Her summations are, how to say it, a bit propagandistic.tdadams made this claim without ever reading the book. I ordered the book and when it arrived, asked tdadams what pages he would like scanned for clarity in context. He obfuscated, over and over.
After that I posted the first of 62 progagandistic summaries in context and he complained I merely posted the most inoccuous summary. Hey, I was just starting at the beginning since tdadams wouldn't provide a specific number so we can see if he was right about the summary.
Numerous times after that tdadams simply refused to provide a specific reference or page number. I simply wasn't going to waste my time scanning in random summaries of the 62 points if tdadams was only going to state whatever I posted was merely an innocuous summary. It was obvious tdadams only interest was in obfuscating the issue.
Unless, of course, tdadams wants to provide a specific reference from 2 to 62 and I'll be more than happy to scan in the respective page numbers.
Hey Scripter, you've still never answered me on one question. Would you give an open-minded and reasoned consideration to an article titled "The Christian Agenda for America" by the American Athiest Organization?
No? I wonder why.