User:Editor at CP
I'm "Editor at CP" over there at RW, though I don't actually edit much at Conservapedia anymore.
- Nor RW for the matter. After the server change it is too slow for me.
My views on Philip
(This is not quote-mining. Just his complete answers to me in our discussion. The parts in italics are my words, to which he replies)
I expressed my opinion, which is that Bradley's words sounded paradoxical (accusing someone of lying and defending the true liars - in my opinion).
- While expressing an opinion is okay at times, publicly maligning someone without anything to back it up is not acceptable. Excusing that as "expressing an opinion" is insufficient justification.
Surely I side with Dawkins' views on some aspects over creationists', as most of the world does, but what has it to do with anything? We are not discussing creationism here, we are discussing lies and morality.
- Dawkins doesn't just disagree with creationists. He maligns them, calling them names, etc. Many others do this as well. That is, people's opinions on the merits of creationists' arguments flow over into their opinions of the creationists themselves. Claiming that you are unbiased on the issue of creationists' claims about what happened when you are biased (have a view) on their arguments is trying to create a gulf between two closely-related facts.
Actually, they are (in my opinion) quite scary. Do you refrain from killing people only because you "know what God's standards are"?
- Not "only", but to a fair extent, yes. Or, to put it another way, that is my prime reason for not killing people. Other reasons, such as the law of the land, are secondary.