Well, it hasn’t even made it a week.
Of course people are going to goad, well, just because they can. If you’re a person that can’t take some heat, even if it’s objectionable to you, maybe you should get off the Internet. Hey, I get some comments, even tweets that I end up just laughing off. I don’t know these people and therefore don’t care what they say about me.
Now, the so-called “Joint Statement” as I wrote earlier, is in general a good idea. There are many of us that have tried to dialogue (there’s that very objectionable word) in the past. Rebuffed. Succumb to what we demand.
Now there’s this. It doesn’t matter what someone says and I really doubt that Phil gives a damn about being able to comment on her blog. Phil happens to disagree, as I do, and is instantly attacked. Yes, that’s “ethical disagreement” for you. It’s just that they don’t want dialogue. It’s like the kid that says, “My rules or I take my ball and go home”. That’s all this really comes down to in the end.
Placing Richard Dawkins on some “statement” doesn’t exonerate you from anything you’ve written or spoken in the past. I actually respect Professor Dawkins: I’m certain he receives more hate and death threats in a single day than you’ve received in a year(or longer!). You’re not innocent in attacking Professor Dawkins as well.
So please, stop playing the innocent victim when you and your ilk have done more harm to what you refer to as “the movement” than any other group or single person.