Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt
You responded to a post that I deleted. Maybe you should have considered the fact that I deleted it within a few seconds after I wrote it before you went ahead and responded to it.
In closing, I am no authority. I am just one voice. I'll speak and if you want to try to call me an authority to try and put me in my place go ahead. In this case, it's not having the desired effect. It's producing the opposite effect. You should well know by now that I am not dumb and that using tactics of bullying simply won't work with me.
I'm not defending a book here. That's just plain silly (and stupid).
|
But that is almost the only times that you get so heated. It is hard to separate the two. You are almost entirely the voice of reason. But when something comes up where anyone says anything that even hints at negativity, you are suddenly a different person. I would not call that stupid. And you, of all people, should reconsider using that word here.
In post #115 there were no such examples. You came to say that the account of BlessD says something about Dallas. That is simply not an accurate statement. You attacked Don as if he were trying to hide a bunch of dead bodies in the lawn of the big house or something. (I know, hyperbole.) Before you accuse me...
Yes, your examples were 1st hand accounts (Post #117). They spoke volumes about the LC in general. They say volumes about what they actually say, not what someone can stretch them to say. Lest we all forget, many of the problems of the LC are Lee’s taking scripture where the do not truthfully go. I do not wish to paint an idyllic picture of Dallas. It was far from that. But you have nothing to add to the discussion. If these were added for the general discussion outside of this particular debate, then that is OK. I do not say “OK” to suggest that I have some authority in the matter. I am speaking in terms of valid facts v logical fallacy. On their own, for their own purpose, they are welcome. As kindling for the discussion about Dallas, they are fallacy because they are not on topic but are, at best straw men. Beat up someone about something and everyone else gets swept in.
You are free to ask questions that dig deeper. But you cannot suppose to say that things are any particular way in Dallas because they were that way anywhere else. Even in the absolutely aberrant system that is the LC, even here in 2008, they are not all cookie cutter mirrors of each other, no matter how strongly Benson and company try to say they are and make them so. Broad-brushing can only be taken as a general thing, not specific.
Stick to actual accounts of issues rather than innuendo concerning things you do not know anything about. I know that there are truly valid issues relating to the LC, and also to Dallas. When you said (in your now deleted post) that the incident relating to BlessD did have relevance to Dallas, you made my case that there was an attempt to take the example where it did not go because that was simply an incorrect statement.. You are correct to retreat to talking about the LC in general. There is a lot to say there. That is where we all should be. And each of us may have something to say. There is surely something worthwhile to say about Dallas. But the Dallas history does not speak to the history in Cleveland, Toronto, Houston, OKC, or Anaheim. And those do not speak directly to the experience in Dallas.
As for the deleted post, evertying of substance in it was in #115.