Are you seriously even thinking about condemning/censuring emotional reaction? I don’t understand what the -content- of any of the above is, at all. Things are the way they are—including people. They act the way they do. I’m not being reductionist—I’m saying that (in my world) it is only the power of dropping the context which gives your statements a semblance of meaningfulness.
If you do not give your statements basis will lose people (e.g. me) from different philosophical/intellectual backgrounds.
I’m not sure where you got that idea.
I think the crux of Eliezer’s post is that if you don’t understand it, it’s still a mystery, and it’s worth discovering.
Where is the condemnation?