Boy, was I wrong

[_Yoda]

Well, if it truly were a Christian denomination the apologist was defending, I think turning the other cheek would be the method Jesus instructed.

And did MsJack turn the other cheek? No. Let's not be hypocritical here. This is a rat ship here. Listen to Al Pacino.

Is Ms. Jack an apologist? I don't think so.

She has never claimed to be.

[_harmony]

Your first paragraph is bullcrap. She knew quite well what she was doing. Will's problem was in using his real name on this board. He should have used a screen name as scratch and MsJack have done. Then, all would have been well for Will.

No, Will's problem is behaving in a manner unbecoming a priesthood holder in the LDS church. THAT's his problem, not using his real name.

Dan uses his real name here... and never, not even once, have I seen him post anything anywhere near the vile words Will used here (and was unable to delete later).

So the real name is NOT the problem. Behavior unbecoming is the problem.

Your second paragraph misses a point. There is someone somewhere who is playing the role of a fink or a rat. And that is certainly not noble

I haven't seen the word "fink" in years. Good grief!

[_sock puppet]

There is someone somewhere who is playing the role of a fink or a rat. And that is certainly not noble. And what does that say about a person who hides behind a screen name using rats or finks as sources?

What's NAMIRS got to hide, why me? Certainly "the truth" does not need hiding, now does it? It seems that NAMIRS operations seem to need as much secrecy as how LDS Church spends tithing and other contributions. LDS Church ≠ Truth-in-Religion.

[_MsJack]

Will's problem was in using his real name on this board. He should have used a screen name as scratch and MsJack have done. Then, all would have been well for Will.

I use a posting handle, but I am not anonymous. My real name is available to anyone who cares to follow the links contained in my signature, and I include my signature in every post I make on this forum. I can be held accountable for anything and everything I say on these forums, just as I held William accountable for what he said here. What I do is no different from what David Bokovoy does when he posts here as Enuma Elish, and in fact, I'm a bit more direct about my RL identity than he is since I make that information accessible via my forum signature.

Using a posting handle would not have helped William out. I still would have held him accountable for his words and linked them to his real-life identity in my thread.

That said, William has at least one "anonymous" sock puppet on this forum (Silver Hammer) and several probable others. He isn't above using them. He could have posted his vile remarks anonymously if he had wanted to. He didn't.

And did MsJack turn the other cheek? No. Let's not be hypocritical here.

I cannot cease to be amazed at how William's defenders have attempted to demonize me for having the audacity to complain about their hero's misogyny. Unbelievable.

I think I'm starting to agree, at least in part, with Wade: there really is a "cesspool" at this forum. A cesspool of people who exhibit misogynist behavior towards women and those who will stop at nothing to defend them.

[_sock puppet]

Well, if it truly were a Christian denomination the apologist was defending, I think turning the other cheek would be the method Jesus instructed.

And did MsJack turn the other cheek? No. Let's not be hypocritical here. This is a rat ship here. Listen to Al Pacino.

MsJack is not the apologist you are defending, now is she?

[_sock puppet]

Will's problem was in using his real name on this board. He should have used a screen name as scratch and MsJack have done. Then, all would have been well for Will.

I use a posting handle, but I am not anonymous. My real name is available to anyone who cares to follow the links contained in my signature, and I include my signature in every post I make on this forum. I can be held accountable for anything and everything I say on these forums, just as I held William accountable for what he said here. What I do is no different from what David Bokovoy does when he posts here as Enuma Elish, and in fact, I'm a bit more direct about my RL identity than he is since I make that information accessible via my forum signature.

Using a posting handle would not have helped William out. I still would have held him accountable for his words and linked them to his real-life identity in my thread.

That said, William has at least one "anonymous" sock puppet on this forum (Silver Hammer) and several probable others. He isn't above using them. He could have posted his vile remarks anonymously if he had wanted to. He didn't.

And did MsJack turn the other cheek? No. Let's not be hypocritical here.

I cannot cease to be amazed at how William's defenders have attempted to demonize me for having the audacity to complain about their hero's misogyny. Unbelievable.

I think I'm starting to agree, at least in part, with Wade: there really is a "cesspool" at this forum. A cesspool of people who exhibit misogynist behavior towards women and those who will stop at nothing to defend them.

There is also a cesspool of people at this forum who exhibit a penchant for ignorance and blind, unbending loyalty over enlightenment. That they have circled the wagons around their misogynist hero is par for the course with them.

[_wenglund]

Freedom of speech is not freedom from the consequences. One is free to say vile, hateful things but not free from being judged by them.

Obviously.

There was actually a poll and thread dedicated to who wanted Will's paper to be published and I think it was nearly unanimous in the positive. Most would like to see it published in a peer-reviewed journal.

They must have been different people than the one's doing the threatening and smearing.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_why me]

Is Ms. Jack an apologist? I don't think so.

She has never claimed to be.

But she claims to be a christian and is active in her church.

[_wenglund]

Wade,

You seem like a damn good person. I am not sure why you would feel the need to defend Will.

I appreciate the complement. However, I didn't defend Will. I simply condemned the dog pile and smear campaign.

I didn't defend Will because I didn't see anything that I believe he said that was all that problematic. But, then, I am not a big PC guy, certainly not here at the cesspool.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_MsJack]

But she claims to be a christian and is active in her church.

I am and I am.

But I don't believe "turn the other cheek" means "turn a blind eye to sinful behavior and don't say a word about it." I would say that the Bible instructs us to do just the opposite.