Groothuis's Hypocrisy on Civility

Lately Mr. Groothuis, over at The Constructive Curmugeon, posted something about publishing civil discourse on his blog, including the following thought: "As is typical, Darwinists insult, condescend, and label anyone who disagrees as an ignoramus. The policy of this blog is to not post insults and invective." (Emphases added.)

Hmmmm, really? Labeling others as ignoramuses is not civil, perhaps ad-hominem? But a quick search of his blog reveals the use of the word ignoramus(es) several times (see below). The author? Why, Groothuis himself. No one should take lessons on civility from a theocratic censor.

• Slippery slopes do exist. Legalizing abortion on demand led to an overall cheapening of unborn life in America. The argument was that abortion would only occur in "hard cases"--threats to the mother's life, extreme fetal deformity, etc. Now people have abortions for sex selection and to murder Down's babies--80-90% of which are now killed before birth. The slope is real, Mr. Jones. To say otherwise to be be [sic] a flagrant (if popular) ignoramus. (From "Tony Jones on Perverse Unions". Of Jones he also said this: "He stares into the camera and opines idiocy with great smugness...")


• But Obama, like the good liberal ignoramus that he is, trusts "the international community" (read the UN) more than the historic strength of his own country. The foolishness of this man is breath-taking, mind-boggling, and bone-chilling. (From "Ignoramus In Chief")


• Any presidential candidate who claims he does not know when human life begins or when a fetus gets human rights is both a moral and biological ignoramus and unfit for The White House. (From "Propositions to Ponder Considering the Presidency")

That is not all, of course.

Groothuis calls "ignorant Americans" people who are swayed by "Obama's pseudo-gravitas" (in "It Gets Still Worse: O's Anti-Semitism Connection.") He calls "ignorant Christians" those who do not share his own view on abortion (in "Obama on 'The Least of These'.") He said that "The euphoria over Obama can only be explained on the basis of massive ignorance and massive credulity." (From "Review of Mark Levin, Tryanny [sic] and Liberty", emphases added. One can just assume that those who voted for Bush's first term, and especially for second, were enlightened Christians--oxymoron anyone?)

You know, I am no Christian, but even I remember hearing something about "casting the first stone" or being good "examples to the flock."

Had enough of condescending hypocrites, yet?