On 8/25/05, JAY JG jayjg@hotmail.com wrote:
Perhaps you can re-read my previous posting on the list, as well as the postings of those who banned him; I don't see the point in repetition.
Again, I don't find anything to suport the ban in compliance with our policies.
Even in re-reading, it appears we've banned someone solely for their beliefs and philosophy; have I made an error?
Calvinball is fine if everyone wants to play, but I think this discussion proves that there are a significant number of members who would rather take the moral high ground and let this user nuke himself with his actions instead of joining him in the cesspool of prejudice and discrimination.
By the way, for those who be wondering where the name "Amalekite" comes from, in the Bible, the nation of Amalek was the sworn enemy of the Israelites.
Jay.
This is no surprise to me. The Israelites were sworn enemies of the Amalekites as well.
Not only that, the Israelites exterminated the Amalekites! Genocide, pure and simple, and merciless. Documented in 1 Samuel 15. It was Yahweh's test of Saul to see if he could follow distasteful instructions to the letter, for he was later scolded and had the role of King taken away from him for showing the slightest mercy.
"Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys."
..."He (Saul) took Agag king of the Amalekites alive, and all his people he totally destroyed with the sword"
..."And Samuel put Agag to death before the LORD at Gilgal."
If the original ban was for the choice of user name, and the editor permitted to come back with a different name, that would make sense, if we also wouldn't allow a user name of "Israelite". However, if we decide to retroactively apply this standard, we should start with an apology.
(Apologize to a Nazi? WTF? Well, the moral high ground does demand an apology when you make a mistake that harms another.)