It Mooney can´t get his facts straight about something so simple, it´s time to ignore him. For my own future reference, though, and that of anyone who´s morbidly curious about this mini-fiasco, Jerry Coyne has a nice compilation of relevant posts, which he seems to be continuously updating. Though it doesn´s include this most lovely-titled of posts. Notice how Mooney has nothing of substance to say in reply, saying only that the debate is a waste of time–in which case, why doesn´t he shut up? [links omitted]saying without a trace of irony, "I trust there will be round denunciation of this behavior?"
*Yes, I checked the quotation to make sure it was accurate. If Mooney said the sky was blue, I'd look out my window to check.
A person with two functioning brain cells can figure this out, but I'll spell it out in case Mooney somehow manages to stumble on this post. He still won't get it — if Mooney were any stupider, we'd have to water him — but it's not fair to condemn him for failing to understand a subtle point.
Hallquist is not actually telling Mooney to shut up. He's asking a rhetorical question: Why is Mooney speaking out in a debate he considers a waste of time? The implication is that because Mooney is speaking, he doesn't actually believe the debate to be a waste of time. Mooney, on the other hand, has built his career on trying to make an actual philosophical case that anti-religious, anti-accommodationist atheists really should shut up. And not because their position is mistaken, but precisely because their position is correct.
Hallquist is a fairly minor blogger (not a slam; I'm a minor blogger myself). For some unfathomable reason (Midnight sacrifices to Nyarlahotep? Daily oral sex for the Discover Magazine editorial staff? A rent in the space-time continuum?) Mooney is a player in this debate; players should have better things to do than take offense from the peanut gallery.
Accusations of hypocrisy have a way of rebounding on the accuser. Even if Hallquist really were telling Mooney to shut up, why should Mooney take offense? Mooney is all about the shut up. It would be hypocritical, for example, for Fred Phelps to show kindness and tolerance to George Takai, but I certainly would not be incensed that Phelps showed kindness, nor would I condemn him for doing something I would approve of.
Fourth, and most importantly, Mooney takes offense at a turn of phrase to simply duck and ignore Hallquist's substantive criticism, that Mooney is actually lying. Well, Mooney, are you a liar?
[Note that the title of this post is a sarcastic joke. Mooney should say what he thinks, and so should I, and I think Mooney is indeed a whiny fucktard whose head is so far up his ass he needs a glass navel to watch television.]