How Much Do You Have to Hate Someone Not to Proselytize?

Francis Schaeffer on the Origins of Relativism in the Church

One of My Favorite Songs

An Inspiring Song


Friday, March 5, 2010

On Links

It's been a while since I've thought about adding anything to the "If You Want to Know More About Me and this Blog" part of my sidebar, but it occurs to me today that it might be just as well to talk briefly about all the links on this blog.

You've probably noticed that there are quite a lot of them. Let's see--just the stuff in the sidebar that links to outside authors or sections, unless I miscounted...

I link to those blogs and sites because I frequently read what they write. I don't read every word of every post. My stars and garters--who could possibly get the time? Jihad Watch alone could keep a person busy most of the day. I swear that they must put up about half a dozen posts a day, on average. But I at least scan the headlines, and often the opening paragraph, usually via Google Reader, and find enough of their material interesting and informative to keep me looking at it somewhat regularly.

And, of course, there are all the links in the posts. I try to link to material where it's important to establish that I'm not making stuff up, or where I think highly of and/or recommend the material from which I'm quoting, and I try not to link to material that I'm trying to criticize unless I have to, because usually, I'm not trying so much to argue with someone as I am to illustrate what I think about a given line of thinking.

In no case should a link on this blog be taken to mean that I agree with or endorse everything the linked-to blog or author has to say. I mean, for cryin' out loud, take a look:

Except for his staunch support of Second Amendment Rights, I can't stand Dojo Rat's politics. But I'd have a beer with him and talk about karate and other martial arts any day.

Hmmmm--I wonder how many Presbyterians I link to on this blog? I guess I only know about one for sure--Dr. Parker. And then there's Michael Bates, but I'm not sure you'd call him a "real" Presbyterian, just maybe someone who finally had enough of the ridiculous anti-intellectualism so often thrown around in Baptist churches. At any rate, God knows I disagree with their ideas on paedo-baptism and ecclesiology, but I do agree with them about the Gospel--and a goodly number of other things.

Whilst I agree with the Pyromaniacs about a lot of things, I find their occasionally bordering-on-annoyingly-sarcastic remarks towards beer to be--well, occasionally bordering on annoying. And sometimes I think that they're really torturing things vis-a-vis cussin' (It should be pointed out that I don't cuss, save for the occasional I-narrowly-avoided-being-crushed-by-an-out-of-control-semi moments, and those occur less and less often).

There are times when I think Wade Burleson is trying so hard to be open-minded that he too easily embraces people that flat-out deny the concept of knowable truth--that is, Emergents--as trusted compadres.

I guess I disagree with Dave about at least fifty percent of darn near everything in life--but I kind of like 'im anyway.

Stanislav is so much the Russian patriot that I frequently question his objectivity, at least when it comes to Russia, or how Russia's been treated.

I've got multiple links in the sidebar to places where versions of "karate" are taught that are not, I'm personally convinced, more than superficially like that which was taught 150 years ago.

The folks at the Oklahoma Go Players Association seem largely convinced that go is a much superior game to chess, where I'm pretty much convinced that there are only a handful of people alive to whom such a comparison would ever have any serious meaning.

I've got at least one post by Pat Buchanan in my sidebar, and I'm reasonably sure I link to him more than anyone else, but I don't agree with him at all about the correct way to deal with resurgent Islamofascism.

And then there's that Russ fellow. There are days I just don't know what to think about him.

The upshot is this: the links are there because I do read, or at least skim, a fair amount of what those people write, but it would be a bad mistake for you to conclude that I agree with everything they write, or that my links constitute a blanket endorsement of everything they write. If I applied such a standard, if I only linked to people with whom I am in total agreement, even about important things, I submit to you that I probably wouldn't even link to me Sainted Irish Mother--if she were a blogger, that is.

And, of course, I may not at all agree with you and what you think about what they've written, too! And in that case, you may be wondering what I think about comments.


  1. I’ve never thought that just because someone links to something that he/she agrees with everything said other person says. If you look at the plethora of links on my blog, you’ll find links to people and organizations that I vehemently disagree with but like you, I read or at least skim their stuff on a regular basis. In fact I think it is kind of silly for someone to assume that you, me, or anyone who runs a website agrees with everything/everyone that he/she links to.

  2. I had some private correspondence from a gentleman who happened to mention that he did not link to so-and-so because so-and-so did not hold to position X. It reminded me that I have run across a handful of people in the blogosphere who seem to think that a link to someone implies full approbation of that person's opinions. It occurred to me that for the handful of people seeking out certain posts, it might be just as well to have this little explanation handy.

  3. Probably not a bad idea...CYA and all.