Alex Jones...

[Robert]

I did follow this case somewhat.

Here is a quick run down of my learnings and thoughts.

Alex Jones is quite bombastic. I do not listen to him, but have listened to some of the Tim Pool episodes he was on. I got to hear his side. I know that was only one side.

The court case was a railroad as some recent case for a well known presidential candidate. It worked against Jones so they used it again for the other guy. I watched some of the televised proceedings and found it to be very biased. I do not like Jones. I did not care that he was being sued. I just found the proceedings to be unjust.

Jones did apologize. It does not fix everything, but it is a step.

If Jones is guilty, so is Bernie Sanders and several other politicians that have followers who have shot people and done great harm like burning cities. Justice should be blind, not just something we use against people we do not like.

Jones never told his listeners to "get up into their face" and chase them out of places. Some Congressmembers did. They should be held accountable too. Once I see that, I will consider this case in a more balanced way. Until then, I see much bias.

A $1 billion fine is not justice. It is an attempt to shut down Jones/Infowars.

[temporal1]

MN is a place where certain people come for debate but aren’t interested in changing their minds. ..

A sad note.
MD enjoyed lots of folks who arrived with sincere interest in anabaptists, especially CMs; they were interested, had questions, willing to dialogue. i miss that.

i think folks continue to register with the same interest/spirit, READ THE WELCOME THREAD, but often don’t post, or post a little then disappear. i’m not sure how to better engage them.

it’s a different “animal” that is present to criticize and tear apart. (MD had some of that, also.)
MD also had many more registered than actively participating. read-only.

MD had a younger population, well read in scriptures, history and current events. “nobody’s fool,” so to speak. lots of levity and camaraderie. They were willing and prepared to discuss, esp with a scriptual perspective. this was new to me.

“It takes two,” is correct.

As Robert reminds now+then, the forum will reflect what members are interested in.
There are MANY threads in “Unanswered topics”. It-can-be-done.

[justme]

the forum will reflect what members are interested in.

i agree

[Josh]

the forum will reflect what members are interested in.

i agree

Or rather, it reflects what a small number prolifically post about.

I made a decision a while ago that there are enough non-liberals who stay silent whilst progressive liberals dominate the conservation. But they still get to decide what the conversation is about. It seems the liberals here want to constantly discuss politics and Trump. I just wish they could confine it all to the politics forum.

[Ernie]

It seems the liberals here want to constantly discuss politics and Trump.

I agree.

But I think the conservatives on MN also want to constantly discuss politics. But they prefer discussing Biden and liberals.

I just wish they could confine it all to the politics forum.

I think both groups should confine all such conversations to the politics forum. That is why I have a standard tag line for any threads that I start... threads that may veer into the favorite partisan political routes...

[Ken]

If Jones is guilty, so is Bernie Sanders and several other politicians that have followers who have shot people and done great harm like burning cities. Justice should be blind, not just something we use against people we do not like.

Who is the "we" here that you are talking about?

This case was brought by some specific people who were targeted and lied about relentlessly by Jones over a long period of time despite repeated requested for him to cease and desist. And who suffered direct harm from his actions. It was a private civil case brought by private individuals, not a public criminal case brought by state or federal prosecutors.

I also don't know what you are referring to with respect to Bernie Sanders. But if there are specific people out there who Bernie Sanders targeted and lied about in a similar fashion over the course of years who suffered damage as a result. Then they too would have good course of action against Bernie Sanders.

Actions have consequences and so do lies. Wars have been started over lies. The truth is always a defense against libel, slander, and defamation.

Also claiming something is "just a conspiracy theory" doesn't immunize it from being a lie. A lie is still a lie no matter what you call it. There are no "conspiracy theory" exceptions to defamation law.

[Josh]

It seems the liberals here want to constantly discuss politics and Trump.

I agree.

But I think the conservatives on MN also want to constantly discuss politics. But they prefer discussing Biden and liberals.

I just wish they could confine it all to the politics forum.

I think both groups should confine all such conversations to the politics forum. That is why I have a standard tag line for any threads that I start... threads that may veer into the favorite partisan political routes...

