I personally believe society has failed to see what is really going on in so many seemingly "good" homes -- homes where the material needs are met, but the emotional needs are not.I further believe society has vastly underestimated the damage done through emotional abuse.
Given this, I've felt no need to defend my opinions on the authorship debate, especially when there are scholars who have dedicated their professional lives to the subject and are in a better position to debate the evidence (or lack thereof).
I treat other opinions with respect, I wait for the incontrovertible evidence that will put this argument to bed once and for all, and I wonder sometimes if any one writer could have been responsible for the ensuing effect on literature, language, and history.
The issue is complex, fraught with logic pitfalls even for those who defend the orthodoxy, but Shakespeare remains the easiest of any authorship candidate to defend.
For elaboration, let me first introduce my friend, William of Occam, and his proposition that forms the basis of my stance.
Most people would reject my story without question.
What's interesting is that there are millions of people who actually do believe this story of the angel and the plates and the book and the Jewish people living in North America 2,000 years ago.
Producer Pat Walters brings us a detective story from the Cold War, about a mysterious substance that fell from the sky in Southeast Asia at the end of the Vietnam war.
As retired CIA officer Merle Prebbenow explains, once the US pulled its troops out of the region, the communists took over -- the Viet Cong and their allies in Laos the Pathet Lao.
By the mother's own words we see example after example of emotional abuse.
It is the same kind of abuse I have seen in the homes of the suicidal and self-harming teens.
Besides, the burden of proof falls on the other claimants to the throne.