[MD] Morality, Abortion and the MoQ

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Ian]
"Catch22"

[Arlo]
Aye.

What's funny (funny-sad, not funny-haha) is that when *I* say "that's 
not what the MOQ says" I am a priest, a blind static sheep incapable 
of understanding the Great Insight of others. But when Platt says the 
same thing, he is a renegade free-thinker challenging the established 
theocracy of the anointed academics.

When I tell Platt he is wrong, I am a self-appointed priest.
When Platt tells me I am wrong, he is a radical thinker taking on the 
establishment.

Michael and I disagree enormously about what the MOQ, but Platt casts 
me as a "priest" and Michael as a "prophet". And why do you think 
that is? Could it be the shared theistic, right-wing ideology? Nooo, 
couldn't possibly be THAT....

Michael asks me if we could set aside the fire, and I do, and yet a 
short while later he makes (in a third person reference!) this 
horribly disingenuous remark ("This is the same as Arlo's attempt at 
diverting discussion from MoQ to the concept that everything requires 
faith to affirm, thus faith is irrelevant."), even though it was 
**I** who started that derailed dialogue by saying outright that 
Quality DOES NOT require faith. I point out the dishonesty and 
disingenuity of that, and lo and behold I am a "priest" and poor 
Michael wants no more to do with the list. Whatever, stay or leave, 
he can talk with Platt endlessly about "activist judges" and theism 
and faith, I'll have no more to do with it (apart from defending 
myself against dishonest remarks).

Alright. Enough on all this. Next topic, please.