2005-06-17T09:15:00.000-07:00

I see much blogging of false philosophies- not really belonging to any one School of Thought, more of the "use anything out there" type (UAOT).
I intend to attack these sophisms in the topic where it counts: Religion.
I have noticed Bloggers accuse others of using the above mentioned "UAOT" while employing the same method. I will go after these first by showing the readers where they "speak from both sides of their mouths" and, hopefully, they will learn to watch themselves while attacking the "enemy." Better I do it than the one you are opposing... credibility is at stake.

Another problem I see: Knee-Jerking. Just because wrong side said it, doesn't make it false. Even the enemy can speak a truth.
Going the opposite way of the enemy is not always the right direction... sometimes you have to be beside him on the road, taking the split 'When It Comes'- if you cut out just because you can't stand giving any "kudos" you will lose the magic word for today: Credibility.
Bide your time. If you are on the right side, it will be seen sooner or later. The enemy is usually "right for the wrong reason" or only "half-right" and this you can point out- but never say they are completely wrong, when they aren't.
Example: "Being cruel to animals is wrong because they have rights"
Truth: "Being cruel to animals is wrong."
False: "because they have rights."
It is wrong to be cruel to animals exactly because they have NO rights, they are in our charge- Furthermore, this life is all they have as they do not have an eternal soul- and do the Will of God, without question.

-Brindisi

Double-Take