Biblical America: the social movement that seeks to use the Bible as the
sole basis of all governance and social interaction. BARF:
a resource for all who work to monitor and counter the
Biblical America movement. No white
flags: Individually or socially, never give
in to, nor accomodate, this movement's extremist demands.
Also
from the creators of barf.org: |
|
|
Diagnostic questions: a waste of time
By Mike Doughney
Time: Sun, 28-Mar-1999 18:33:08 GMT
IP: 207.239.111.78
::Nice tag-team board flooding you and your friend
::have going here. But you two are *really* boring
::us.
::
::Now, how 'bout if you stop quoting Bryan Kemper,
::and instead of regurgitating the usual canned
::rhetoric, think for yourself?
:
:That was the cowards way out of answering her
:question (which you never did). How about an
:answer?
Perhaps you should consider who you're calling a
coward. All of these messages are tagged with
first names only and bogus e-mail addresses,
which sure sounds to me like the "coward's" way
of anonymously engaging in a discussion. Anyone
digging around our web site knows my real name,
a working address and a phone number, and it's
easy enough to find out a lot more about me.
And as you well know, it's the abortion
providers and their friends who've been getting
shot up lately.
As for the "are you opposed to murder" question,
this is what is known in the evangelism business
as a "diagnostic question." As you well know,
the anonymous writer already has an answer to
the question based upon their assumptions and
what they think those words mean. Someone who
asks that question, who believes that "abortion
is murder," is asking a question with the
implied followup of "if you were against murder
you'd oppose abortion." Another, who believes
"meat is murder" then follows up with "if you
were against murder you wouldn't eat meat" or
somesuch.
A question like that is a waste of time for me
to consider answering. The only appropriate
answer - and an answer is, in my view, only
appropriate if the question wasn't a 'diagnostic
question' - is, "That depends on what you mean
by 'murder.'" And I have a pretty good idea of
where this exchange goes from there.
Diagnostic questions are just a method for the
evangelist to make a point, to get 'into' a
prospect. They are not intended to engage
someone in a discussion in the conventional
sense; it's not about an exchange of ideas and
views, but of obtaining conversion, and not
taking no for an answer. A question like that
one is just another way of hammering on people
that the evangelist wants to convert.
As for conversion, the answer is "no." Not "not
yet." "Never surrender, never submit" is not
just a slogan, it's a way of life in the face of
people who see everyone who's not like them as
fodder for conversion, perhaps, eventually, at
gunpoint.
As for the "abortion is murder" equation, it's
just another tactic to motivate people. Go dust
off your copy of that great propaganda movie,
"Whatever Happened to the Human Race," starring
Francis Schaeffer. It's clear in the first
fifteen minutes that the whole point of
Schaeffer's agenda was not abortion, but to
hammer on society until it submits to a modern
repackaging of the so-called "Judeo-Christian
ethic," which is more about maintaining church
growth and power than anything else - by force
if necessary.
People who won't take no for an answer, who
don't hesitate to use militaristic imagery, and
who teach their kids that physical assault in
answer to the word "no" is quite OK, may lead
this country in the direction of a bloody
internal confrontation, which no sane person
could ever advocate for any reason.
I hear D. James Kennedy is looking for more
Civil War uniforms so he can throw more
theatrical displays that glorify war. We should
all be asking why influential, powerful and rich
organizations are doing this today, in a free,
peaceful and prosperous country.
And these are the kind of issues I'd prefer to
be discussing here. You are wasting your time
reposting the same propaganda and attempts at
conversion that I've experienced and witnessed
countless times, and have accumulated an
enormous collection of videos, books and paper
with the same message. Though since I'm
confronting a movement composed of people whose
entire identity is based upon acting upon all
other people as prospects for conversion - not
discussion, not learning, not exchange of ideas
- I hardly expect the next twenty messages to be
much different than the last twenty. Lay
evangelists seldom if ever change.
|
