Members of Mormon Religion March. Pride Parade Ashland

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Members of Mormon Religion March. Pride Parade Ashland

Post by _Droopy »

Stormy Waters wrote:http://www.kobi5.com/component/zoo/item/mormons-march-for-gay-pride.html

From the article.
The Mormon group's organizer says this is the first time they've been permitted by the Church of Latter Day Saints to voice their personal opinions on the topic, and organizers say they've already walked in the Seattle and Portland pride parades.


This is the dead giveaway. Take this seriously at your own peril.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Darth J
_Emeritus
Posts: 13392
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Members of Mormon Religion March. Pride Parade Ashland

Post by _Darth J »

Ron Lafferty wrote:
From the article.
The Mormon group's organizer says this is the first time they've been permitted by the Church of Latter Day Saints to voice their personal opinions on the topic, and organizers say they've already walked in the Seattle and Portland pride parades.


This is the dead giveaway. Take this seriously at your own peril.


That's funny, because in another thread you started, you waxed triumphant about one of your favorite televangelists supposedly endorsing one political stance over another: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=26457

And you continually cyberstalk Joanna Brooks for allegedly being an apostate because of her ideological views, which according to you should be subject to church discipline.

(Does it make you excited to think about Joanna being disciplined, Loran? Would you like to discipline her personally, because she is a naughty girl?)

So are you dubious because you think it's a given that LDS members can express their personal beliefs (which you yourself demonstrably do not believe), or do you think it's dubious to claim that the LDS Church allows members to express their own beliefs?

P.S. We're not a cult!
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Members of Mormon Religion March. Pride Parade Ashland

Post by _Droopy »


That's funny, because in another thread you started, you waxed triumphant about one of your favorite televangelists supposedly endorsing one political stance over another: http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/vie ... =1&t=26457

And you continually cyberstalk Joanna Brooks for allegedly being an apostate because of her ideological views, which according to you should be subject to church discipline.

(Does it make you excited to think about Joanna being disciplined, Loran? Would you like to discipline her personally, because she is a naughty girl?)

So are you dubious because you think it's a given that LDS members can express their personal beliefs (which you yourself demonstrably do not believe), or do you think it's dubious to claim that the LDS Church allows members to express their own beliefs?

P.S. We're not a cult!



Between the lies (which Darth knows are lies), the adolescent, emotive affect, and the fantastic, delusional bigotry this individual exudes, I would well nigh now swear under oath that this was Scratch. This is exactly the kind of stuff Daniel Peterson has had coming his way for years (and others),and its style is pretty well by now etched in stone.

Its a long and respected tradition here.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Darth J
_Emeritus
Posts: 13392
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Members of Mormon Religion March. Pride Parade Ashland

Post by _Darth J »

Maybe my problem is that I long ago abandoned my valence in the gospel, in favor of the weaker ionic bonds.

Droopy, you may at your leisure demonstrate what exactly you are alleging that I lied about.

I mean of course lies qua lies.
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Members of Mormon Religion March. Pride Parade Ashland

Post by _Droopy »

Darth J wrote:Maybe my problem is that I long ago abandoned my valence in the gospel, in favor of the weaker ionic bonds.

Droopy, you may at your leisure demonstrate what exactly you are alleging that I lied about.

I mean of course lies qua lies.



I'm not discoursing with you anymore, Darth, but just for the sake of being clear:

That's funny, because in another thread you started, you waxed triumphant about one of your favorite televangelists


L. Tom Perry is not a "televangelist."

supposedly endorsing one political stance over another: http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/vie ... =1&t=26457


I didn't say he was endorsing a "political stance," or that he was being political at all. What I pointed out is that his statement was a denunciation of some key attributes of the Left, which, of course, manifests itself in political ways, but is at its core, a worldview and fundamental philosophy of the human condition - a doctrine, or series of doctrines, of which political doctrines are among the most salient.

And you continually cyberstalk Joanna Brooks


This is both a lie and a slander.

for allegedly being an apostate because of her ideological views,


Which she, in my view, is. I've never mentioned anything regarding her personal morals, which may be exemplary.

which according to you should be subject to church discipline.


