The Darth Plagueis soap opera is already winding down. The hapless Plagueis, it seems, said some naughty words that contravened the Posting Guidelines and he has brought down on his head the wrath of the owner and his moderators. Regardless, this is not about the benevolent dictatorship that is JWN but about standards of behaviour, permissiveness and tolerance and what, exactly, causes offense. It is also about owning the consequences of what we have to say.
If I was to list the most insufferable characteristics of the righteously religious, at the very top would be sacrimoneous indignation. In my experience a serious but respectful challenge to what a righteous individual believes, particularly if put forward with evidence, knowledge and conviction, has the potential to precipitate rage. Not putting a too delicate or politically correct spin on it, the Muslims have some of the most graphic examples within their ranks - say something even mildly critical or irreverant about the Prophet and you can expect not only rage but a fatwah on your life. Not quite as intolerant toward those who dare not believe what they believe are some within the WTS. There is nothing quite as transparent as the tremulous look of contempt on the face of a Watchtower elder seriously confronted with the truth about The Truth. The complexion of the thing changes, however, when words are disrespectful and taking offense is justified.
In a currently active thread entitled: I need a show of hands: who believes the Bible and to what extent?, the following post was made:
There are most definitely elements of truth in the Bible, otherwise it would not be credible at all, even to the gullible. But I might liken those elements of truth to the undigested kernels of corn one might see in feces - they're still edible, but I'm not too interested in picking them out before I flush it all down the toilet where it belongs.
While the post may push the envelope of vulgarity, it does not apparently violate the Posting Guidelines, but it's a safe bet that there are those who would find the comment deeply offensive. Far more offensive, perhaps, than Plagueis' potty mouth - particularly to those gentle souls who regard the Bible and its contents with a deep, abiding love and reverance. But after two days, narry a comment, doubtless because it absolutely deserves none.
I can say with complete certainty that the poster's intent was not to offend and that he later had sober second thoughts about his sense of decorum and the appropriateness of his words. I know this because the words are mine. They may express my perspectives unambiguously but they are also disrespectful, for which I may expect to be disrespected in kind. Ye reap what ye sow.
To those who I offended, though none have yet spoken up, my apologies.