Beastie rocks my socks.

[_Pahoran99]

You didn't answer my question, Pahoran.

Did DrW have to answer any such question before you showered kudos on him?

Yes, Pahoran, you are the epitome of class. It was real "classy" how you told Runtu that it was too bad he didn't succeed in his suicide attempt. That was during a time when Runtu was clinically depressed, and seriously needed professional help. Even your counterpart, Julianne, had enough compassion to encourage him to get help.

That definitely deserved mention.

Of course. It's entirely irrelevant to anything under discussion, but it's really really old.

And we all know how firmly you approve of ambushing the Mormon with really really old stuff.

Pahoran:

You may ask: why have I not subsequently defended myself in another thread? Well, the real reason the mods leave me alone is that I always respect their decisions, even when they are not helpful to me. Relitigating closed threads is an infraction that they have little patience for.

Imagine my surprise upon visiting MAD tonight and finding - yes, folks - another thread on the topic!

LOL

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... opic=44346

Yes. And let me say -- thank you so very much for giving me a valid reason to start a new thread wherein to defend myself against your accusations.

Regards,
Pahoran

[_Jersey Girl]

Well hello there, Nephew. Watcha doing back here? Defending your honor?

Yer Auntie

[_Pahoran99]

It also demonstrates what passes for "class" around here.

Yes, Pahoran, you are the epitome of class. It was real "classy" how you told Runtu that it was too bad he didn't succeed in his suicide attempt. That was during a time when Runtu was clinically depressed, and seriously needed professional help. Even your counterpart, Julianne, had enough compassion to encourage him to get help.

If I recall correctly, Runtu and I worked out our differences about that incident, all those years ago. What does it have to do with you?

Since we're dragging up past incidents,

I'm sorry, but who's this "we" you are talking about? I'm not the one dragging up ancient vendettas.

I just thought that was one worth mentioning. You're a real "class act".

Since you seem to think we're such a low-life group, it looks to me like you'll fit right in.

Welcome to MDB.

Thanks. I think.

I rather suspect that, as in my previous visits, I'll probably have to surface to breathe soon.

Regards,
Pahoran

[_beastie]

The situation is not equivalent.

Answer the question.

[_Pahoran99]

The situation is not equivalent.

How?

Answer the question.

You're not even going to say "please?"

Regards,
Pahoran

[_beastie]

I just shared a couple of the posts from Z that are extremely pertinent to the question of whom Pahoran was referencing as the individual falsely blaming the church:

I stated:

Note that:

1) Manna was not an apostate. He was excommunicated for abuse.

Pahoran replied:

I was perfectly well aware of this fact. This is frequently part of the pattern, which I did not elucidate. However, it is neither here nor there--the main point is that these people blame the Church for consequences that arise from their own actions.

Who are the "these people" referenced here? Gino. No mention of the brother.




Ray pointed this one out:

Pahoran

I mentioned it because it is one of many examples where spurious accusations were made against the Church of Jesus Christ; accusations that the Church "breaks up" families, when the cause of the breakup invariably resides elsewhere. The fact that the culpable party was mentally ill is entirely beside the point. If he was a vampire, being visited by aliens or possessed by the ghost of Stalin, it would have been equally irrelevant. The only relevant point is that the actions of the spouse, and not the Church, were the cause of the breakup.

Who is the culpable party blaming the church? The mentally ill Gino.

[_beastie]

It's not equivalent because Dr W did not assert, as part of his justification, that he was not asserting what his original post seemed to assert. His statements seemed consistent. Yours do not. You are now asserting it's only my imagination that makes them seem inconsistent. I think the quotes I just shared make that unlikely.

[_Yoda]

If I recall correctly, Runtu and I worked out our differences about that incident, all those years ago. What does it have to do with you?

Runtu is a dear friend of mine. He he is one of the most kind-hearted people I know. You talk about the participants of this board being "of lower class" than those of MAD. To do something that low is beyond contempt, Mr. High and Mighty. So much for class.

I'm glad that you and Runtu were able to work things out. He is a classy person. I'm sure he was able to find it in his heart to forgive you. You, who claim to be a servant of the Lord, and an apologist for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, are an embarrassment. I have absolutely no respect for you.

Of course, I'm sure you don't care; I doubt you have any respect for me, either...but since I'm banned from MAD, at least I was able to tell you what I thought "face to face", so to speak.

[_Pahoran99]

I just shared a couple of the posts from Z that are extremely pertinent to the question of whom Pahoran was referencing as the individual falsely blaming the church:

I stated:

Note that:

1) Manna was not an apostate. He was excommunicated for abuse.

Pahoran replied:

I was perfectly well aware of this fact. This is frequently part of the pattern, which I did not elucidate. However, it is neither here nor there--the main point is that these people blame the Church for consequences that arise from their own actions.

Who are the "these people" referenced here? Gino. No mention of the brother.

Yes. Language is imprecise in general, and mine was imprecise on that occasion. I was not drafting a legal document, so perhaps my post ought not to be parsed with such pharisaical precision.

Ray pointed this one out:

Pahoran

I mentioned it because it is one of many examples where spurious accusations were made against the Church of Jesus Christ; accusations that the Church "breaks up" families, when the cause of the breakup invariably resides elsewhere. The fact that the culpable party was mentally ill is entirely beside the point. If he was a vampire, being visited by aliens or possessed by the ghost of Stalin, it would have been equally irrelevant. The only relevant point is that the actions of the spouse, and not the Church, were the cause of the breakup.

Who is the culpable party blaming the church? The mentally ill Gino.

I'm sure you "sincerely believe" that leap. But I did not say he was culpable for blaming the Church, but for "the breakup." In other words, he was the party culpable for the destruction of his family.

But again: how, exactly, could be be "culpable" for blaming the Church? He killed himself when he killed his family!

Are you at risk of falling through concrete floors?

Regards,
Pahoran

[_beastie]

We know from the comments he made to his neighbors, family, and bishop.

Like this one:

"A lot of his friends were Arabs. He mixed with the type of men that would keep their wives under the thumb." Ross and Phyllis Hookey, who lived two doors up from the Mannas, agreed Gino Manna enjoyed power. "They had a lot of dogs in his backyard and we know he beat at least one of them to death," Mr Hookey said.
He may have loved her once but towards the end there was a lot of hate when he spoke of her," Mr Accetto said.

"It was her side of the family who had all the money and she owned the house.

"He was ferociously possessive of that house, it was his land and his home and he was telling me the Mormons were trying to take his house from him by getting her to hand it over to them.