CFR

(Does it make you excited to think about Joanna being disciplined, Loran? Would you like to discipline her personally, because she is a naughty girl?)


I think its high past time to take all those Robert Mapplethorpe fetish art photos down from your bedroom wall.

So are you dubious because you think it's a given that LDS members can express their personal beliefs


Of course its dubious. Any such claim is a knee slapping riot, as anyone who's spent any time in the Church, and been an actual part of its culture and understands its doctrine, understands quite clearly. The individual who made that claim is a bald, wide-eyed liar, and knows he is. But so what? The Cause...

(which you yourself demonstrably do not believe),


CFR
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Bob Loblaw
_Emeritus
Posts: 3323
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2012 2:26 am

Re: Members of Mormon Religion March. Pride Parade Ashland

Post by _Bob Loblaw »

Darth J wrote:(Does it make you excited to think about Joanna being disciplined, Loran? Would you like to discipline her personally, because she is a naughty girl?)


After interacting with Droopy here, I'd guess he'd prefer being the recipient of discipline from Joanna. Maybe we can get him a subscription to Leftist Vixens in Leather.
"It doesn't seem fair, does it Norm--that I should have so much knowledge when there are people in the world that have to go to bed stupid every night." -- Clifford C. Clavin, USPS

"¡No contaban con mi astucia!" -- El Chapulin Colorado
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Members of Mormon Religion March. Pride Parade Ashland

Post by _Droopy »

Bob Loblaw wrote:
Darth J wrote:(Does it make you excited to think about Joanna being disciplined, Loran? Would you like to discipline her personally, because she is a naughty girl?)


After interacting with Droopy here, I'd guess he'd prefer being the recipient of discipline from Joanna. Maybe we can get him a subscription to Leftist Vixens in Leather.



After interacting with you here, I'm tempted to subscribe to High Times.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Bob Loblaw
_Emeritus
Posts: 3323
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2012 2:26 am

Re: Members of Mormon Religion March. Pride Parade Ashland

Post by _Bob Loblaw »

Droopy wrote:After interacting with you here, I'm tempted to subscribe to High Times.


Interesting. I've never been high, but maybe you can describe it for me.
"It doesn't seem fair, does it Norm--that I should have so much knowledge when there are people in the world that have to go to bed stupid every night." -- Clifford C. Clavin, USPS

"¡No contaban con mi astucia!" -- El Chapulin Colorado
_Darth J
_Emeritus
Posts: 13392
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Members of Mormon Religion March. Pride Parade Ashland

Post by _Darth J »

Droopy wrote:
Darth J wrote:That's funny, because in another thread you started, you waxed triumphant about one of your favorite televangelists


L. Tom Perry is not a "televangelist."


televangelist: an evangelist who regularly conducts religious services on television.

evangelist: a preacher of the gospel.

L. Tom Perry is paid to go on TV and espouse the LDS gospel and solicit donations to the religious organization that employs him. By definition, he is a televangelist.

supposedly endorsing one political stance over another: vie ... =1&t=26457


I didn't say he was endorsing a "political stance," or that he was being political at all. What I pointed out is that his statement was a denunciation of some key attributes of the Left, which, of course, manifests itself in political ways, but is at its core, a worldview and fundamental philosophy of the human condition - a doctrine, or series of doctrines, of which political doctrines are among the most salient.


If he was denouncing tenets of an identifiable political ideology, then he was being political.

And you continually cyberstalk Joanna Brooks


This is both a lie and a slander.


"Lie and a slander" is redundant. At least, that's what I thought while I was eating bacon and cured pork belly this morning.

And it is not slander, because it is not a verbal statement. Also, truth is a defense to defamation.

cyberstalking

Many cyberstalkers try to damage the reputation of their victim and turn other people against them. They post false information about them on websites. They may set up their own websites, blogs or user pages for this purpose. They post allegations about the victim to newsgroups, chat rooms or other sites that allow public contributions, such as Wikipedia or Amazon.com.

search.php?keywords=joanna&terms=all&author=droopy&sc=1&sf=all&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

http://joannabrookswatch.wordpress.com/

for allegedly being an apostate because of her ideological views,


Which she, in my view, is. I've never mentioned anything regarding her personal morals, which may be exemplary.


