Where, Charles -- on the part I highlighted above? Tell me what post # on this thread where I impugned anybody's motive re: some supposed defense of murderers? Which FREEPERS did I so impugn their motive?
It's not there, Charles. You have falsely accused me here -- and you owe me an apology.
However, one was in fact your post.
Maybe we can get Bean Counter to go to that thread as well as post his "anti-Mormon persecution" post...that way he winds up defending both fLDS and LDS water torturers alike!]Also Post 25:
do you always go into different cult threads discussing how they abuse children and defend those abusers as well?...or does that only apply to fundamentalist Mormons?I would note that attribution of "motive" is a subjective determination. Saying that a post was to defend someone attributes the motive of "defending" to the post, if the poster didn't say they were posting in order to defend something. But you could say that the post has the effect of defending something -- that is an attribute of the words, and does not suggest that the poster had that intention.
So, for example, you could correct the problem in post 25 if, instead of saying "and defend those abusers", you said "and post comments which sound like a defense of the abusers". That way you are giving your opinion on the words in the post, rather than your opinion of the motive of the poster.