God can write straight with crooked lines.

[Morley]

...My concern here, in particular, is that we really don't know for certain what influences the moral compasses of those that participate here. Especially when there may/might be a 'build your own' scaffolding for behavior/action that might at times conflict with a more strict 'version' of truth telling...

Projection is so revealing.

MG, again, obliquely calling everyone liars, and suggesting that the only thing that provokes doubt is sin.

[Res Ipsa]

When you step beyond the whole 'money and power' shtick you reach a dead end it appears.

Regards,
MG

This isn’t my thread of discussion, but I’m curious. Why would Bill need to “step beyond the whole money and power” as motivation theory? Why isn’t that a relevant argument?

Asking for a friend.

Stepping beyond the gravity schtick, why does my pencil fall when I drop it?

[MG 2.0]

Projection is so revealing.

MG, again, obliquely calling everyone liars, and suggesting that the only thing that provokes doubt is sin.

Again, Morley, you’re twisting my words and putting words into my mouth. I said neither one of these things. Using the word “obliquely” doesn’t excuse it.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

...My concern here, in particular, is that we really don't know for certain what influences the moral compasses of those that participate here. Especially when there may/might be a 'build your own' scaffolding for behavior/action that might at times conflict with a more strict 'version' of truth telling...

Projection is so revealing.

MG, again, obliquely calling everyone liars, and suggesting that the only thing that provokes doubt is sin.

Exactly. Just because he hides it behind that Wasatch Front LDS passive aggression he uses so frequently doesn't mean people don't see his intent.

[Morley]

MG, again, obliquely calling everyone liars, and suggesting that the only thing that provokes doubt is sin.

Again, Morley, you’re twisting my words and putting words into my mouth. I said neither one of these things. Using the word “obliquely” doesn’t excuse it.

Regards,
MG

I’m happy to hear that. I must have been reading it wrong. Maybe you’ll rephrase that section and tell me how I’m misunderstanding.

Here it is again:

...My concern here, in particular, is that we really don't know for certain what influences the moral compasses of those that participate here. Especially when there may/might be a 'build your own' scaffolding for behavior/action that might at times conflict with a more strict 'version' of truth telling...

I was interpreting “Especially when there may/might be a 'build your own' scaffolding for behavior/action that might at times conflict with a more strict 'version' of truth telling...” to mean “lying”.

And I thought that “My concern here, in particular, is that we really don't know for certain what influences the moral compasses of those that participate here” to mean that you don’t trust our own narratives about what went into our own moral compasses.

How did I get it wrong? What did you really mean?

[Morley]

By the way, here’s the whole post, so you can see that i’m not taking you out of context:

You're right. Religion has often been used to justify lying and/or telling half truths.

You're also right that there are/may be secular frameworks that 'do it better' for some folks. That is, creating moral frameworks/scaffolding/compasses that work better for them because of the nature of 'who they are'.

Obviously we are not all carbon copies of each other (for those that still know what a carbon copy was...if not, look it up )

When all this discussion is said and done, it comes down to the fact that I am describing a different slice of lived experience...not erasing yours.

If your moral compass works for you and doesn't cause any harm or discomfort for others, life is good, right? My concern here, in particular, is that we really don't know for certain what influences the moral compasses of those that participate here. Especially when there may/might be a 'build your own' scaffolding for behavior/action that might at times conflict with a more strict 'version' of truth telling.

What I can tell you is that my moral compass when it comes to being honest and trustworthy is built upon the teachings of the gospel of Jesus Christ. And the fact that (just a few nights ago) I sat down and told a SP member that I was and am truthful and honest in my dealings with my fellow man.

In my mind, I'm saying that to God and witnesses. That, obviously, has an impact (external) on my internal compass of behavior. My concern is that, at least in some cases, if SOME people believe that ULTIMATELY they don't have accountability to anyone other than themselves, that compass may point in a different direction. Again, however, let me say that in many cases those compasses are going to result in honest and upright behavior/action to their fellowman.

You may very well believe that you belong in this category of persons. And from the outside looking in I can't judge you on that count. What I can do, however, is have reservations in regards to folks that I've experienced injustice from. Where I think/believe they have been less than truthful.

And yep, that's my own judgement. And it's not always 110% trustworthy when I can't sit down and have a face to face. I get that.

As I said earlier though, we have many, many instances where when men/women is 'left to/on their own' things don't go so well...for themselves or others.