http://joannabrookswatch.wordpress.com/ ... s-of-time/

An interesting example of the mindset at work here can be found on Joanna Brooks blog, in which Brooks (here a kind of self-styled leftist Mormon Dear Abbey) answers questions from other generally liberal LDS about various aspects of Mormon life, culture, and doctrine. Her answers, however, are not those one would expect from one who had been, not only immersed in, but imbued with, the doctrines, teachings, principles, and culture of “Mormonism.” Indeed, her answers, for the most part, bespeak a deep and conflictual alienation from the Church, from the gospel it teaches and seeks to spread, and from the bulk of its faithful, committed members.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=26345&p=644166&hilit=joanna+bishop#p644166

The ghastly intellectual fraud involved in either claiming, or accepting from others, a designation as a "spokesperson" or "a national voice on Mormon life and politics" while that voice is imbued with ideas, concepts, and philosophies dredged from the deepest abyssal planes of the academic Left and its churning cauldron of "studies" departments and pseudo-academic disciplines demands an intellectually substantive, assertive response.

which according to you should be subject to church discipline.


CFR


Droopy wrote: Joanna Brooks has, for all intents and purposes, apostatized from the Church. viewtopic.php?f=1&t=23079&p=567283&hilit=joanna+bishop#p567283


Or maybe you think that apostates should not be subject to church discipline, which means she is free to promote whatever viewpoint she wants, which begs the question of why you have a blog and interminable threads on this board obsessing over Joanna Brooks.

(Does it make you excited to think about Joanna being disciplined, Loran? Would you like to discipline her personally, because she is a naughty girl?)


I think its high past time to take all those Robert Mapplethorpe fetish art photos down from your bedroom wall.


How many blogs do you have obsessing over Joanna Brooks, Loran? More than I do, I bet.

So are you dubious because you think it's a given that LDS members can express their personal beliefs


Of course its dubious. Any such claim is a knee slapping riot, as anyone who's spent any time in the Church, and been an actual part of its culture and understands its doctrine, understands quite clearly. The individual who made that claim is a bald, wide-eyed liar, and knows he is. But so what? The Cause...


Okay, so you do not believe, as this person claims, that members of the LDS Church are free to express their personal opinions.

(which you yourself demonstrably do not believe),


CFR


Tell me about how there is plenty of room in the Church for people like Joanna Brooks.
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Members of Mormon Religion March. Pride Parade Ashland

Post by _Droopy »

L. Tom Perry is not a "televangelist."


televangelist: an evangelist who regularly conducts religious services on television.

evangelist: a preacher of the gospel.

L. Tom Perry is paid to go on TV and espouse the LDS gospel and solicit donations to the religious organization that employs him. By definition, he is a televangelist.



The first of Darth's head gaming lies is here exposed in all its tortured, twisted, lawyarly sophistry for what it is, in his own straw-grasping words. One down (any serious Latter-day Saint will be laughing all the way to the fridge for another Dad's at this).

I said, in a vain attempt at forcing some intellectual coherence down the throat of this posturing hack:

I didn't say he was endorsing a "political stance," or that he was being political at all. What I pointed out is that his statement was a denunciation of some key attributes of the Left, which, of course, manifests itself in political ways, but is at its core, a worldview and fundamental philosophy of the human condition - a doctrine, or series of doctrines, of which political doctrines are among the most salient.


Posturing Hack then retorts, struggling for intellectual substance in an effort to defend his prior slanders:

If he was denouncing tenets of an identifiable political ideology, then he was being political.


Which is exactly what I said.

What I pointed out is that his statement was a denunciation of some key attributes of the Left, which, of course, manifests itself in political ways, but is at its core, a worldview and fundamental philosophy of the human condition - a doctrine, or series of doctrines, of which political doctrines are among the most salient.


PH than takes the standard MDB low road:

And you continually cyberstalk Joanna Brooks


I responded:

This is both a lie and a slander.


PH responded with more lawyerly linguistic gaming, and then posted from another site:

Many cyberstalkers try to damage the reputation of their victim and turn other people against them.


By this definition, anyone who criticizes anything anyone does or says online, gives a critical review of a book or paper, or critiques anyone political or philosophical views, is a cyberstalker.

