Question for MSJack, re: LDS arguments

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Darth J
_Emeritus
Posts: 13392
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Question for MSJack, re: LDS arguments

Post by _Darth J »

Simon Belmont wrote:
Darth J wrote:No, it's not. Nobody owns the name "Mormon." blog.php?u=7958&b=2823


Whether he made it up or it was told to him through revelation, Joseph Smith owns the name "Mormon."


Joseph Smith is dead, and all and sundry sects of Mormonism claim him as their prophet.

Similarly, it would not be good if Latter-day Saints used the term "Christian," because it would be quite confusing for outsiders who might mistake the LDS Church for a mainstream, traditional Christian church. Right?


Except Fundamentalist Mormons are not "Mormon," they are "Fundamentalist Mormon" or "FLDS."


The FLDS do in fact refer to themselves as "Mormon," as was explained by the expert witness whose affidavit is linked to in my blog post.

Your concession is also contradicting Gordon B. Hinckley:

Gordon B. Hinckley, October 1998 General Conference

There is no such thing as a “Mormon Fundamentalist.” It is a contradiction to use the two words together.


Was he disingenuous, or are you incorrect?

It isn't a "clarification." It is a disingenuous attempt to tell the rest of the world how to speak.


How to speak? Does the church have instructions about how to pass air properly through one's vocal chords to make resonating sounds?

Or would it just like to be referred to by its proper name?


The Church of Jesus Christ is not the proper name of the LDS Church. It is the proper name of the Bickertonite church.

The proper name of the LDS Church is the Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That is the name of the corporation sole organized under the state of Utah that is a legally-recognized religious entity.

The LDS Church claims to have a monopoly on the name "Mormons," but it demonstrably does not.


Where do we claim that?


In that press release to which I linked.

The LDS Church has already been denied its attempt to trademark the name "Mormon," yet it still insists that the term applies uniquely to itself and its members.


It does.


Simon, after you recover from that headupyourassectomy that you have been putting off for so long, maybe you would like to explain why the LDS Church was denied a trademark for the word "Mormon."
_sock puppet
_Emeritus
Posts: 17063
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: Question for MSJack, re: LDS arguments

Post by _sock puppet »

sock puppet wrote:Why do you suppose that is?
Simon Belmont wrote:It's ultimately a matter of personal evidence vs. empirical evidence.
sock puppet wrote:What weight, if any, for your own personal beliefs do you give to anyone's but your own personal evidence?
BUMP. I'd like to understand you, Simon, in this regard better than I currently do.
_Simon Belmont

Re: Question for MSJack, re: LDS arguments

Post by _Simon Belmont »

Darth J wrote:Joseph Smith is dead, and all and sundry sects of Mormonism claim him as their prophet.


He either invented it, or it was told to him. He owned it, and by default, his church owns it. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is that church. We cannot stop other churches from using it, but it is our term, and we are the only Mormons.

The FLDS do in fact refer to themselves as "Mormon," as was explained by the expert witness whose affidavit is linked to in my blog post.

Your concession is also contradicting Gordon B. Hinckley:

Gordon B. Hinckley, October 1998 General Conference

There is no such thing as a “Mormon Fundamentalist.” It is a contradiction to use the two words together.


There really is no such thing, however, a group of people call themselves "Fundamentalist Mormons," so that's the name by which we refer to them. Another example, there is no such word as "Baconator" but it is the hamburger at Wendy's with a crap load of bacon and Wendy's refers to it as the Baconator.

Was he disingenuous, or are you incorrect?


Neither option in your false dichotomy will suffice.

The Church of Jesus Christ is not the proper name of the LDS Church. It is the proper name of the Bickertonite church.


You didn't answer my question. Do you believe The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches people how to speak?

The proper name of the LDS Church is the Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That is the name of the corporation sole organized under the state of Utah that is a legally-recognized religious entity.


That is the legal entity, yes. So what?

In that press release to which I linked.


Don't see it.

Simon, after you recover from that headupyourassectomy that you have been putting off for so long, maybe you would like to explain why the LDS Church was denied a trademark for the word "Mormon."


You just keep setting up those strawmen and knocking them down, DJ. It's what you're best at.
_Simon Belmont

Re: Question for MSJack, re: LDS arguments

Post by _Simon Belmont »

sock puppet wrote:BUMP. I'd like to understand you, Simon, in this regard better than I currently do.



I give weight based on case. However, who am I to tell someone whether their experience was real or not?
_sock puppet
_Emeritus
Posts: 17063
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: Question for MSJack, re: LDS arguments

Post by _sock puppet »

Simon Belmont wrote:
sock puppet wrote:BUMP. I'd like to understand you, Simon, in this regard better than I currently do.



I give weight based on case. However, who am I to tell someone whether their experience was real or not?

