Writing a blog on a contentious issue will naturally get responses from people who agree and disagree with the blog comment. I have never had a problem with disagreements with my comments, but I have been faced with the dilemma of whether or not to print comments from people named Anonymous, who make defamatory statements while opposing my position.
During the baby Joseph case, there were several terribly destructive attacks by a person/people named Anonymous against the Maraachli family, myself and another supporter of the Maraachli family and I chose not to print those comments.
Recently Anonymous has showed up again to attack myself and my comments on another issue.
I wonder why Anonymous is wonders why I haven't printed the comments?
First: Anonymous wishes to attack myself and others while remaining Anonymous.
Second: I cannot respond to Anonymous because I do not have a contact for Anonymous.
Third: I will not print attacks of myself or others or defamatory statements against certain religious or personal beliefs whether you are Anonymous or not. I do not believe in discrimination and I do not believe in promoting hatred against certain religious groups.
Fourth: I don't attack other peoples religious beliefs and I do not appreciate Anonymous thinking that I am some religious robot who simply spouts out comments without thought or reason. People who attack others do not deserve to be printed because they refuse to take on the actual issue. Maybe it is because the position that Anonymous has cannot be effectively defended so Anonymous chooses to attack the writer instead.
My editorial position is simple. From now on, I will not print responses from Anonymous and I will not print responses from a person who is attacking me, other people, religion or personal beliefs. Public statements and debate are fair game.
You have every right to oppose my position, but you must state who you are and argue your position without hatred or attacks.