'Dooney with an "E"

I was notified this morning that Chris Ortiz at the Chalcedon Foundation has become aware of my writing, and doesn't like it:
http://0rz.com/?AMfYd

It also seems that Ortiz doesn't like the fact that I have been deliberately spelling Rushdoony's name with an "e" about half of the time. It's rather childish, I know, but I wondered how long it would take one of these fellows to finally notice it and make a big point of pointing it out.

Chris writes,

"Oh, dear me, if I had a dollar for every time a secular critic misspelled a reconstructionist's name, I'd be a wealthy man. Here's the latest from a silly woman who thinks she can discuss the issue of slavery with the likes of Rushdoony and North:
Lately I've been reading about a still darker side to the Reconstructionist/Patriarchy movement.Quite simply, it is this:There are those among the movement who claim that since SLAVERY is not condemned in the Bible, it is a perfectly legitimate thing, and advocate a return to the same.
J.R. Rushdooney, the father of Reconstructionism, advocated a return to debtor slavery. So does his son-in-law, Gary North.LOL! Oh, man. That's too funny. I love it. I absolutely love it. How can she possibly understand the doctrine of a man who's name she does not know? She's never read a single page of "J.R. Rushdooney.""

Now, it seems that Chris can't be bothered with comments at his blogsite, so I guess I'll answer him here.

First of all, Chris, I am not a secular critic. I am a Christian critic, and I am rather tired of seeing "the name of God blasphemed among the Gentiles" because of theonomists such as North and Rushdoony and yourself. Your Dominionist heresy is giving Christianity a bad name.

Second, if you wish to call me a "silly woman", you have a perfect right to do so. I've been called far worse, and it's really rather a privilege to be ridiculed for telling the truth.
But if you disagree with what I or other persons have said, why not refute it, point by point, on a blog that allows public commentary? It's easy to simply call names.

In other words, if I am wrong, prove it. But if I'm speaking the truth, why are you mocking me?

And third, Chris....
Whether you are writing of Rushdoony or anyone else:
"Whose" is the possessive form of the pronoun "who." "Who's" is a contraction of "who is".