Boring dead drama is boring and dead

[_Pahoran]

Not only that, but he seems to believe that he has the green light from Jesus to attack and hate even if the other guy doesn't behave badly.

Call for references, please. Kindly support your accusation or else withdraw it.

As I said, above: if one of yours announced that he was going to eat my children, and I said I disapproved, you would claim I'd been mean to the other poster.

As when you claimed that Shulem, who regularly tells those he hates to "Die in a fire!!!" was much kinder and gentler than I am.

You see, I think you simply share, without questioning it, a perception of me that is based, not in reality, but in the ethos of the hate clique to which you belong.

Regards,
Pahoran

[_Bob Loblaw]

Call for references, please. Kindly support your accusation or else withdraw it.

It's your assertion that you attack only when attacked first? Where to begin with that statement? You acknowledged that you pegged LDSToronto as "an outright non-believer who was hostile to everything the Church stood for, especially regarding its public stand on moral issues. I saw him undermining and back-stabbing the Church's leaders at every opportunity" and hence felt justified in attacking him. If I spent any time over on the other "dialogue" board I'm sure I'd find more examples.

As I said, above: if one of yours announced that he was going to eat my children, and I said I disapproved, you would claim I'd been mean to the other poster.

Horsehockey. If and when you behave with kindness and respect for others, I will note it publicly. I recognize I can be a jerk sometimes but at least I admit it. Your protestations of innocence ring rather hollow.

As when you claimed that Shulem, who regularly tells those he hates to "Die in a fire!!!" was much kinder and gentler than I am.

I have never once seen Shulem tell anyone to die in a fire. How regularly does he say that if I haven't seen it once in the few months I've been posting?

You see, I think you simply share, without questioning it, a perception of me that is based, not in reality, but in the ethos of the hate clique to which you belong.

Don't be so melodramatic. Hate clique?

Pointing out bad behavior is not the same as hate.

[_beastie]

I didn't know that Jesus taught you only have to follow his rules for behavior if the other guy does, too. You learn something new every day.

As you know, that is not what I said.

But thanks for playing.

Regards,
Pahoran

You didn't claim that Jesus would teach it, that's true. I just assumed that since you supposedly try to follow Jesus that somehow you had interpreted his teachings in a manner to justify your behavior.

Of course, it's just as possible you know your behavior conflicts with Jesus's teachings, and either don't care or will repent....one day. Maybe on your deathbed.

[_Pahoran]

Pointing out bad behavior is not the same as hate.

Thank you! Thank you!

Now repeat it until you actually get it.

Regards,
Pahoran

[_Bob Loblaw]

Thank you! Thank you!

Now repeat it until you actually get it.

Regards,
Pahoran

I do get it. You seem to take every criticism of your religion as a personal insult, which may be why you feel justified in responding with invective aimed at individuals.

[_Pahoran]

You didn't claim that Jesus would teach it, that's true. I just assumed that since you supposedly try to follow Jesus that somehow you had interpreted his teachings in a manner to justify your behavior.

Of course, it's just as possible you know your behavior conflicts with Jesus's teachings, and either don't care or will repent....one day. Maybe on your deathbed.

Okay, time for one of those questions that always ends up with a long period of chirping crickets:

Where and when did Jesus teach that we should always be spineless milquetoasts when discussing our beliefs?

Alternatively, where do we see Jesus setting the example of being a spineless milquetoast when discussing such things as, say, the sanctity of the Temple?

Now that beastie's bit of nonsense is out of the way:

This forum prides itself on what it calls "freedom of speech," meaning freedom to attack the Church of Jesus Christ. Indeed, between obsessing about the personal lives of LDS defenders, slagging off at MD&DB contributors and endless self-congratulations about how much "freedom of speech" there is here -- in the form of rather ineffectual moderation -- at least 90% of the forum content is accounted for.

Since my brief (and about to end) return, I have noticed a few people reciting the popular mantra: "Mormons can't stand it here because the truth isn't censored. That's why they always run away."

Permit me to disabuse you of that notion.

The reason why faithful, believing, covenant-keeping Latter-day Saints don't stay in this sty for very long is not, as you fondly delude yourselves, fear; it's disgust.

Personal abuse and smack-talk are what this forum thrives upon. An LDS participant coming here has a choice; he either gets down in the mud with the swine, or he does not. If he does not, he'll soon get sick of the place. If he does, then pious hypocrites will start hounding him about saying the same sorts of things everyone else around here says, only less frequently.

You lot have to decide if you want to have a level playing field or not. If you do, then stop piling on LDS participants who have the awful temerity to play your game on your field by your rules.

But if you do not, then you should stop thumping your hollow little chests about how little "censorship" there is here. Because the most effective kinds of censorship are not formal, and those kinds abound here.

Regards,
Pahoran

[_Bob Loblaw]

Pahoran,

The reason I'm not tempted to post over on the other board is that the smack talk and personal abuse are permitted for one side but not the other. That disgusts me more than the abuse itself.

You do realize that you can stand up for yourself and not be a spineless milquetoast without resorting to invective and vilification, don't you? Maybe you don't.

Sorry to see you go. Perhaps you have gotten all the personal abuse and smack talk out of your system for a season.

[_Doctor Scratch]

The reason why faithful, believing, covenant-keeping Latter-day Saints don't stay in this sty for very long is not, as you fondly delude yourselves, fear; it's disgust.

In your case, it *is* fear, hence why you were soiling yourself over the prospect of MsJack posting your PMs, and hence why you totally sidestepped the question Mr. Stakhanovite posed to you a couple of pages back.

[_Dr. Shades]

As when you claimed that Shulem, who regularly tells those he hates to "Die in a fire!!!" was much kinder and gentler than I am.

I have never once seen Shulem tell anyone to die in a fire. How regularly does he say that if I haven't seen it once in the few months I've been posting?

Pahoran is correct about Shulem saying that.

Shulem typically does it in the Telestial Forum, though.

[_Drifting]

Do you mean that you believe God is officially okay with your online behaviour not meeting the standards expected of a Priesthood holder?

I participate in these fora on the understanding that they are a "level playing field." Just as I don't walk up to people in Church and throw them to the ground, but absolutely have no problem with doing such things on the sports field, so I understand, as you evidently do not, that the rules here are not the same as the rules there.

But I rather resolutely insist that my participation is based upon the presumption that the same rules apply to everyone. I'm not going to bind myself to Marquess of Queensberry rules while everyone else is employing street-brawler tactics. Nor will I be preached at by those who have absolutely no intention of applying those preachments to themselves.

Regards,
Pahoran

You haven't answered my question.

Bump, is this a yes or a no?

Also, have you compared your posting style etc with President Uchtdorfs recent talk and how do you feel you measure up to his counsel?