Saturday, October 20, 2012

FacePlant of the Day - Debunking Christianity: Dinesh D'Souza Resigned Under Pressure From King's College Amidst Scandal

So what does sour grapes look like? Well when one loses a debate and uses his opponent's public trial years later to insult and belittle him - it is a great example of sour grapes.
While attending a conference last month, the president of the King’s College was spotted in the company of a woman other than his wife. At a typical institution of higher learning, a sighting like that might not have turned into a major controversy. But the King’s College is not a typical institution of higher learning. It is a tiny Christian college based in a downtown Manhattan office building, whose mission statement articulates a “commitment to the truths of Christianity and a biblical worldview. The King’s College announced Mr. D’Souza’s resignation on Thursday, two days after World Magazine, a Christian-oriented publication, reported that he had checked into a Comfort Suites in South Carolina in September with a woman he introduced as his fiancée, despite the fact that he was already married. Link.
Dinesh is in the process of getting divorced. He said, “I had no idea that it is considered wrong in Christian circles to be engaged prior to being divorced.” Really? ;-) Now he's saying I am not having an affair with his new girl. Really, no sex before re-marriage? What a prude, or a liar, or something.

If one bothers to actually read the links Loftus posted we can see that there is something going on with people who had issues with D'Souza and who wanted him out of his job. I think it may have more to do with his documentary about President Obama than his theology or philosophy. I didn't agree with the conclusions he had drawn about Obama, but I don't think he should be silenced or censored in some way because of them. I think that Loftus is still smarting from their debate and because he could not make good arguments against D'Souza's presentation, Loftus decided to attack D'Souza the only way he can. If D'Souza is telling the truth that he was not with another woman before his divorce was final, then I don't think he did anything wrong. Divorce is horrible but I don't know why he was separated  from his wife or the circumstances around the divorce so criticizing him for it is none of my business. 

Debunking Christianity: Dinesh D'Souza Resigned Under Pressure From King's College Amidst Scandal
Enhanced by Zemanta

24 comments:

  1. is english your 1st language?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey, thanks for suggesting that I edit this a little more closely. God can use even your snide and sarcastic "commentary" to help me! Praise God!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think it may have more to do with his documentary about President Obama than his theology or philosophy. I didn't agree with the conclusions he had drawn about Obama...

    Where on earth did you come up with this?

    Marcus: "If one bothers to actually read the links..."

    Um, yeah... Dinesh's own words re: Olasky "Marvin Olasky, the editor of World, is the former provost of the King’s College. Olasky was on the search committee when I interviewed to be president, and he vehemently opposed my candidacy. Olasky publicly admitted that he was resigning his position as a consequence of my appointment. The reporter who wrote this story, Warren Smith, also used to work as a consultant for King’s until I decided not to renew his contract. And what was Olasky’s gripe against me? As he put it, I was seeking to make King’s a non-denominational “mere Christianity college” in the image of C.S. Lewis. This for Olasky was simply intolerable. Having nursed his grievance for two years, now apparently Olasky is using World to continue his vendetta."

    ReplyDelete
  4. That you are talking out of your posterior. Like normal...

    ReplyDelete
  5. So you are really naive enough to think that this situation that D'Souza is in has absolutely nothing to do with book he wrote or the movie he produced criticising the Obama ministration? The two men D'Souza explicitly mention are nursing judges but do you really think that they are the only ones or that thety are in this alone? I'm speculationg that they are not. I'm pointing out that D'Souza himself knows that this is a personal attack on him and his ministry. I'm merely suggesting that it could be bigger than he even said in the article. And to bottom line the purpose of the post (which you seem to have missed) is that Loftus is simply crude and mistaken in his criticism of D'Souza. We see what happens when Loftus looses debates. As for your opinion, which seems to be that this has nothing to do with the Presidential ELection, you are wselcomed to it. Feel free to disagree. Free country...for now. You have every right to your pwm opinion - even if its wrong (or stupid in your case).

    ReplyDelete
  6. You're making too many unevidenced assumptions here for me to even begin commenting on.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Which part do you think it is an unsubstantiated assumption?
    1. That some of this persecution has to do with D'Souza's conclusions about President Oabama? I only said that it is my opinion - not from on high
    2. That John Loftus is being childish because D'Souza trounced him in his debate with him? And this is the only ammunition he think he has against D'Souza?
    3. That D'Souza is under unwarranted personal attack?
    4. Or is it because I think you have no idea what you are talking about. You have offered nothing meaningful at all.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "speculation" is another term for generating a conclusion based on evidence, just much looser. So again, what evidence?

    As for your points, 1 is unevidenced in this case, 2 indicates you completely missed what John's critique was about (it was not directed at Dinesh), 3 of course the attacks were unwarranted, but look at the delusional prudish fools they were coming from and 4 is nonsense.

    I could see why 3 would confuse you though. Like most "scandals" they are often made infinitely worse by how the accused handles themselves in their "defense".

