Reply #312: I couldn't agree more

[ironbark]

Part of the "respect" would be just taking the time to read what was >actualy said< rather than responses that incessantly reach for disingenuous extraperlation, straw man and assumed psychic insight into “motivation”, “character” and “intent”.
These all oblige endless disclaimers of –“I didn’t say, suggest or infer that”…it’s a pointless waste of time and the original stated point/issue invariably gets lost in it.

The second aspect of “respect” IMO would be if someone is going to make a knowledge claim or assertion/allegation re what another has said then at very least do the courtesy of standing prepared to link, cite and substantiate.

There are currently two or three banner headline threads that contain things allegedly said to or about atheists (in quotation marks) for which no evidence can be seen or given on request.