OK. Here is the crap I have to put up with. People who are ashamed of themselves and post anonymous comments say things like this:
Joe is extremely prejudiced! More so than the people he struggles to slander on a daily basis through his blog! If you don't agree with Joe, you my friend are a racist hate monger and public enemy number 1! So what does that make Joe? That's right, he is just as prejudiced as the person who puts on a white robe and burns a cross or openly speaks out against gay rights or maybe uses the "N" word. Look in the mirror Joe! Oh wait, that would be the christian thing to do.
I did not publish this comment, not because I am embarrassed at the accusation or refuse to publish opposing views, but because it is useless chatter.
First of all, why am I "extremely prejudiced?" I truly don't understand this accusation. Prejudice is "making a decision before becoming aware of the relevant facts of a case or event." Unless something I post is copied (with reference) or meant to be funny, I research or confirm what I write.
Prejudice used to mean "making a judgment about a person based on their race, religion, class, etc.", but more recently has been used to describe"any unreasonable attitude that is unusually resistant to rational influence," including "race, sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, and religion..."
I understand the people I speak out against. I understand their beliefs, their philosophies. That is why I speak out against them. If I make a broad statement about right wing Christians, for instance, it is because of their beliefs and actions that I consider wrong, but it is not because of their Christianity, per se. The problem is, they have warped Christianity into a divisive element so far removed from what Jesus must have had in mind that it is barely recognizable. But I digress.
Now this anonymous commenter may be reacting to the post he tried to comment on, or he may have read my column in today's Western Tribune and reached a tipping point, I don't know. I will post that column tomorrow, for those who do not subscribe to the paper.
It's almost laughable that I am compared to KKK members by a right winger just days after "they" tried to discredit a civil rights hero (John Lewis) for making the same comparison about certain elements of the McCain campaign. Because I am for human equality, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation and age (innate characteristics) and even religion and creed (chosen characteristics), I am considered prejudiced?
I've reached a tipping point myself. I am sick of anonymous commenters. Especially when I have a good idea who they are. And where they work. (I do wonder what they were doing in handcuffs in downtown Bessemer the other day, but my research hasn't turned up the reason).
I will find a way that is best to avoid anonymous postings, and my first attempt is using openID. When you comment, you will be required to use your google blogger name or one of several other ID's. I don't want to exclude commenters, I just want to exclude people who will not identify themselves. If you don't have any of the ID's offered, create one, I guess is my recommendation. We will see how this works. My other option is to require membership to the blog to post, but that is limited to 100 people. Well over 100 read each day, but I don't know how many would want to post comments, and only they would have to be members. Others could read, I guess. Help me out here fellow bloggers if you have suggestions.
If you find you cannot post a comment, and want to, email me...I will try to work around it either by posting your comment myself, with you name (or pseudonym) and the explanation that I am posting it for you, or change the way comments are handled.
In the meantime, continue to enjoy Bessemer Opinions where you can be entertained and educated on an almost daily basis.