Regards,
MG

Bold is mine.

[Limnor]

Is lying to yourself worse than lying to an authority figure and being declared “worthy”? Lying to yourself bruises the conscience internally, but lying to an authority who believes you replaces that bruising with externally certified moral standing.

So if “I am honest and truthful” is self-reported to an authority who cannot independently verify the claim yet certifies the claimant as “worthy,” then that claim is, at least functionally, “true,” even if false in reality.

Outsourcing conscience through deception is a strange way to administer accountability.

And MG worries that personal moral frameworks allow people to justify dishonesty to themselves.

[MG 2.0]

By the way, here’s the whole post, so you can see that i’m not taking you out of context:

You're right. Religion has often been used to justify lying and/or telling half truths.

You're also right that there are/may be secular frameworks that 'do it better' for some folks. That is, creating moral frameworks/scaffolding/compasses that work better for them because of the nature of 'who they are'.

Obviously we are not all carbon copies of each other (for those that still know what a carbon copy was...if not, look it up )

When all this discussion is said and done, it comes down to the fact that I am describing a different slice of lived experience...not erasing yours.

If your moral compass works for you and doesn't cause any harm or discomfort for others, life is good, right? My concern here, in particular, is that we really don't know for certain what influences the moral compasses of those that participate here. Especially when there may/might be a 'build your own' scaffolding for behavior/action that might at times conflict with a more strict 'version' of truth telling.

What I can tell you is that my moral compass when it comes to being honest and trustworthy is built upon the teachings of the gospel of Jesus Christ. And the fact that (just a few nights ago) I sat down and told a SP member that I was and am truthful and honest in my dealings with my fellow man.

In my mind, I'm saying that to God and witnesses. That, obviously, has an impact (external) on my internal compass of behavior. My concern is that, at least in some cases, if SOME people believe that ULTIMATELY they don't have accountability to anyone other than themselves, that compass may point in a different direction. Again, however, let me say that in many cases those compasses are going to result in honest and upright behavior/action to their fellowman.

You may very well believe that you belong in this category of persons. And from the outside looking in I can't judge you on that count. What I can do, however, is have reservations in regards to folks that I've experienced injustice from. Where I think/believe they have been less than truthful.

And yep, that's my own judgement. And it's not always 110% trustworthy when I can't sit down and have a face to face. I get that.

As I said earlier though, we have many, many instances where when men/women is 'left to/on their own' things don't go so well...for themselves or others.

Regards,
MG

Bold is mine.

Thank you for the complete context. I bolded some more. This along with going back to some of my previous posts in this thread paints a picture in which I lay out the fact that in an online venue such as this one, especially with a majority being critics of the LDS church, there is going to be a natural tendency, I think, on the part of a believer hesitate in giving 100% benefit of a doubt to everyone on the board.

Some I would, through time and experience, trust to a larger extent to be straight shooters in showing themselves as dependably honest and trustworthy. My experience within the last few days, however, in being doxed causes me some concern as to whether or not I can trust anyone on the board 'all the way' without a degree of questioning their motives and thus their actions/behavior.

It is what it is in this respect. When we don't have face to face discussions we are left to the dynamics of herd mentality/group consensus which tends to go in one direction on this board.

Another poster, a non Mormon, recently brought this to light.

Anyway, I'm not going to take this line of questioning any farther. You can think what you will I guess.

I'm not in anyway trying to paint you as a bad person or sinner. Again, I don't know you. You may be a better person than me.

I'd actually like to meet you in real life and get to know and understand you.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

...My experience within the last few days, however, in being doxed causes me some concern as to whether or not I can trust anyone on the board 'all the way' without a degree of questioning their motives and thus their actions/behavior.

And of course Mentalgymnast has reported this rule violation, and given Shades all information re the event. Right?

It is what it is in this respect. When we don't have face to face discussions we are left to the dynamics of herd mentality/group consensus which tends to go in one direction on this board...

That's utter nonsense. Mentalgymnasts who obfuscate, cheat with AI, dress up their opinions with bigotry and the ceaseless stereotyping of fellow participants, and refuse to participate in a normal manner are the reason mentalgymnasts don't do well in discussions here. The pity party invoked by this mental gymnast is just a mask for his trolling. (And I still think he is just here to troll, because I have a difficult time believing an educated adult would post some of the nonsense he spouts. Trolling is a minimal effort sport.)

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

The irony of MG complaining about herd mentality is delightfully ironic.