Fauci E-mails and Honesty

[Josh]

The burden of proof is on us to come up with reasons why we can worship, go to our jobs, or show our faces in public?

[Bootstrap]

On Page 13, I still don't see any evidence that the emails show Fauci is dishonest.

I think the burden of proof is on the accuser. Making strong, emotional accusations without evidence is not what Christians should be doing.

So... you repeatedly turn to these fact checkers on anything stated. So... you are doing the exact same thing you accuse them of doing. Go to the source if you desire to dispute claims rather then do what they do.

I disagree. Let me give an example. If someone accuses you of murder without proof, and I point out no real evidence has been given, how would you respond if someone said it was my job to prove you haven't committed murder?

If there's a smoking gun in Fauci's emails, there are plenty of political rabblerousers who are looking for it. There doesn't seem to be. Nobody in this thread seems to have found it. Nobody has found evidence that you are a murderer either.

[Bootstrap]

The burden of proof is on us to come up with reasons why we can worship, go to our jobs, or show our faces in public?

When do you think it is appropriate for a Christian to make unfounded accusations that result in death threats? Do you think we should replace our legal system with kangaroo courts run by social media?

Should a Christian want to know if he is bearing false witness against his neighbor? Should a Christian want to know if he is engaging in slander other fruits of the flesh?

[Josh]

The burden of proof is on us to come up with reasons why we can worship, go to our jobs, or show our faces in public?

When do you think it is appropriate for a Christian to make unfounded accusations that result in death threats? Do you think we should replace our legal system with kangaroo courts run by social media?

Should a Christian want to know if he is bearing false witness against his neighbor? Should a Christian want to know if he is engaging in slander other fruits of the flesh?

So, you think I’m morally responsible for anonymous people I don’t know making death threats I can’t even verify as genuine, to other people?

Simply because I hold opinions against ruining millions of jobs and lives for lockdowns + not taking experimental, untested vaccines + not thinking closing church for a year is okay?

[Bootstrap]

When do you think it is appropriate for a Christian to make unfounded accusations that result in death threats? Do you think we should replace our legal system with kangaroo courts run by social media?

Should a Christian want to know if he is bearing false witness against his neighbor? Should a Christian want to know if he is engaging in slander other fruits of the flesh?

So, you think I’m morally responsible for anonymous people I don’t know making death threats I can’t even verify as genuine, to other people?

Yes. You are morally responsible if you bear false witness against your neighbor. Promoting accusations without proof is addressed directly in the Old Testament.

I think we are each responsible for our contribution to this culture in which facts don't matter, passions are cranked through the roof, and false accusations are one of the primary tools of political propaganda. I think we are each responsible if we sign up as foot soldiers, pushing the talking points of the political factions without ever slowing down to ask if they are true or what the consequences are.

None of this looks like Jesus. None of this looks like the Kingdom of God.

Simply because I hold opinions against ruining millions of jobs and lives for lockdowns + not taking experimental, untested vaccines + not thinking closing church for a year is okay?

Your opinions on those things do not mean that whatever accusations people can dream up against your opponents are true whether or not they are true.

I mean, should people who disagree with your opinions on vaccinations make up unfounded accusations against you and promote them? If you get death threats, should they point out that they have no proof of those death threats? I sure hope not.

[Soloist]

I disagree. Let me give an example. If someone accuses you of murder without proof, and I point out no real evidence has been given, how would you respond if someone said it was my job to prove you haven't committed murder?

If there's a smoking gun in Fauci's emails, there are plenty of political rabblerousers who are looking for it. There doesn't seem to be. Nobody in this thread seems to have found it. Nobody has found evidence that you are a murderer either.

bad analogy really.

A better one would be that Josh said I committed neglect of my patients based off of abuse reports that are difficult to inspect and maintained by poorly ran state programs. Another Josh said I didn't and both wrote lengthy reports on why I did or didn't based on inspecting these reports. Following that my name is ranted or defended repeatedly on this forum yet no one actually personally knows me and both sides other then the two original authors actually looked into it.

Plenty of people have said there are smoking guns and plenty have said there are not... You just have chosen to believe fact checkers that are just as opinionated as everyone else and often distort the truth.

I could ask the question, where are the email death threats he got? I don't see anyone producing that proof either.

[Bootstrap]

I could ask the question, where are the email death threats he got? I don't see anyone producing that proof either.

Seriously, you think people should have to prove that to your satisfaction before you are willing to care? As long as they don't know for sure that someone is getting death threats, people can go ahead and pour gas on the flames with false or unproven accusations?

[Bootstrap]

bad analogy really.

A better one would be that Josh said I committed neglect of my patients based off of abuse reports that are difficult to inspect and maintained by poorly ran state programs. Another Josh said I didn't and both wrote lengthy reports on why I did or didn't based on inspecting these reports. Following that my name is ranted or defended repeatedly on this forum yet no one actually personally knows me and both sides other then the two original authors actually looked into it.

OK, that really is a better analogy. I think whoever is ranting against you on the forum is being rather vile, engaging in gossip and slander. They don't know the facts, they don't know you. They don't care about truth - if they did, they would care about facts. They aren't trying to get a conflict resolved in the proper setting, they are trying to pour gas on flames and create conflict.

The right thing to do would be for both of those people to talk to your supervisor, probably with you in the room. And if your supervisor is good, he would go ballistic if the two parties took it to MennoNet.

Now take it beyond this forum. Put it all over social media and broadcast media. Have a plan to promote it. Watch the death threats come in, we know that's what happens. How does this become an accepted tool of politics? And why would Christians participate in it?

[Soloist]

Now take it beyond this forum. Put it all over social media and broadcast media. Have a plan to promote it. Watch the death threats come in, we know that's what happens. How does this become an accepted tool of politics? And why would Christians participate in it?

[RZehr]

Do you think we should replace our legal system with kangaroo courts run by social media?

No. But sometimes -not this time-, I think we’d be better off with our legal system being replaced with kangaroo courts run by kangaroos.