1. The claims of the petition are a gross misrepresentation of the actual texts they purport to have a problem with. The first, a Turkish translation of Matthew, does in fact retain the terms "Father" and "Son" in an interlinear form right underneath the original Greek text in the left column of the book, while the right column has a translation that is akin to "The Message" in Turkish. Is that a sin? Are the translators demons for doing it? The authors of this petition would have the Christian public believe so. And many a Christian who can't read Turkish and hasn't even seen this text is ready to jump on the McCarthy bandwagon and demonize the missionaries who were behind this translation.
2. The second text in question is an Arabic translation of the Gospels and Acts. In this text, when the Greek term υιός του θεού ("Son of God") appears, it is translated literally as ابن الله ("Ibn Allah" / "Son of God") in Arabic. However, when only the Greek word "Son" appears, the translators took some liberty by using حبيب الله ("Habib Allah" / "Beloved of God") to make it clear that Jesus is not the result of human procreation (I'd prefer a literal rendering with a parenthetical note, but I'm not going to demonize the translators for it). This translation is, again, much like "The Message" essentially.
3. Nobody wants to take "Father" and "Son" out of the Bible, with the exception perhaps of an infinitesimally small percentage of fringe people. I agree that we need to make sure we keep "Father" and "Son" in the Bible. I would have signed the petition if what it claimed was actually true. But the exaggerations and misstatements in the petition were many, which is why I didn't sign it.
4. Using a secular, activist site like change.org and posting the names and emails of the people who the petitioners deemed responsible is, in my opinion, very irresponsible and unprofessional.
5. Finally, consider the following example from Mark 1:1 in both the ESV and The Message:
The ESV is a translation. The Message is an idiomatic paraphrase. Everyone understands the difference. The translations in question by the new McCarthys are no different than The Message. They are simply idiomatic paraphrases designed to allow more people to connect with the Bible who otherwise might not. Personally, I don't enjoy The Message. But that doesn't mean I think we should attack what Peterson has tried to do with it. And for the record, I don't enjoy the newer idiomatic translations for Muslims either. But that doesn't mean I want to derogate those who do!
Why don't the initiators of the "Lost in Translation" petition start a new petition and charge Eugene Peterson with heresy and defame him all over the internet too?