I know why personal attacks occur at MA&D

[_zeezrom]

I'm finding this through personal experience. I know why it happens.. I think.

If I criticize the church or Mormon theology or a prophet, that is taken personally so there is a feeling to come back with an attack. I would imagine if I went there and said something like, "I found that the Baptist church is better than Mormon for reasons x, y, and z." then I would likely not get any personal attacks but a discussion of what I said. They are free to attack my reasons for choosing Baptist and there is no need to attack me.

By going over there and presenting a problem without presenting a solution, they are left with nothing to do but either defend or attack me. I'm not providing anything for them to attack.

Maybe criticism of Mormonism should always be presented with a solution in mind. For example if I don't like the idea of Outer Darkness, I should present an idea that I do like in addition to saying OD is a crappy idea for reasons x, y, and z.

Do you agree that personal attacks might happen because a critic might leave nothing but themselves to attack - no alternative or option or solution.

[_bcspace]

I think it might be because you initially pretended that your state of apostasy was less than it actually is; from someone sincerely questioning the faith to someone who parrots antiMormon talking points.

[_zeezrom]

what does state of apostasy have to do with this? State of apostasy makes people attack the person instead of the issues? How so?

Forget about me for a second. Do you agree with my hypothesis? why or why not? My hypothesis is not critical of apologetics - I would say it is pretty nice, actually.

[_beastie]

Criticizing the church feels like a personal attack because LDS tend to be emotionally enmeshed with the church: their self-esteem and self-image is very tied up with the church. So when someone who knows the religion intimately - like a former member - leaves the church, just that act of leaving is a form of rejection and judgment. So they're already very sensitive to the issue. Plus, they know how odd some LDS beliefs sound.

In addition, the LDS church teaches very pejorative things about apostates. Apostates leave the church with that baggage, with those labels, and they don't want the labels and baggage. So the apostate's natural instinct is to explain, hey, no, I didn't leave the church to sin, I left because (X,Y, and Z). Well, X, Y and Z are all criticisms of the LDS church, so the member reacts like it's a personal attack for the above reasons.

[_Joseph Antley]

Do critics give personal attacks for the same reasons, or this just a Mormon/MA&DB thing?

[_Tchild]

Do critics give personal attacks for the same reasons, or this just a Mormon/MA&DB thing?

Well, you so called "Christians" are supposed to "turn the other cheek", but you don't. Some of you tend to be douchebags, and that isn't very Christian.

So why profess Christ, when you don't live his precepts and teachings?

If you were serving the poor, you wouldn't have spare time to get indignant with unbelievers on the internet. You would have a life, be living your religion, and not be a glaring hypocrite.

Not you of course Joseph, but others.

[_beastie]

Do critics give personal attacks for the same reasons, or this just a Mormon/MA&DB thing?

I do think we're mainly talking about internet interactions. I think "real life" interactions between Mormons and exmormons is far more civil.

Obviously, some people are prone to personal attacks because of their personality.

I do think that some of the exmormon snarkiness is a reaction to the fact that we know believers have been taught, like we were, and often seem to believe, that exmormons lost faith because we're lazy, wanted to sin, never really believed or understood the gospel, got our feelings hurt, blah blah blah. Losing faith is actually a very painful process, and it's quite annoying to have believers act so dismissively about it. Sooner or later exmormons will get annoyed by being told repeatedly by MADdites that it was due to their own laziness that they didn't know X, Y, or Z about the church - and that's one of the more benign accusations.

[_The Nehor]

I really don't think anyone on either side of the aisle is far enough above the interaction to diagnose the psychology of those involved....but they keep doing it anyways. This suggests a psychological issue consisting of...(pause)...oh dammit.

[_huckelberry]

"why profess Christ when you do not live his standards?"

I am having difficulty stopping myself from getting all pious here.

It seems to me far better to profess Christ because of who Christ is. The reason would not be because of who I am.

[_beastie]

I really don't think anyone on either side of the aisle is far enough above the interaction to diagnose the psychology of those involved....but they keep doing it anyways. This suggests a psychological issue consisting of...(pause)...oh dammit.

This is actually quite astute, and funny to boot.