tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3137995022574691057.post6002483899863961311..comments2023-08-26T14:31:44.845+01:00Comments on Charles Lambert: Dear EditorCharles Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18074227813367594283noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3137995022574691057.post-16924623951715771962008-01-17T23:49:00.000+01:002008-01-17T23:49:00.000+01:00Well, anyone who'd like to enjoy my articulacy can...Well, anyone who'd like to enjoy my articulacy can enjoy it here. I don't feel the need to proselytise, and if I did I'd do it in places where people were less convinced of their rightness than they seem to be on your site. I'd do it where it might make a difference.<BR/><BR/>But thank you for the invitation.Charles Lamberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18074227813367594283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3137995022574691057.post-53492775391895020422008-01-17T16:47:00.000+01:002008-01-17T16:47:00.000+01:00You misunderstand.I was hoping you'd go say all o...You misunderstand.I was hoping you'd go say all of this to Vox. You're so much more articulate than I am.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3137995022574691057.post-49445082222340414452008-01-17T16:15:00.000+01:002008-01-17T16:15:00.000+01:00I can't imagine why. You still don't seem to under...I can't imagine why. You still don't seem to understand two things:<BR/><BR/>a) To censor someone is to prevent him or her from communicating his ideas in an <I>absolute</I> sense; to deny that person access to others. Nobody has suggested that the pope should be prevented from doing this. (God knows, the man's unstoppable.) But the corollary of this is not that he has a <I>right</I> to speak anywhere he likes. He doesn't. A university inauguration is not an appropriate place for an astrologer, or alchemist. Why should it be appropriate for someone who claims to believe in the virgin birth?<BR/><BR/>b) He chose not to go for motives that have nothing at all to do with freedom of speech and everything to do with political convenience. That's the choice he made. It was <I>his</I> choice. It wasn't for security reasons, and it wasn't because he was being censored. My feeling is that he doesn't like being contested, and he realised that it would be bad publicity. It's the way any other politician would have reasoned but it's hardly an example of the kind of moral authority that's claimed for the man.Charles Lamberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18074227813367594283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3137995022574691057.post-44248967868857438532008-01-17T15:44:00.000+01:002008-01-17T15:44:00.000+01:00Thought you might quite fancy wading through this....Thought you might quite fancy wading through this.<BR/>http://voxday.blogspot.com/2008/01/its-no-pretext.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com