Why "cowardly anonymity" may indeed be best

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Jason Bourne
_Emeritus
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm

Re: Why "cowardly anonymity" may indeed be best

Post by _Jason Bourne »

Runtu wrote:Our friend Will Schryver just posted this over on the other board:

You see, I know more about you than you think. It's a small world, after all.


I can only assume that since Will and I have a mutual friend (an apostle's son) and that friend knows the name of my bishop, Will is hinting that I'll be the first in his campaign to root apostates out of the church.

He also hinted that coming events will destroy my marriage and family. Yes, disciplinary councils tend to do things like that.

Maybe it is time to resign rather than put my family through that.


Perhaps you should turn the tables. I do not think his leaders would smile on his rantings about a purge.
_charity
_Emeritus
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by _charity »

harmony wrote:
RenegadeOfPhunk wrote:...and wasn't it mentioned about you talking to your kids?! Wouldn't even matter if you are or not in my mind - if your the parent, you have every right to discuss what you believe with your kids. It's THEM who would be interfering with YOUR rights as a parent if they try to portray the situation any other way...


What I want to know is if charity said "About a believing spouse demanding that a non-believing spouse be who they truly are in real life, that is wrong. Just as wrong as a non-believing spouse making demands on a believing spouse to weaken or destroy the spouse's faith. Truth is always best. Hiding and pretending is not a good thing." on MAAD? Because that comment would definitely put her at odds with the likes of Will and company.


By the time I got over onto the thread, found Will's comment, came back here, and then went back the thread ws locked. I didn't get a chance. From what I saw of it, Will pretty much stood alone over there.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

charity wrote:
harmony wrote:
RenegadeOfPhunk wrote:...and wasn't it mentioned about you talking to your kids?! Wouldn't even matter if you are or not in my mind - if your the parent, you have every right to discuss what you believe with your kids. It's THEM who would be interfering with YOUR rights as a parent if they try to portray the situation any other way...


What I want to know is if charity said "About a believing spouse demanding that a non-believing spouse be who they truly are in real life, that is wrong. Just as wrong as a non-believing spouse making demands on a believing spouse to weaken or destroy the spouse's faith. Truth is always best. Hiding and pretending is not a good thing." on MAAD? Because that comment would definitely put her at odds with the likes of Will and company.


By the time I got over onto the thread, found Will's comment, came back here, and then went back the thread ws locked. I didn't get a chance. From what I saw of it, Will pretty much stood alone over there.


Well, I think you could start a thread over there about your experience as the MIL of a nonbeliever, and how your daughter handles it (which I think is a very healthy way to handle it). And it would probably help if you mentioned that it's only fair that a believing spouse allow the children equal access to a nonbelieving spouse's beliefs, in the interest of fair play. Sauce, goose/sauce, gander and all that.
_charity
_Emeritus
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by _charity »

harmony wrote:
And it would probably help if you mentioned that it's only fair that a believing spouse allow the children equal access to a nonbelieving spouse's beliefs, in the interest of fair play. Sauce, goose/sauce, gander and all that.


A very wise person said to me that we are not required to give Satan equal time, in the interest of being "fair."

I am not saying that non-believing spouses are Satan, but if they are teaching against the Lord, His Church and His commandments, then Satan is getting his hand in.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

charity wrote:
harmony wrote:
And it would probably help if you mentioned that it's only fair that a believing spouse allow the children equal access to a nonbelieving spouse's beliefs, in the interest of fair play. Sauce, goose/sauce, gander and all that.


A very wise person said to me that we are not required to give Satan equal time, in the interest of being "fair."

I am not saying that non-believing spouses are Satan, but if they are teaching against the Lord, His Church and His commandments, then Satan is getting his hand in.


So you think your SIL is of Satan? Every child of God has a spark of divinity, charity.
_Jason Bourne
_Emeritus
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm

Post by _Jason Bourne »

This is what I meant. The person who has left the Church, and by that I mean does not believe the doctrines, the leaders, the authority, etc. but his name is still on the membership records, still is given some credibility when he speaks, due to his membership in the Church. The statements he makes mean more to non-LDS just becuse he is a member. He has access to members in terms of attendance at Church and activities where people assume he is an active member in good standing.

