After reading the scathing post to admin moderator (that I see has since been deleted, because it was a duzzy!), I believe that John may have just lost his mind.
Ha ha, no I've not lost my mind Reformer. I'm sure it looks that way though.
The Moderator deleted the post because it was offensive, rude, untrue, obnoxious, slanderous, impertinent, factually devoid, and contemptuous of powers and authorities by people fairly given that authority, namely the Moderators. And I agree such vitriol should be removed or censored as it has no place on a Christian forum, or in any
discussion where fair and logical ideas and fine ideals are attempted to be discussed, whether political, societal, Biblical, or of the basest and most unimportant of topics.
Then if it so offensive, why some might ask, attack the Moderator is such a crass fashion? It's not because my mind is gone. Rather, it is an object lesson. A small test of the sensibility and spiritual acumen of an otherwise laissez-faire approach to maintaining civility on this forum. You may not agree, and that is your prerogative, but a challenge is a challenge either lost or won.
Therefore, when confronted with a string of quotes copied straight from the unbridled tongue of a particular forum member (who shall remain nameless) the Moderator was immediately offended, and deleted the post. And so he should.
Every word of that offensive language is common prose of this unnamed person, copied and strung together. These venomous rants have appeared against forum members, targeted groups, and those in high authority (even loftier than a Moderator by a bit) flowing from the poisonous pen of this unnamed individual with regularity, showing repugnance toward other people/groups/powers that he cruelly and bitterly despises, but yet are brushed aside and ignored as a trivial thing by these moderators now offended by one in the same.
Trivial it may be, but when directed toward a Moderator, or any fair-minded person, it is immediately recognizable as an affront, is it not? Does this even need to be argued? It is not just part of the normal dialog of politics to be assailed as stupid, or racist, or a liar or any other pejorative, and because it is so offensive such behavior must
be persecuted and punished to keep wickedness from taking a foothold and the gangrene spreading. That is the sensible course. Moderators should by policy delete, as they have done, any post in any forum where personal attacks are made against forum members, or against forum Moderators, or against persons in any civil or military office from the lowliest estate to the nation's highest.Tit 3:1-2
(1) Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work,
(2) To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men.
So test-wise, the Moderators passed, to a degree - they indeed are able to recognize inappropriate language, to notice slander, when and if they are the subject and it is given in a large enough dose. I can say assuredly they do have the ability to recognize unChrist-like behavior because they know that false allegations, defamation of character, and guilt-by-association, when applied against them and their position is unacceptable. How much more when it is done against our nation's president (regardless of political party)? If Moderators are offended, and forum members are offended on behalf of the Moderator, is it that far removed that Christians in general are offended on behalf of our nation's leaders who are being smeared and libeled without even a modicum of restraint?
Even if you dear Christian do not agree with the decisions of our president or governmental leaders, (there is always disagreement), yet our arguments and rebuttals must be done in good-order; stated factually, with specificity, without slander, without mud-slinging, without casting aspersion and defaming the character of those differing in viewpoints. I have no need to remind anyone that we can disagree without being disagreeable.
(1) I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
(2) For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
(3) For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
All discussion seeks to uncover what is true (or should, as best as we are able). Those involved in any forum discussion must be willing to listen with consideration to the other side. It would be a fine day when Christians can dialog on the most divisive issues (e.g., abortions, war, taxes, security, the law, crime, monetary policy, etc.) in a sane and open fashion without cordoning off a portion of the forum like a crime scene - a no-man's-land you just don't go without evoking the wrath of the troll that lives under the bridge.
As the Moderator stated, there is inevitably going to be friction when two world-views collide. When it cannot be done without vilification of the other side, as some are wont to do, perhaps for the sake of this forum the Moderator (-- being a tad more experientially aware), will incline themselves more-so and with greater zeal to step-in to enforce decorum, politeness, and a Christian spirit. Naturally, that result is desirous for me, else it is all for nought, and the crassness of the world continue its invasive spread here, when otherwise noble people unintentionally through slothfulness beckon it to enter inside the gate and encamp roundabout.