Most of the key issues in the 284 line post to which I am following up are dealt with in the following post I made on talk.abortion yesterday, modified to correct the next to last paragraph.  Message-ID: <nyikos.734890344@milo.math.scarolina.edu>  References: <nyikos.734360987@milo.math.scarolina.edu> <nyikos.734640769@milo.math.scarolina.edu> <1993Apr13.122356.3612@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>  In <1993Apr13.122356.3612@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:  >In article <nyikos.734640769@milo.math.scarolina.edu>, nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes: >> In <CS132073.93Apr9160836@cslab1g.cs.brown.edu> cs132073@cs.brown.edu (John Bates) writes: >>  >> >In article <nyikos.734360987@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes: >> > perhaps out >> >of dedication to your convictions. I never, *never*, thought that you >> >would be consciously intellectually dishonest, though. >>  >> I am not.  Can you show me anything that would lead you to think  >> otherwise?  >See the "Spreading Christianity" thread, in which he says I >ignore certain statements that I specifically acknowledged and  Dean did not.  He called them "the Great Commission" but this is NOT descriptive of Jesus's words in Matt. 10:15.  Matt. 10:14, Jerusalem Bible translation:  	"And if anyone does not welcome you or listen to what you have 	to say, as you walk out of the house or town shake the dust 	from your feet."  Matt. 10:15:   	"I tell you solemnly, on the day of Judgment it will not   	go as hard with the land of Sodom and Gomorrah as with   	that town."  In the post to which Dean is referring above, I said:  "> The above is a good description of Kaflowitz, who keeps harping on  > shaking the dust off the feet but ignoring what Christ said next."    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^                                ^^^^  The highlighted words refer to Matt 10:14 and 10:15 respectively.  And Dean countered:  "Actually, this comment of your's is a perfect example of what an intellectually dishonest little sparrowfart you are, since I specifically acknowledged the Great Commission and the entreaty to spread the word.  In fact, it is the combination of the two statements I was addressing, and not just the one, and for you to characterize that as "ignoring" the instruction to spread the word is a good example of what a dishonest little fellow you are."  Of course, Matt 10:15 [quoted above] makes no mention of "instruction to spread the word."  All these quotes btw are from:  Message-ID: <1993Apr13.121624.3400@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>  >in which, at the end, he claims I did not answer a question >which I answered, and which he deleted (to get the chronology >right, he deleted the answer and then said I didn't answer).  And I claim it correctly, because my question went:  "Do you, too, measure the goodness of a post by its entertainment value, and care not a whit for such mundane things as truth and falsehood?"  and the closest Dean came to an answer was:  "Peter, Peter, Peter.  You're just so stupid, pretentious, dull, and generally unworthy of the value you place on yourself that the sport is all there is."  Of course, this does NOT answer my question, which has to do with posts in GENERAL and not my posts in particular.  Surely even Dean knows this, yet he brazenly asserts otherwise, reinforcing his claim with an insult:  "So I now restore the answer to your question that you deleted.  If you're still unable to figure it out, ask a nice kid at the local junior high to help you.  It really doesn't take much sophistication to understand."  On top of which, I doubt that the "answer" is at all representative of Dean's true frame of mind.  The insults you have seen quoted thus far are but a small sample of the stream that oozes out of Dean's  mind throughout the 284-line post from which these quotes were taken. One wonders whether Dean's mind is so warped as to find sport in all this.  He even dredges up a falsified account of events that transpired earlier on another thread:  "You made an ass of yourself by claiming that it 				^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ was in the tradition of Lent to make public announcements of ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ the "sins" of other individuals." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  False.  I said it was the tradition to recall and atone for one's sins. That I made public announcements of the "sins" of others --"sins", BTW, that were a matter of public record, documented in the posts of others-- is a different matter.  Many of the individuals involved are so nearly amoral that they do not see as sins what morally upright people see as sins, so I pointed some of them out.  And I expressly set up a whole thread, YOUR TURN, to let people point out MY sins to me.  Dean again:  "You made an ass of yourself by saying that my statement of the tradition of tzedukkah was somehow an attempt to "paint Jews as plaster saints," thereby revealing your inability to understand the discussion as well as showing your dislike for people saying positive things about Jews, and now you show your intellectual dishonesty by repeatedly ignoring the simple argument being made, and then claiming I am ignoring the very argument I acknowledge."  Actually, what happened was that Dean made it seem like ANY Jew who gave alms or did other acts of charity in public was a hypocrite according to Jewish customs.  In doing so, he was caricaturing Jewish customs as being almost impossibly demanding, as well as implicitly slandering all Jews who make public their acts of charity.  I went very easily on Dean for this, giving him the benefit of the doubt in a post following my initial crack about "plaster saints",  suggesting that he had been merely careless in his wording.  In an astonishing act of ingratitude, Dean now serves up an incredibly distorted picture of what took place between us, and using it as the basis of one insult after another.