(December 4, 2009 at 10:18 am)Eilonnwy Wrote: But...then it wouldn't be my column. It would be Mark Twain's column, regardless of his living or dead status. I don't think anyone is masquerading as this priest, trying to claim his words. They are properly attributed, the paper has done their due diligence. As you stated in your original post, there is nothing illegal about what they are doing.
Others say it's a minor issue, I don't even think it is one.
I have to to wonder, is this one of those minor issues you've decided to put your foot down on because the guy is dead so you think you might have grounds to remove his words from the paper? I think sometimes atheists need to take check what they're doing, because they can be as bad as the fundies, demanding their feelings aren't hurt or their lack of religion respected. The newspaper is a private organization, they can do what they want. I'm not accusing you of it, but this is the impression you're giving me.
This smells like a Patrick Greene issue, IMO.
Pick and choose your battles. I think you're grasping at straws here.
I think I am coming to the same conclusion, ie, it just isn't worth the effort. I'm not sure what a Patrick Greene issue is (I will look it up), but I do feel strongly about these things. I certainly don't expect his words to be removed from the paper, that is not my motive. Had he still been alive I would at least have felt able to write to the newspaper's 'letters' page challenging his creationist views.
Thanks for the input, it has helped.
KK