They post false information about them on websites.


Which I've clearly never done.

They may set up their own websites, blogs or user pages for this purpose.


Clearly, have never done that.

They post allegations about the victim to newsgroups, chat rooms or other sites that allow public contributions, such as Wikipedia or Amazon.com.


This would shut down all critical free speech on the Internet if taken seriously.

PH then begins the usual self-defeating, intelligence insulting, Johnnie Cochranesque game anew:

[color=#0000FF]An interesting example of the mindset at work here can be found on Joanna Brooks blog, in which Brooks (here a kind of self-styled leftist Mormon Dear Abbey) answers questions from other generally liberal LDS about various aspects of Mormon life, culture, and doctrine. Her answers, however, are not those one would expect from one who had been, not only immersed in, but imbued with, the doctrines, teachings, principles, and culture of “Mormonism.” Indeed, her answers, for the most part, bespeak a deep and conflictual alienation from the Church, from the gospel it teaches and seeks to spread, and from the bulk of its faithful, committed members.


And? These are criticisms of her ideas and beliefs. They are opinions about here philosophy and what I perceive to be her state of mind and psychological orientation (as manifested in her beliefs and philosophy. Just the kind of stuff you'd apparently like to shut down, eh Darth?).

The ghastly intellectual fraud involved in either claiming, or accepting from others, a designation as a "spokesperson" or "a national voice on Mormon life and politics" while that voice is imbued with ideas, concepts, and philosophies dredged from the deepest abyssal planes of the academic Left and its churning cauldron of "studies" departments and pseudo-academic disciplines demands an intellectually substantive, assertive response.


More criticism of her ideas, philosophy, and in this case, self-styled personae as a public intellectual. I do think her designation as a "national voice of Mormon life and politics" is a ghastly intellectual fraud, because Joanna Brooks' politics, ideology, and social philosophy is drastically in conflict with the beliefs and values of the vast majority of faithful, committed Mormons within Mormon culture and with the doctrines of the Church, which are at the base of Mormon culture.

Now, take a look at Johnnie at work:

which according to you should be subject to church discipline.

CFR


Droopy wrote: Joanna Brooks has, for all intents and purposes, apostatized from the Church. viewtopic.php?f=1&t=23079&p=567283&hilit=joanna+bishop#p567283


Or maybe you think that apostates should not be subject to church discipline, which means she is free to promote whatever viewpoint she wants, which begs the question of why you have a blog and interminable threads on this board obsessing over Joanna Brooks.


Apostates may or may not be subject to church discipline. That's more a point regarding what they do as over against what they think privately. It is possible, however, to find oneself excommunicated when one crosses a certain line in public criticism of the Church, its leaders, and its teachings. That is up to the Brethren and/or her local priesthood leaders.

In any case, as I have now called your bluff yet again, exposed you as a lying demagogue, and pulled your mask off one more time, it would probably be of little use in pointing out that I have made my position on apostasy clear on this board time and time again. You are ignorant of it, or too utterly consumed by your own fervid agenda to bother apprising yourself of it. Either way, an apostate is one who leaves the church in mind and heart. Apostates do get excommunicated, and others leave of their own accord, in an official sense. That's not my call, and I've never made it my call.

My concern is with Brooks' subversion and corruption of what it is and means to be Mormon; it is with her desire to alter the Church to accommodate the secular liberal world that is her true home and frame of reference. One look at many of the replies on her Religion Dispatches page, as well as on her blog, will make clear that she has already been successful, in true Korihorist fashion, in drawing members of the Church into her worldview and neutered, secularly domesticated version of the gospel.

He tries to save himself, but only sinks lower into his pool of bigoted extremism:

How many blogs do you have obsessing over Joanna Brooks, Loran? More than I do, I bet.


Its a blog dedicated to intellectual, philosophical criticism of Joanna Brooks philosophy and criticisms of the Church. Deal with it.

I took out a CFR on PH when he claimed that I do not believe that LDS are allowed (by whom, only Crom knows) to express their personal beliefs. Here it is:

CFR


PH replies:

Tell me about how there is plenty of room in the Church for people like Joanna Brooks.


What is Joanna Brooks like, Darth?
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
Post Reply