I am not suggesting you tell anyone anything. Just wondering what weight you give their claims as you formulate or revise your own beliefs.
_Darth J
_Emeritus
Posts: 13392
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Question for MSJack, re: LDS arguments

Post by _Darth J »

Simon Belmont wrote:
Darth J wrote:Joseph Smith is dead, and all and sundry sects of Mormonism claim him as their prophet.


He either invented it, or it was told to him. He owned it, and by default, his church owns it. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is that church. We cannot stop other churches from using it, but it is our term, and we are the only Mormons.


In the past, Simon Belmont has said on this board that Rough Stone Rolling is the best biography ever about Joseph Smith. (For example, see him praising it here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=17129&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=63) Its author, Richard L. Bushman, is the Howard W. Hunter Visiting Professor in Mormon Studies at Claremont Graduate University. Let's see what Professor Bushman has to say in his book, Mormonism: A Very Short Introduction, regarding Simon Belmont's assertion:

Pages 13-14

Varieties of Mormonism

Mormonism now consists of scores of independent factions that have emerged over the years. The church bearing the name of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, headquartered in Salt Lake City, is only the largest entity in a broad movement. A number of separate groups sprang up in the decades after Joseph Smith's death in 1844 when there was a contest to succeed him as president of the church. After Brigham Young led the largest contingent west to the Great Basin in 1847, a substantial number of Mormons who stayed behind formed the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints under Joseph Smith's son. Known since 2001 as the Community of Christ, this branch of Mormonism is headquartered in Independence, Missouri.

In the early twentieth century, another major split took place following the abandonment of plural marriage in 1890. So-called fundamentalist groups held on to polygamy and claimed to continue authentic Mormonism. They believed that the main body of the church had strayed. The fundamentalists are the groups now notorious in the press for their practice of plural marriage in opposition to anti-bigamy laws.

These divergent wings of the Mormon movement exemplify the complex forces operating within Mormonism to this day.


The FLDS do in fact refer to themselves as "Mormon," as was explained by the expert witness whose affidavit is linked to in my blog post.

Your concession is also contradicting Gordon B. Hinckley:

Gordon B. Hinckley, October 1998 General Conference

There is no such thing as a “Mormon Fundamentalist.” It is a contradiction to use the two words together.


There really is no such thing, however, a group of people call themselves "Fundamentalist Mormons," so that's the name by which we refer to them. Another example, there is no such word as "Baconator" but it is the hamburger at Wendy's with a crap load of bacon and Wendy's refers to it as the Baconator.


Where your analogy falls apart is that Wendy's has trademarked "Baconator" because it describes a unique product made only by that restaurant.

By contrast, the United States Patent and Trademark Office denied the LDS Church's application to trademark "Mormon" because "[g]eneric terms are by definition incapable of indicating a particular source of the services, and cannot be registered as trademarks....One of the generic names of a religion may not register for religious services under Section 2(f), or on the Supplemental Register." http://tdr.uspto.gov/jsp/DocumentViewPa ... /false#p=1

Was he disingenuous, or are you incorrect?


Neither option in your false dichotomy will suffice.


See: No true Scotsman fallacy

The Church of Jesus Christ is not the proper name of the LDS Church. It is the proper name of the Bickertonite church.


You didn't answer my question. Do you believe The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches people how to speak?


You're right. I am ignoring your thinking that deliberate obtuseness is a clever rhetorical device.

The proper name of the LDS Church is the Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That is the name of the corporation sole organized under the state of Utah that is a legally-recognized religious entity.


That is the legal entity, yes. So what?


So let's call things by their proper names to avoid confusion with the many, many other denominations that refer to themselves as "The Church of Jesus Christ."

In that press release to which I linked.


Don't see it.


Well, it's something that is actually published by the Church, and I know how it disturbs you to go to the Church to find actual LDS teachings/policies/statements.

Simon, after you recover from that headupyourassectomy that you have been putting off for so long, maybe you would like to explain why the LDS Church was denied a trademark for the word "Mormon."


You just keep setting up those strawmen and knocking them down, Darth J. It's what you're best at.


Hey, kids! Now you, too, can have the rapier wit and razor-sharp mind of Simon Belmont! Let's watch as

SIMON BELMONT EXPLAINS THE STRAW MAN FALLACY!

1. Darth J says that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office denied the LDS Church's application to trademark the name "Mormon" because it is a generic description of a religious movement.
2. The above is irrefutably true: http://tdr.uspto.gov/jsp/DocumentViewPa ... /false#p=1
3. Simon Belmont says, "Nuh-uh!"
4. See? It's a straw man!

For more on Simon Belmont's masterfully pointing out the straw man fallacy---and not at all making a complete fool of himself!---you can visit the first two pages of this thread:

http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... &sk=t&sd=a
Post Reply