My Wife's Take on the New Mormon Media Blitz

[_Jason Bourne]

Face it, Why Me, you missed the point of Jack's post, big time. You either missed it intentionally, or you are really just THAT stupid. I'm really not sure which.

Uh well, yea!.... and well, never mind.

[_cafe crema]

Face it, Why Me, you missed the point of Jack's post, big time. You either missed it intentionally, or you are really just THAT stupid. I'm really not sure which.

Stupidity and will, the two combined makes for an impregnable fortress.

[_why me]

That's right, why me. Mocking a disingenuous ad campaign (which is what I mocked, by the way, NOT temple marriage) is exactly the same thing as accusing someone of having murderous impulses.

I thought you'd hit rock bottom before, but the bottom just dropped.

So you were mocking the LDS church and in that mocking, you mentioned temple marriage and piercings. Regardless if you were mocking the campaign, in that mocking you picked out the temple marriage. And that was my point. You also brought up your own tolerant religion in that same post.

My point. your religion was not always so tolerant and in many cases it still isn't when we consider the attacks by certain pastors on the LDS church.

[_why me]

Face it, Why Me, you missed the point of Jack's post, big time. You either missed it intentionally, or you are really just THAT stupid. I'm really not sure which.

What point did I miss? She admitted that she was mocking the campaign. Unfortunately, in that mocking she mentioned LDS temple marriage and how gushing her husband was that all the relatives can attend. Not to mention the mocking of ear piercings and her mocking tone of the I am a Mormon campaign.

Where was I stupid? She admited it. But I am not calling you stupid for missing it.

Now of course, if MsJack were fair she would have admited that both her and her husband could have gotten married in a LDS church and all family could have attended. But she failed to mention this in her mocking. And this would have been the case since she is not a member of the LDS church.

[_cafe crema]

Face it, Why Me, you missed the point of Jack's post, big time. You either missed it intentionally, or you are really just THAT stupid. I'm really not sure which.

What point did I miss? She admitted that she was mocking the campaign. Unfortunately, in that mocking she mentioned LDS temple marriage and how gushing her husband was that all the relatives can attend. Not to mention the mocking of ear piercings and her mocking tone of the I am a Mormon campaign.

Where was I stupid? She admited it. But I am not calling you stupid for missing it.

Now of course, if MsJack were fair she would have admited that both her and her husband could have gotten married in a LDS church and all family could have attended. But she failed to mention this in her mocking. And this would have been the case since she is not a member of the LDS church.

She didn't admit it, she said she mocked the ad campaign, you are putting all kinds of mocking in there that is non-existent.
You don't even bother to listen to other people, I can see why you are in the family situation you are. Who wants to stay around when what you say is not heard.

[_MsJack]

So you were mocking the LDS church

No.

you mentioned temple marriage

No. I mentioned Protestant marriage.

and piercings

Yes.

you picked out the temple marriage.

No.

And that was my point.

Your point was almost entirely based on things that did not actually happen.

You also brought up your own tolerant religion in that same post.

I mentioned that the minister who married us was Protestant. I said nothing about my religion outside of that. (Technically, you can be married by a Protestant minister even when neither husband nor wife is Protestant.)

And I certainly didn't call my religion "tolerant." Whether or not Protestantism is "tolerant" really depends on the context. Tolerant of what?

My point. your religion was not always so tolerant and in many cases it still isn't when we consider the attacks by certain pastors on the LDS church.

You attacked me and my husband personally over things that I never said. You owe us a tremendous apology.

I read this exchange to my husband, by the way. His response: "I wouldn't punch him in the face. I'd do worse."

What point did I miss? She admitted that she was mocking the campaign. Unfortunately, in that mocking she mentioned LDS temple marriage and how gushing her husband was that all the relatives can attend. Not to mention the mocking of ear piercings and her mocking tone of the I am a Mormon campaign.

Where was I stupid? She admited it.

The only thing that I have admitted to mocking is the disingenuous nature of some of the ads in the "I'm a Mormon" campaign---i. e. the ones that showcase members doing things that the LDS church has specifically discouraged. I emphatically deny that my post mocked the LDS church as a whole, the temple, temple marriage, or "ear piercings" (???---seriously, why would I mock something that I'm quite fond of?).

[_why me]

My husband has an earring, which I am given to understand goes against prophetic counsel.

He also married outside the temple in violation of a direct commandment.

He has never seen church discipline for doing either of those things.

I think the church should feature him in an "I'm a Mormon" commercial. He can show off the pictures of a Protestant minister performing his wedding, gush about how great it was to hold a wedding that all of our friends and families could be a part of, and talk about how he decided to surprise me for my birthday one year by coming home with an earring.

It would be so touching, and totally "Mormon." And I'm sure it would not give any outsiders the mistaken impression that Mormons are completely okay with and tolerant of those things.

MsJack, I think that you should read your post again.

First it is not a commandment to marry in the temple. Second, you could have gotten married in a LDS church with all family present. And you did mention tolerant in relation to ear piercings and family weddings with a protestant minister indirectly.

[_MsJack]

MsJack, I think that you should read your post again.

I have. And I see nothing in my post that mocks temple marriages or ear piercings or the LDS church as a whole---not even the parts that you bolded. I also see no mention of what you call "Protestant tolerance" (I'm not even sure I know what that is). It mentions what Mormons are tolerant of, not what Protestants are tolerant of.

First it is not a commandment to marry in the temple.

"The greatest commandment given us, and made obligatory, is the temple work in our own behalf and in behalf of our dead." (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 2, p. 149)

Second, you could have gotten married in a LDS church with all family present.

I could have. However I think the church actually has a policy against holding weddings in the chapels of LDS buildings. And a wedding in the Relief Society room or a basketball court with lines on the floor didn't sound all that appealing. (I could be wrong about this, my memory is fuzzy.)

Even if it were allowed in the chapel, most of them are poorly-suited for weddings since they have two rows on either side of the sanctuary instead of a row in the middle of the room and no room in the front for a minister and wedding party to arrange themselves.

And you did mention tolerant in relation to ear piercings and family weddings with a protestant minister indirectly.

That was in reference to things Mormons are tolerant of, not things Protestants are tolerant of.

[Guest]

"The greatest commandment given us, and made obligatory, is the temple work in our own behalf and in behalf of our dead." (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 2, p. 149)

This has nothing to do with temple marriage. It is not a commandment to marry in the temple and when a member gets married in a chapel of the LDS church, they are not breaking any commandments. See the point?

[_Morley]

"The greatest commandment given us, and made obligatory, is the temple work in our own behalf and in behalf of our dead." (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 2, p. 149)

This has nothing to do with temple marriage. It is not a commandment to marry in the temple and when a member gets married in a chapel of the LDS church, they are not breaking any commandments. See the point?

"Temple work in our own behalf" has nothing to do with temple marriage?