haven't read any of his books, pamphlets, comic books,
novels or flyers. I'm sorry, I'm just not all that interested in his
religious or world views, so I cannot comment on what he may or may not have
said based soley on the word of someone who appears to have an axe to grind
with him.
If there is a legal issue, then by all means take it to the courts, council,
commission, or wherever it needs to be addressed.
This constant screeching about every little thing is just plain childish and
I believe it goes deeper than any legal issues. In fact, I believe it is an
ideological clash and despite all of the "Coexist" stickers on cars in this
town, there is a deep seated hatred towards anybody or anything that doesn't
fit in with the local liberal lockstep.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20110505/ec14c92c/attachment-0001.html 