Why I am not a Mormon

Post by **_Mister Scratch** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 7:52 pm

I think what this thread demonstrates is the rather disquieting reality that Loyalty to the Cause Trump's all other matters of ethics and morals. Sure, DCP's behavior wasn't on the same plane as, say, Blood Atonement, but I don't think there is any question that there was ill intent involved here, and that it was done in the service of The Cause. The whole affair is yet another bit of support in favor of anonymity. If you reveal your in real life identity, apologists will use it to hurt you. In my case, this truth takes on a much darker degree of shading, since Daniel C. Peterson has threated to use lethal force against me.

Anyways, thank you for the welcome back, my dear friends Rollo and Trevor. Truly, you rate among the good ones.

Post by **_Some Schmo** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 8:39 pm

Mister Scratch wrote:I think what this thread demonstrates is the rather disquieting reality that Loyalty to the Cause Trump's all other matters of ethics and morals. Sure, DCP's behavior wasn't on the same plane as, say, Blood Atonement, but I don't think there is any question that there was ill intent involved here, and that it was done in the service of The Cause.

Didn't you read what he said? Only he knows what his intent was, and there was nothing malicious about it. I'm sure he said this 4,957 times, because, as we all know, the more you bear your testimony about something, the truer it becomes.

_GoodK · Post by **_GoodK** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:36 pm

Mister Scratch wrote:In my case, this truth takes on a much darker degree of shading, since Daniel C. Peterson has threated to use lethal force against me.

You are obviously on his mind.

Notice how many times he mentioned you throughout the thread?

But anyway... welcome back!

Post by **_Runtu** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:44 pm

Mister Scratch wrote:I think what this thread demonstrates is the rather disquieting reality that Loyalty to the Cause Trump's all other matters of ethics and morals. Sure, DCP's behavior wasn't on the same plane as, say, Blood Atonement, but I don't think there is any question that there was ill intent involved here, and that it was done in the service of The Cause. The whole affair is yet another bit of support in favor of anonymity. If you reveal your in real life identity, apologists will use it to hurt you. In my case, this truth takes on a much darker degree of shading, since Daniel C. Peterson has threated to use lethal force against me.

Anyways, thank you for the welcome back, my dear friends Rollo and Trevor. Truly, you rate among the good ones.

I think there is something to the idea that loyalty to the tribe/cause Trump's everything else. However, I'm not convinced there was anything malicious here. When I asked Dan what he thought the likely outcome was, he said he just thought the father should know. For me, this means that Dan really didn't think about outcomes and didn't really care about outcomes. He just thought the father "should know." That's why I always consider the outcome. I wish Dan had in this case.

_rcrocket · Post by **_rcrocket** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 10:59 pm

If my son, whom I support, spend money on, pay for an education, pay for food, room and board, went out in public and humiliated me and my daughter, and one of my better friends found out about it, I'd insist upon knowing about it.

Post by **_silentkid** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:01 pm

rcrocket wrote:If my son, whom I support, spend money on, pay for an education, pay for food, room and board, went out in public and humiliated me and my daughter, and one of my better friends found out about it, I'd insist upon knowing about it.

Congratulations. Good luck with that.

_GoodK · Post by **_GoodK** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:07 pm

rcrocket wrote:If my son, whom I support, spend money on, pay for an education, pay for food, room and board, went out in public and humiliated me and my daughter, and one of my better friends found out about it, I'd insist upon knowing about it.

He humiliated himself. No one humiliated his daughter, my sister.

It is reflective of your lack of character that you would imply that, again.

If I really wanted to be frank and antagonistic, I would have said that those who dumped vegetable oil on her head humiliated her.

And let's remember that the two gossiping hens, the two bishops on the board, were the only people who knew who I was talking about.

I don't know why I assumed you weren't the jerk everyone else here seems to know you as. You seem intent on proving to me how wrong I was about you.

_Yoda · Post by **_Yoda** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:16 pm

GoodK wrote:And let's remember that you two little gossiping hens, the two bishops on the board, were the only people who knew who I was talking about.

A valid point.

Post by **_Mister Scratch** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:26 pm

Let's face facts here: the real reason Bob is so upset about all of this has to do with the fact that it seriously undermines his anti-anonymity campaign. He wants to continue railing against those of us who rightly value our anonymity, and yet he has demonstrated that the reason he wants people to use there own names is so that he can attack them, possibly even doing damage to their family relationships.

_Yoda · Post by **_Yoda** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:29 pm

Mister Scratch wrote:Let's face facts here: the real reason Bob is so upset about all of this has to do with the fact that it seriously undermines his anti-anonymity campaign. He wants to continue railing against those of us who rightly value our anonymity, and yet he has demonstrated that the reason he wants people to use there own names is so that he can attack them, possibly even doing damage to their family relationships.

And possibly their careers. Take a look at the last page of this thread here:

http://mormondiscussions.com/discuss/vi ... 320#174320