[QUOTE=ClassicalTeacher;625608]The sad situation of double-standards has bared its ugly head over the past few days here at RO. Unfortunately, this is just a small example of what has happened in our society at large. Isn’t it interesting that OSB’s dishonesty is being defended and given a pass by some here? Can you imagine the outrage and cries of foul play we would have heard had the same thing been done by some of the conservatives or republicans here on this site? DNA, RNA mRNA, and every other subtopic regarding genetics are extremely complex and have taken decades to understand just the basics. Every day geneticists and other scientists are discovering even more complex attributes of DNA. I understand the basics and even a little about some of the more complex synergies of DNA. But, it is dwarfed in comparison to what geneticists in the field know and understand. I always check what I think I know by other resources because the field changes so quickly in its breadth of knowledge and discovery.
Putting the legal issues aside for a moment of what OSB did, let’s focus on the animus of his attempt to use other’s intellectual arguments on evolution as his own.
- He is a committed evolutionist. (I am a committed creationist.)
- His knowledge of science, and particularly in DNA and Dr. Meyer’s focus is very limited. That’s not to dispute the fact that one can garner knowledge on one’s own, but my guess is that by his own admission of getting his information from his daughter’s biochemistry textbook is an indicator of his limited knowledge on the subject matter. (My knowledge of science, DNA and understanding of Dr. Meyer’s points are far more advanced than OSB’s simply because I studied them in college and have my degree in education with a major in science.)
- He is a committed atheist. (I am a committed Christian.)
- He is a liberal. (I am a conservative.)
- His experience in the subject matter is limited to what he reads in his daughter’s textbook and what he finds on the internet. (My experience comes from extensive study in the field and teaching science for years. One learns when one teaches.)
- He is pro-abortion. (I am pro-life.)
It would be clear to even the most simple-minded person that OSB’s tactics were meant to provide credence to his belief in evolution and to claim those arguments as something that came from within him. He needed scientific and intellectual “muscle” to counter Wallstreeter and Dr. Meyer’s claims which clearly and scientifically disproved some of the generally accepted tenets of the evolution crowd causing a panic.
And I could continue the list, but my point here is that if the situation had been reversed and I or another conservative, Christian, pro-lifer had done the same thing without citing the sources, and had been found out, we would have been tarred and feathered. And you all know that is the truth.
Which leads me to an even greater problematic reality. There is a double-standard which is becoming more and more predominant in our society especially over the past 15 years. The fact that this claim is discounted by the liberal left is significant. It is just one more way to lie and indoctrinate but deny you’re lying or indoctrinating.
Those who believe in God are accused of being religious fanatics.
Those who believe that God created the universe are accused of belonging to the “flat earth society”.
Those who believe in moral absolutes are accused of trying to force their religion down the throats of all mankind.
Those who believe that life is precious no matter what the stage are accused of perpetrating a “war on women”.
Those who believe that homosexuality is deviant, abnormal behavior are accused of hate–of being a “homophobe”.
Those who believe in the traditional definition of marriage/matrimony and that it has always been defined as between one man and one woman are accused of hatred and denying others their civil rights.
Those who believe in the rights given citizens as afforded in the Constitution (especially the 2nd Amendment) are accused of supporting violence and murder against school children.
Those who believe that the violence and murder are found in greater numbers in certain populations are accused of racism.
Those who believe that men need to accept responsibility for their actions are accused of being insensitive and too demanding on others.
Those who believe that this country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles are accused of promoting religious uniformity and wanting to turn our country into a religious state.
Those who believe that less government is the key to a prospering society are accused of hating the poor.
And I could go on and on. But, what’s the point?
There are a number of issues that have raised their ugly heads because of this OSB situation. In joining a discussion group on the internet that specifically lends itself to political issues one must have at least a modicum of honesty and integrity in order to truthfully discuss issues with others who may or may not agree with one’s position. I believe there is a general expectation of honesty amongst those who participate in the forum regardless of one’s position on certain issues. Maybe I’m completely off the mark here, but that is what I thought was necessary to have intelligent and thoughtful dialogue with others. When, in the course of exchanges between members on various topics, one member begins to deceive, all subsequent debating then becomes tainted and sterile. RO is not a scholarly, peer-reviewed site, but it is one where honesty is expected. This is where OSB’s dishonest deception created a schism. Any other exchanges between him and other members, at least in my mind, will always be suspect. There will always be a question of honesty and truthfulness in my mind regarding his future comments. Sorry. That’s just me. Others who argue that he did nothing wrong either don’t understand common truthfulness and honesty, or who are, themselves, dishonest and untruthful.[/QUOTE]