First Posting

Susan Russell runs a hard hitting blog filled with snark, condescension and micro-aggressions called "An inch at a time.'( And no this does not refer to the response of Pinocchio's nose to her posts)
Yet she only permits soft pedaled comments. The parameters of commentary are so narrow that any comment that disagrees with her premises or questions her motives is deemed hate speech, in violation of the baptismal covenant.

So this is for anyone who tries to respond to Rev Russell but is shut out by the delusions of her blog.
We'll follow the same guidelines she gives on her blog and let's see if you can be posted here.

Allow me to  lead by example:

In a response quoting Andrew Sullivan:

"A civil rights movement without toleration is not a civil rights movement; it is a cultural campaign to expunge and destroy its opponents. A moral movement without mercy is not moral; it is, when push comes to shove, cruel.
For a decade and half, we have fought the battle for equal dignity for gay people with sincerity, openness, toleration and reason. It appears increasingly as if we will have to fight and fight again to prevent this precious and highly successful legacy from being hijacked by a righteous, absolutely certain, and often hateful mob. We are better than this. And we must not give in to it."


I  was informed by her posting that using the term "hateful mob" was an ad hominem attack and was deleted. The following was how I responded. Needless to say dear reader, she wasn't about to publish that either.

"Calling for a boycott of mom and pop businesses in Indiana as you did is contemptible. And aptly describing the actions of the progressive left as Andrew Sullivan does regarding the RFRA as that of a mob hardly constitutes an ad hominem attack. As to the baptismal covenant, it is in the finest tradition of the prophets even at the risk of offending to call to repentance of hateful actions which truly are most in violation of the covenant.

I am not the only one to point out the rising totalitarianism of the progressive left and your mischaracterization of my post in order to censor it only convinces me of the contagion. If the loss of freedom of association, freedom of speech and free and public exercise of religion is now the requirement of supporting same sex marriage then it isn’t worth it.

Lastly to delete posts from your readers that challenge your assumptions does not only do a profound disservice to them but to the issues you wish to advance. You may want to think about how that scorches the earth you say you wish to green an inch at a time."

 

This what she published in response:

 

And for the commenter who ripped me a new one for [a] attacking small businesses in Indiana while [b] spewing "hate speech" and [c] being hypocrite for drawing boundaries around acceptable comments on this blog [d] #LifeIsTooShort, dude. Take it someplace else. Seriously. Reading this blog is probably not good for your blood pressure and I'm not giving you a platform to rant anymore so Vaya con Dios. #Seriously

The insincerity of her concern  is noted as is her blasphemous solicitude of "Go with God " when of course her  intended meaning  is "Go fuck yourself". Such a lovely priest. Seriously!