It looks like Morella's simply setting up an out for himself so that he can be excused from having to ever address my original criticism. The last sentence that I ever wrote him was the only one that addressed this subject, "If you prefer to not become a member of Free Republic please be aware that I may post any relevant correspondence of ours to that thread." Starting off a reply with that accusation is pretty desperate,... and pitiful.
3-4 times I directed Morella to post #146 where I laid out the problem with his essay and specifically asked for a succinct reply (bold facing that word.) I repeated it so many times because I knew he would think his best option would be to try to obscure the failure of his premise in a long rambling diatribe, ignoring the fundamental problem laid out in that post. I was right.
Don’t you see Brian, that's not the behavior of "men with good intentions"! That's why I'm so short with the guy. The signs have always been there. This is the clincher. If you have even a little bit of objectivity and honor left in you, you'll see it too!
I skimmed about 30% of Morella's 3515 word temper tantrum and didn't find any reference to the question for debate that I set up in #146, only of tired platitudes and redirection. I'm not interested in reading more Morella.
Perhaps Morella really believes that thing really was a reply. Maybe he's that blinded by his fanaticism for his ideology. But more likely, some part of him knows that he has a MAJOR failure running like a fissure through the foundation of his reasoning in this article, and he's having a cow trying to hide it from everyone, perhaps even himself.
Morella has taken the coward's way out so far. And we're likely never going to see a succinct reply to my very specific question in #146.
Honestly, I would imagine that every person on this thread has quite a bit of objectivity and honor, in their own fashion. I apologize for implying otherwise.
With that said, I must bow out of this debate. Morella is a close personal friend, and as such I cannot objectively defend him or his statements here from his critics, at least not with charity, given the type of attack.
I also know that his schedule is grueling, both his work duties and his further graduate level studies in philosophy. He has neither the time nor the desire to participate in ongoing forum discussions, either on FR or elsewhere on the internet, and I should not have involved him in this thread.
Debating the relative merits of atheistic philosophy is not my own area of expertise. My own subject area is the morality of reproductive technology.
Good day. You have won the debate. God Bless you.