Silver Hammer wrote:liz3564 posted: "So, I will ask again....Are David, LOAP, and Abman....all stalwart defenders of the faith....two of the three published apologists...."useful idiots", in your estimation?"
It's the easiest thing in the world for "useful idiots" to get published. It doesn't matter if they're apologists or critics. It happens all the time. Will Bagley has done it twice now. Grant Palmer did it.
I do wish there weren't so many "useful idiots" trying to do Mormon apologetics, or getting in the way of those who do it well.
Hi-ho Silver,
I'm not sure I would classify Bagley and Palmer as "useful idiots." They may indeed be idiots, and they are doubtless useful to somebody (although in Bagley's case I'm inclined to see him as hostile rather than stupid.)
I understand the term "useful idiot" to be equivalent to "A person who allows herself to be manipulated by those hostile to what she holds dear." As an example of that: It's been my experience that those in the LDS apologetic community can be divided into two groups, with regard to Kevin Graham. The first group would say "Kevin Who?" The second know that he's one of the most hostile, driven and devious apostates since D. P. Hurlbut.
But Kevin tells us that some LDS apologists contacted
him to confide to
him that they were worried about Will's online behaviour.
Really?If in fact they do know Kevin, but don't realise what he's on about, then I would definitely characterise them as "useful idiots."
Regards,
Pahoran