Religion refers to such a range of form and function that the single word is inadequate and misleading. Argument made against a limited aspect taken to extreme or abused for political or other ends have obvious truth. Such argument against religion, generalized to the whole, is ignorant and in error. And—focus on select phenomena tends to distort the idea of religion and its potential. I do not know of any one source that covers the whole, but The Fifth Dimension by John Hick is a decent start.

I find that in much of your judgment over the years, particularly of me, a limited and distorted aspect of the case is basis of negative and hasty evaluation. This is uncomfortable for me—and difficult because if I object you tend to become heated, sarcastic, and evasive. I’ve written before but gotten no real response. Perhaps the style of judgment above supports your sense of identity. In any case to listen more is a solution to knowing. Less judging makes for better judgment. You complain that I bring up old material. But when you do not respond, and when you have continued the behavior, it remains fresh—is not old.

Barack Obama—my attitude is that proper assessment of a man should be a balanced picture of the whole. In his case this is important because he is subject to an immense campaign of misinformation and distortion. It is harmful to America, especially re Obama and generally as a pervasive way of politics. I therefore consciously choose to speak the whole. I do not object to stating the negative—it is important. However, instant opinion without pause, further judgment, dilutes or hides the main issue, is muddles; and finally evasion enables you to judge my attitude without knowing it or knowing that you don’t know.