I didn't get very far into Bill's episode when I decided this was a bit much for me. Something about insinuating Parker ran with the Nygren name to post comments in comments section to troll or goad? That seemed obviously not Parker to me. But, I don't know the dude at all. For some reason Bill thought it was more likely Parker? Whatever....As I said...a bit much. A hill too far...or whatever.
Steve pointed out that MIKE PARKER acknowledged he was in the chat room. Then Richard Nygren commented in the selfsame chat room. Why is it "a bit much" to assume that the former was posting as the latter? https://youtu.be/Jhu3TSjDHj0?t=2895
Dr Moore wrote:- How can Parker be confident to "categorically state" that no one mentioned in Reel's video ever made a fake Nygren profile anywhere? Sure, they've all denied it. But can he be SO sure that Boylan never made one on the sly? Or Smoot?
Guy works in a pawn shop and probably sees all kinds. If you're not carrying a bloody battle axe it probably doesn't phase someone like that.
Yes, when you work in a pawn shot you learn to tolerate the kray kray without blinking an eye. Parker was just a Thursday.
Mormon Discussion Inc is a non-profit that seeks to help others deconstruct unhealthy systems and reconstruct their lives One Episode At a Time MormonDiscussionPodcast.org
“DCP” wrote: I’m disappointed by the “personal” turn that things have now taken. Of course, it’s always been “personal” in a sense. As I’ve tried to say on multiple prior occasions, I’m quite unconcerned by “Heartland” geographical models for the Book of Mormon. I’m not persuaded by them, but I’m not especially upset that not a few others are persuaded. What concerns me is the tendency of some “Heartlanders” to regard Book of Mormon geography as a central doctrine of the Gospel and, accordingly, to cast public doubt on the loyalty to the Church, the Restoration, and the Gospel of those who publicly affirm views that differ from theirs. That’s why, alas, I’ve found the Neville-Neville Land blog “necessary.” It chronicles such poor and inappropriate behavior. And now I’m further dismayed by the gleeful willingness of at least two zealous “Heartlander” advocates to make common cause with avowed, vocal critics the Church, the Restoration, and the Gospel against those whose views on Book of Mormon geography fail to toe the “Heartland” line.
This new kerfuffle strikes me as a tempest in the proverbial teapot. As Gertrude Stein once wrote about Oakland, California, where she grew up, “there’s no there there.” Especially bemusing to me is the central role in it that is now being assigned to me both by Mr. Jonathan Neville and by my Malevolent Stalker and his epigones. I’m so peripheral to this story, as intrinsically insignificant as it is, that one would need a high-powered telescope even to see me from the periphery.
Steve pointed out that MIKE PARKER acknowledged he was in the chat room. Then Richard Nygren commented in the selfsame chat room. Why is it "a bit much" to assume that the former was posting as the latter? https://youtu.be/Jhu3TSjDHj0?t=2895
Because it'd be a motivated move. Its more likely someone posting as Richard Nygren was another anonymous troll than Parker in my view. Plus, I think when it comes to guesswork like this, its best to pay caution its due and be most charitable to the other side. And since Paker denied it was him and I'd just take him at his word.
Look. That's just how I see these personal squabbles, typically. I too, though, admittedly, and not prone to over-emphasizing personal beefs. But for me? just too much. If it was Parker...so be it. Prove it out or really, don't try and draw the inference...that'd be my preference.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
But now that they think they’ve got me dead to rights, suddenly the mere mention of a fictitious Black man has them screaming “EMERGENCY! RACISM! DANGER!” Actual incendiary antisemitism is something they’re happy to overlook and excuse, but merely mentioning a nonexistent Black man as part of a joke is apparently beyond the pale. Hypocrisy much?
Has anyone looked into this claim? Or does anyone know anything about it? Do heartlanders cover/excuse/hide an antisemite?
Parker may not realize but this only speaks more loudly to the susceptibility Mormonism is toward bigotry.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
Steve pointed out that MIKE PARKER acknowledged he was in the chat room. Then Richard Nygren commented in the selfsame chat room. Why is it "a bit much" to assume that the former was posting as the latter? https://youtu.be/Jhu3TSjDHj0?t=2895
Because it'd be a motivated move. Its more likely someone posting as Richard Nygren was another anonymous troll than Parker in my view. Plus, I think when it comes to guesswork like this, its best to pay caution its due and be most charitable to the other side. And since Paker denied it was him and I'd just take him at his word.
You’d take the word of a man who employed duplicity to attack Latter-day Saints anonymously for four years? You’d take the word of a man who could’ve cleared up the Nygren thing with one post, but instead allowed Boylan’s creation to give him cover to continue attacking fellow Latter-day Saints anonymously?
But now that they think they’ve got me dead to rights, suddenly the mere mention of a fictitious Black man has them screaming “EMERGENCY! RACISM! DANGER!” Actual incendiary antisemitism is something they’re happy to overlook and excuse, but merely mentioning a nonexistent Black man as part of a joke is apparently beyond the pale. Hypocrisy much?
Has anyone looked into this claim? Or does anyone know anything about it? Do heartlanders cover/excuse/hide an antisemite?
Parker may not realize but this only speaks more loudly to the susceptibility Mormonism is toward bigotry.
You could read Parker’s blog like the rest of to get your answers.
You’d take the word of a man who employed duplicity to attack Latter-day Saints anonymously for four years? You’d take the word of a man who could’ve cleared up the Nygren thing with one post, but instead allowed Boylan’s creation to give him cover to continue attacking fellow Latter-day Saints anonymously?
Cool.
- Doc
I don't know what I'd do if I were in the position, to be honest. I'm simply saying why I stopped listening and moved on. It felt like a bit much. And to be honest, it could have just been the mood I was in. I didn't relisten to make sure I was right about how I felt. I can't really even remember much about what I heard, or exactly how long I listened.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
Has anyone looked into this claim? Or does anyone know anything about it? Do heartlanders cover/excuse/hide an antisemite?
Parker may not realize but this only speaks more loudly to the susceptibility Mormonism is toward bigotry.
You could read Parker’s blog like the rest of to get your answers.
- Doc
Parker's blog? Why would his blog give me an answer to whether the heartlander guy is an outspoken antisemite?
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
