I believe it correctly characterizes their intent, albeit it’s not a generous interpretation of their words. What faith, after all, does the American family hold? Overwhelmingly, it’s Christian. If they’re emphasizing a Congress that shares this faith, they’re emphasizing a government body that shares the Christian religion. Why emphasize taht if you’re not going to have Congress acting in a manner that is based on these values?
I believe that the actions of the 1994 class demonstrated that my understanding of their words is accurate.
Nevertheless, I also understood that it was a controversial interpretation. That’s why I labelled it as biased. That’s why I linked people to the original words. That’s why I encouraged people to go read it for themselves.
Had Shodan taken issue with my reading of this line in that thread–had he cited the specific clause and laid out an argument for why my interpretation of it was unfair–that would have been cricket. But that’s not what he did. Instead, he pulled it out a couple weeks (?) later in a snarky insinuation that I was lying. Instead of backing it up then, he disappeared from THAT thread, and now he’s pulling it out again, falsely claiming that I’m behaving in a manner similar to the one I’m criticizing.
It’s cowardly, sneaky behavior, and it pisses me off.
Daniel