Marcus wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 5:31 am
I know Free Ranger has indicated his desire to disengage, so this is simply a response to his comment:
Free Ranger wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 9:16 pm
...So what I see going on here in this thread some people are avoiding my questions and answering the question
they wanted to answer which is "what is a religion," which in my humble opinion feels like a clever Mormon-like/Millet-style tactic
in my view.
No, people have NOT been answering their own questions, they have been asking you to define your terms.
...For my actual question(s) was regarding whether or not there is a new cultish ideology many call secular far-Leftism (not to be confused with Liberalism) that is in my opinion going mostly ignored in the exmormon community (despite much of its harm, more harmful than Mormonism even perhaps?) and in some cases fully adopted by some exmormons despite its perceieved "cultishness" by Bill Maher and other secular atheists?
Really.
Because here is what you actually said:
.. that atheism has been taken over by what the atheist James Lindsay calls Feminist Gnosticism... then maybe just maybe we are seeing a new quasi-religion emerge in front of our eyes as critical thinkers who were able see through the cultish ways of Brighamite Mormonism. That I think is a huge elephant in the room...
So what exactly is your "elephant in the room"?
...at least I should not have dared to ask the question in the first place. So I will say now that my question has been answered indirectly I think based on the responses.
So I do not feel a desire any longer to engage as my inquiry has resolved itself. Again, not a fan of sticking my finger in hornet's nests. And yes I do sense hostility. So I will leave ya be...
In all honesty, what you have done is come here under false pretenses, concluded what you planned to conclude before you came here, and then left in the most cowardly manner possible. Your reputation is what you have made of it, and it is not good.
Take care.
As to your slanderous comment:
What you have done is come here under false pretenses, concluded what you planned to conclude before you came here, and then left in the most cowardly manner possible. Your reputation is what you have made of it, and it is not good.
Not cowardly no,
naïve definetly. I did not forsee what I consider being ganged up on. I said I was going to read over the material others' linked to and think things over. Why not allow someone to do that?
You have no idea what's going on in my personal life Marcus. Maybe someone close to me just got in a car accident and died. And my mind is on other things, and I was not interested in receiving hostility, you have no idea. Wouldn't the mature reaction have been to allow me to disengage, knowing people have personal reasons for doing so? Why take it so personally anyway? Instead of allowing me to take a moment in peace to read over the material and ponder, you have done what I experienced in the Brighamite Mormon Church when I resigned, which is they also accused me of being cowardly and not allowing me to leave gracefully as they also basically accused me of false pretenses and reading my mind saying
I already came to my conclusions and basically saying I could not handle the rules and expectations and left cowardly. Trying to goad me into coming back, taunting me with threats to my eternal salvation. At least you just went after my reputation. What do we exmormons say about a person or group that won't allow you to leave without your character being attacked, Marcus? Those tactics did not work
then and it's not gonna work with you Marcus.
It feels like I'm being asked to have a discussion in a living room with rules hanging on the mantle of don't throw your food. And then as I sit down, everyone starts throwing food. Your personal attack is classic ad hominum and mind-reading fallacy, which is against the celestial board rules that state:
No personal attacks allowed whatsoever. ...
No disrespectful communications allowed. Address the ideas, not the person who posts them.
There was no reason to personally attack me and slander my character and reputation as you did.
I had already said I felt that you were becoming hostile which you denied. In my opinion, my questions were not being answered and I began to realize I was just making people upset by bringing up the topic even though if you go on the internet and youtube, it is a hot topic discussed among many atheists right now. I could link to several youtube videos and articles saying exactly what I am saying by well known atheists.
So when I could see the majority of outspoken voices on here have a certain perspective on the topic, I respected that and was being honest when I said I would read over the the links provided me. So I decided, they have made their ideas clear, and I asked my questions, and any one reading could decide for themselves. But you made it
personal, going after my character and reputation, even
flat out saying so.
Your
personal attacks came
after I had said things were becoming
hostile and I don't want to stick my finger in a hornet's nest. You fulfilled my prophecy by stinging me as hard as you can. Then you say I'm being cowardly if I don't continue to get food thrown in my face in the living room with a sign on the wall saying
don't throw food. Meanwhile, I'm not supposed to throw food back and if I do my comments will be moderated. How is that fair?
I would just ask of you Marcus that you respect the celestial rules of this board. Otherwise, what's the point of having them?
I will offer this, which is that I was being
naïve to think that my questioning would lead to a discussion with diverse opinions. Among the exmormon posters I did not expect my questioning and my links to cause such a monolithic reaction. When I did see the reaction was negative, I did not want to further antagonize anyone, which was why I was in the
celestial forum in the first place to avoid sparring.
It's just sad we could not have had a better discussion. I will accept some of the blame. But at this point, I'm drained and don't want to continue because as I mentioned elsewhere, I was bullied in middle school until I learned to box and fought back and was manipulated by LDS leaders in my youth, and so if I can't defend myself (which I feel like in this situation) and you can continue to disparage my character and insult me but I can not return fire without being moderated, well that is not good for my mental health to be attacked over and over and can not defend myself. I also, out of respect to Dr. Shades, wish to
follow the board rules, so I will not break Shades' rules, which pushes me into silence.