My perspective is that I see very few conservative Anabaptists desiring to talk about politics or engaging in discussion about it. There is a small handful of non-Anabaptist political conservatives who still don’t post as much as the liberal-progressives here do.

However, lots of topics aren’t political - such as discussing minimum wage, cost of housing and so on - yet there is a constant pressure from the liberal-progressive wing to turn every such topic political. I would prefer to instead see pressure to turn such topics into discussion from an Anabaptist point of view.

[Bootstrap]

However, lots of topics aren’t political - such as discussing minimum wage, cost of housing and so on - yet there is a constant pressure from the liberal-progressive wing to turn every such topic political. I would prefer to instead see pressure to turn such topics into discussion from an Anabaptist point of view.

Ironically, I don't think the Alex Jones thread is political, unless you think he represents what one side of American politics stands for. I hope he does not. I wish this thread had not been politicized like this.

[Josh]

However, lots of topics aren’t political - such as discussing minimum wage, cost of housing and so on - yet there is a constant pressure from the liberal-progressive wing to turn every such topic political. I would prefer to instead see pressure to turn such topics into discussion from an Anabaptist point of view.

Ironically, I don't think the Alex Jones thread is political, unless you think he represents what one side of American politics stands for. I hope he does not. I wish this thread had not been politicized like this.

Of course you don’t; in my opinion, you fail to see that people with different political views than yours have valid opinions at all. You’re okay with billion dollar lawsuits designed to bankrupt someone who dares to have out of the mainstream political opinions.

That is your right, but you should at least respect the political viewpoints of others, and they could start with respecting that many of us viewed the attacks on Jones as being political.

[Ken]

However, lots of topics aren’t political - such as discussing minimum wage, cost of housing and so on - yet there is a constant pressure from the liberal-progressive wing to turn every such topic political. I would prefer to instead see pressure to turn such topics into discussion from an Anabaptist point of view.

Josh, I think you frankly blind to how often you yourself turn discussions political. For example, take this thread. It is about a specific person who was sued for defamation and the damages he caused to several private families that he had wronged. They made their case and won. There is nothing political about it. No larger policy issues involved. It is a private dispute between private parties.

Yet you tilted the discussion right into a broader political discussion unrelated to the specifics of this case with:

"A chilling case for free speech; we aren't a country that really honours the First Amendment anymore. Of course, pornographers are free to claim they need to distribute their filth far and wide and local communities are left powerless to stop it, with the courts siding with the pornographers, but a talk-show host who has always had kind of far "out there" ideas isn't allowed to engage in what is clearly political speech."

and

It is very sad to see free speech fall by the wayside and be replaced with the new reality: those allowed to speak will be those with wealth, power, and influence. Say something the global elites don't like, and you'll be sued out of existence.

In point of fact, there is no new political reality. The very same laws exist today as existed prior to the Alex Jones trial. Nothing has changed. And if Mr. Jones feels that he was wronged or the law was mis-applied, that is what the appeals courts are for.

Or take the discussions about the recent legal troubles of other unnamed individuals with famous political names. You are always quick to jump in and claim it is all part of a larger and vast conspiracy by liberals to politicize the criminal justice system and use the courts to attack political enemies. Rather than the obvious simpler and non-conspiratorial explanation that politics and power are inherently corrupting and have been since the dawn of time. And when politicians on the right, left, or center, cross the line they should be held accountable like any other citizen. Nor more, no less. Regardless of what their name is. Which I would suggest is the logical Anabaptist position.

Or take the discussions on crime. You are always quick to take a discussion about ordinary crime which has also existed since the dawn of time and turn it into a conspiratorial political discussion involving George Soros, left-wing prosecutors, ANTIFA, single mothers, and I don't know what all else.

And by the way, the minimum wage is an inherently political discussion if it at all strays into what is wrong or right with the law and/or how it should be different or changed. If it is simply a discussion of "here is how Anabaptist businesses comply with the law as directed to by Romans 13 then that would not really be political. And the cost of housing is an immensely political discussion to the extent that the cost of housing is driven by government policy. Which it obviously is. Assuming of course that one wants to discuss solutions and not simply gripe about it.