It is the subterfuge that is disturbing. A person should be upfront with their beliefs. There is no reason why they can't still attend Church, but it should not be in disguise. If the person no longer believes, be honest about it.



And the Church has a system in place for this. One can be ex'd for apostasy. What constitutes such and action is not up to you or Will unless he is a bishop or SP. But one who has some unbelief or even entire unbelief but participates for whatever reasons he/she has and is not a pot stirrer should be left the hell alone. Everyone has their own utility they get out of the Church and it is their business and not yours. Busy body members that thing they ought to go about purging, correcting and accusing seed more discontent in a ward then the quiet so called apostate.

Move their spouse and children out with them? There is no reason why their family relationships can't stay the same (unless there is dysfucntion going on anyway), and wives and children have their own agency. No one should interfere with another's agency.



Aren't you and Will talking about interfering with one's agency. Does and unbelieving spouse or Father then have the right to share is disbelief with his family? Should Runtu try to yank his family out because activities like Will's will cause one like Runtu top move down that path. Better to leave him alone, let him vent on a message board where 99% of all active members will never read what he says and then let him work his own peace with his wife. But were I he and some fool like Will made an issue for me I would resign and then I would do all I could to take my wife and kids with me. And guess what? The effort of one like Will would play in my favor with my wife and Kids. This is what I call perilous piety and Will, and you Charity, ooze it. It is a dangerous thing.
Go to Church to keep the family together? There is major dysfunction going on it a believing spouse makes that a condition of keeping a marriage together. The believing spouse does not respect the non-believer and is exercising unrighteous dominon. There should be counseling for that if that is the case.



And what is the root of that dysfunction Charity?
_Jason Bourne
_Emeritus
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm

Post by _Jason Bourne »

Jersey Girl wrote:
Runtu wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:
Runtu wrote:Might I just add that I am not lying to anyone about where I stand in the church. This was about my attending church because it was a compromise my wife and I agreed on. I don't pretend to believe, not to anyone. I rarely speak up in church, and it's never to add something critical. I just don't see the point.

For some reason, Will equates that with being a wolf in sheep's clothing and has condemned me for it. Seems a tad odd, to me.


Why is it Will's place to "condemn" you, runtu?


It's not. Why he thinks it is strikes me as bizarre and misguided. Oh, well.


I don't know quite how to say this but I'm sure I'll muddle my way through it. I only wish that people like Will could see how this looks from the outside. It looks like a bunch of gossip mongering busy-bodying stalkerism instead of a spirit led church family.

Do LDS believe that God needs people like Will to read people's heart?

I'm dead-dog serious.



Fortunately Will is not a majority and hopefully he has no power in these kind of thing and never will unless he changes his tune.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

Jason Bourne wrote:Fortunately Will is not a majority and hopefully he has no power in these kind of thing and never will unless he changes his tune.


Let us pray for continued discernment for Will's bishop and SP.
_antishock8
_Emeritus
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 2:02 am

Post by _antishock8 »

Well, one would hope that with meta-search crawlers like www.zabasearch.com people like William Schryver, myself, and others who have put their real names onto the Internet remember that the world is a very small place, indeed. If I were a reasonable person, the last thing in the world I'd be doing is levying not-so-subtle threats to destroy someone's life when all it takes is a quick search on a place like zaba, an even quicker click on "map it", and someone with a serious case of the ass has directions to your front door step.

Mr. Schryver (and other like-minded assholes), please think about what you're doing on the Internet. You're involving more than yourself when you start to mess with someone in real life. You have a family to think about. To others... Meta-search crawlers are only getting more sophisticated with time. Please please please don't make the mistake some of us did and use your real name on the Internet. It's not a good feeling to know that once you've put that "out there" you can't get it back. If you have used your real name, please consider stopping and start using a handle. It's for your own good, and that of your family.

Oh. And don't be an asshole and mess with people in real life because you're feeling butthurt about some ridiculous online exchanges. Jesus Christ, grow up.
You can’t trust adults to tell you the truth.

Scream the lie, whisper the retraction.- The Left
_Scottie
_Emeritus
Posts: 4166
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 9:54 pm

Post by _Scottie »

I thought it was interesting that he claimed he could tell a DAMU by countenance, then just get em talking...

Was he joking about this? I got confused which things were serious and which were jokes...
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman

I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo
Post Reply