StructureCop wrote:Yes, those ignorant Sunstone schmucks... incidentally, do you lump Martha Beck's brothers and sisters in with those who are unfairly attacking her?
What Would You Do?
-
_Eric
Re: What Would You Do?
I've asked the mods to remove some of the SPAM that's been annoyingly posted on this thread, again.
-
_StructureCop
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:05 pm
Re: What Would You Do?
Eric wrote:I've asked the mods to remove some of the SPAM that's been annoyingly posted on this thread, again.
Wait, I know this game.
Okay, your turn.
The missing roll theory can go to hell. -- Paul Osborne
The evidence will never be compelling for either side of the argument in rational terms. -- John Clark
The evidence will never be compelling for either side of the argument in rational terms. -- John Clark
-
_StructureCop
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:05 pm
Re: What Would You Do?
maklelan wrote:Don't forget her ex-husband.
I can anticipate a couple rebuttals for him, but based on what I've read/heard, he's no friend of the Church himself but at least he has the integrity not to use unfortunate circumstances for a gratuitous attack.
The missing roll theory can go to hell. -- Paul Osborne
The evidence will never be compelling for either side of the argument in rational terms. -- John Clark
The evidence will never be compelling for either side of the argument in rational terms. -- John Clark
-
_Eric
Re: What Would You Do?
StructureCop wrote:Wait, I know this game.
Just so you know, I wasn't calling your post SPAM.
I did find your post vacuous and insincere, though, so I responded appropriately. Feel free to carry on but I probably won't indulge you again.
-
_StructureCop
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:05 pm
Re: What Would You Do?
Eric wrote:Just so you know, I wasn't calling your post SPAM.
Fair enough. My general role is to provide distracting background noise to any conversation, so you would probably be about right in categorizing it as such.
I did find your post vacuous and insincere, though, so I responded appropriately.
Insincere? Me?
The missing roll theory can go to hell. -- Paul Osborne
The evidence will never be compelling for either side of the argument in rational terms. -- John Clark
The evidence will never be compelling for either side of the argument in rational terms. -- John Clark
-
_Yoda
Re: What Would You Do?
Thanks for providing the links, Daniel. I read the Sunstone review....haven't read the other ones as yet.
I found the Sunstone review to be quite fair. You could tell that the author really wanted to keep an open mind as far as the book was concerned, because she had enjoyed Martha Beck's first book so much.
I was intrigued to learn that Martha Beck's therapist was Ruth Killpack. Ruth is actually a friend of mine. She was in my home ward for years...her husband was the bishop in my ward. She moved to Utah after her husband died of brain cancer. I actually took a class from her at BYU while she was in the process of getting her PhD! Small world!
I haven't heard from her in years...I may have to look her up.
I found the Sunstone review to be quite fair. You could tell that the author really wanted to keep an open mind as far as the book was concerned, because she had enjoyed Martha Beck's first book so much.
I was intrigued to learn that Martha Beck's therapist was Ruth Killpack. Ruth is actually a friend of mine. She was in my home ward for years...her husband was the bishop in my ward. She moved to Utah after her husband died of brain cancer. I actually took a class from her at BYU while she was in the process of getting her PhD! Small world!
I haven't heard from her in years...I may have to look her up.-
_Eric
Re: What Would You Do?
liz3564 wrote:I was intrigued to learn that Martha Beck's therapist was Ruth Killpack.
Martha denied this, by the way.
-
_Yoda
Re: What Would You Do?
Eric wrote:liz3564 wrote:I was intrigued to learn that Martha Beck's therapist was Ruth Killpack.
Martha denied this, by the way.
That's odd. According to the author of the Sunstone review, Beck publicly acknowledges Ruth as her therapist in her first book:
Later research revealed that the therapist is in
fact named Ruth Killpack (and is thanked
openly in the acknowledgements for
Expecting Adam).
Since I haven't read either book, can anyone who has access to either book confirm or deny this? I'm a little confused.
-
_maklelan
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 4999
- Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:51 am
Re: What Would You Do?
Eric wrote:liz3564 wrote:I was intrigued to learn that Martha Beck's therapist was Ruth Killpack.
Martha denied this, by the way.
She also denied having acknowledged her as her therapist in her first book, which is easily falsified by simply opening the book to her acknowledgments (Expecting Adam). Both denials were done during a live interview, so she may just have been flustered or not thinking clearly.
-
_Eric
Re: What Would You Do?
liz3564 wrote:Eric wrote:
Martha denied this, by the way.
That's odd. According to the author of the Sunstone review, Beck publicly acknowledges Ruth as her therapist in her first book
Rollo might know more about this than I do. I have Leaving the Saints but I don't own Expecting Adam yet.
It apparently happened during a radio interview, in response to a question about the Sunstone review.
http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kuer/ ... 54759.html
Anyways, I really got to get to sleep.