    ReplyDelete
  9. And by "I could see why 3..." I mean "I could see why 2..."

    ReplyDelete
  10. 1. I stated my opinion...not attempting to prove it. I might spend more time on that later. You really need to lay off the caffine.
    2. Loftus wrote:

    Dinesh is in the process of getting divorced. He said, “I had no idea that it is considered wrong in Christian circles to be engaged prior to being divorced.” Really? ;-) Now he's saying I am not having an affair with his new girl. Really, no sex before re-marriage? What a prude, or a liar, or something.


    Calling a man a "prude, or a liar, or something" is insulting. Wonder why it's not insulting to you?

    3. Do you really think this is because they didn't know he was going through a divorce?! They were trying to make it into something it wasn't. Bottom line.

    4. Your number 4 makes complete sense given your lack of understanding from your 2nd point.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Even opinions require evidence if they are to be taken seriously.

    Calling a man a "prude, or a liar, or something" is insulting

    Not if true.

    They were trying to make it into something it wasn't.

    Correct, as illuminated by Dinesh. Also, they are delusional prudish fools, like you.

    ReplyDelete
  12. So how do you know that D'Souza is a prude or a liar? Any Evidence? Nope. But I guess you and Loftus get to "speculate" and I don't. Not on my blog.

    Correct, as illuminated by Dinesh. Also, they are delusional prudish fools, like you.

    And so is Loftus trying to make this something it isn't. I'm not a prudish fool but you are foolish and a hellbound sinner. You really should see Jesus about that.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Prude or a liar. Or... And it's evidenced in his reaction (which you linked to).

    ReplyDelete
  14. Nothing in Dinesh D'Souza's reaction evidences his prudishness or lack of integrity. So you must be referring to him being smarter than you and Loftus which is indeed evidenced by his body of work and career.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I agree, I've seen him debate. He's pretty good, although no match for Hitch. In any case, he's way too smart to not realize a bunch of delusional prudish fools wouldn't have a problem with the perception that he was sharing a room with someone who was not his wife.

    If you hadn't found this through John Loftus' site, I have no doubt you'd be right there with them...

    ReplyDelete
  16. Maybe he didn't realize that people would have a problem with him sharing a room with a woman who was not his wife because he didn't do it. D'Souza says he didn't. Neither you nor Loftus have any evidence that D'Souza was "shacking" at that conference. His enemies are not saying he did. They are suggesting he did. Just because Loftus' lack of self-control ruined on of his marriages does not mean D'Souza has bad morals. Believing that sex should be only between a single man and a single woman in a marriage is not being foolish or a prude. It is just following God's prescription of what is best for us. Ignoring God's commands regarding sex is like having the best of gifts and disregarding the manufacture's specifications and then crying when it breaks.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Try to focus here. Neither Jon nor I are saying Dinesh has bad morals, but a bunch of delusional prudish fools say he does. And if you hadn't found out about this through John Loftus' site and gone on your anti-john-loftus-auto-pilot, I have no doubt you'd be right there with them...

    ReplyDelete
  18. Ignoring God's commands regarding sex is like having the best of gifts and disregarding the manufacture's specifications and then crying when it breaks.

    I'm not sure how the "crying about it when it breaks" actually fits into your analogy, but in truth, ignoring what a bunch of delusion prudes claim to be god's commands regarding sex is like having the best of gifts and disregarding the manufacture's specifications and then realizing how awesome it is that a big wheel actually can fly...

    ReplyDelete
  19. Try to focus here. Neither Jon nor I are saying Dinesh has bad morals, but a bunch of delusional prudish fools say he does. And if you hadn't found out about this through John Loftus' site and gone on your anti-john-loftus-auto-pilot, I have no doubt you'd be right there with them...

    The problem is that you don't think that sex outside of marriage is immoral. That's your error. The "delusional prudish fools" your refer to are most-likely lying on D'Souza. It's about politics not morality.

    , but in truth, ignoring what a bunch of delusion prudes claim to be god's commands regarding sex is like having the best of gifts and disregarding the manufacture's specifications and then realizing how awesome it is that a big wheel actually can fly...

    That's a lie.Setting aside for the moment that you delude yourself into thinking that God has not passed down commandments regarding sex to us, and instead realizing thing that by disregarding "manufacturer specifications" you are admitting that there is a manufacturer and you are consciously deciding to misuse the "best of gifts". On top of that we know that the "big wheel" crashes and not flies when we live lives full of extra-marital sex. Broken families. Unwanted and unloved children. Sexually-transmitted diseases. I could go on, but I think you lack the mental and moral fortitude to understand the points.

    ReplyDelete
  20. And you do know that more than John Loftus is talking about this. Look up James White's webcast from last Thursday. You'll learn a lot.

    ReplyDelete
  21. You really are talking out of both sides of your mouth... My work here is done.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Yup...over your heard. You even think you've done some "work"! Now that is hilarious!

    ReplyDelete
  23. Well said Marcus. Have a good night.

    ReplyDelete