DiscussMormonism.com

TrashcanMan79 wrote:Hi Madison!

Would you mind providing a link to the thread on the other forum discussing our darling Will? I'm interested in seeing how all this is being perceived elsewhere on the innerwebz. Thanks!

Hi!
Here's the link to the thread on the other forum:
http://forum.newordermormon.org/viewtopic.php?t=21097
(I think it might be posted on some of the other forums like a BYU forum....I know I read about it a few other places too and I'll see what I can find, but this is where I originally heard about it.)

Madison54 wrote:

TrashcanMan79 wrote:Hi Madison!

Would you mind providing a link to the thread on the other forum discussing our darling Will? I'm interested in seeing how all this is being perceived elsewhere on the innerwebz. Thanks!

Hi!
Here's the link to the thread on the other forum:
http://forum.newordermormon.org/viewtopic.php?t=21097
(I think it might be posted on some of the other forums like a BYU forum....I know I read about it a few other places too and I'll see what I can find, but this is where I originally heard about it.)

Don't know if this link will be allowed to stay up due to the personal information it contains, but I first read about this over at Post Mormon:
http://www.postmormon.org/exp_e/index.php/discussions/viewthread/28647/

Hi Wade,

wade wrote:I don't know if the decisions by the Maxwell Institute are secret or not. All I know is that their decisions are none of my business, and since it isn't my business I haven't made it my business to learn what their decision was or will be, nor do I presume to weigh in on their conjectured decision. I will leave this kind of in-effectual and presumptuous nosiness to the proverbial busy-bodies here.

Well Wade, I don't believe, you believe, a single word of what you just wrote. If Will's "theory" fails to get published or accepted publicly by MI your kayak will sink. Being a supporter of of LDS apologetics, and an assumed tithe payer, there should be some care as to what they do and don't publish, especially in this case when you have stuck your neck out defending Will's theory before peer review. As far as it being secret...it is, for no other reason than it is a loser to publish Will's theory. If they do, they have to defend it, if they don't, then it is another one of the "foot in the mouth" attempts by a member to make sense of LDS doctrine or History that doesn't. Personally I would like to see it published so the "big boys" can expound on his theory, it would be interesting.

What you're seeing with this... is exactly the same thing we saw when "the church" tried to respond to folks like the Tanners in the 60's and 70's. The GA finally figured out silence is the only real defense, otherwise a can of worms gets opened they can't control.

My prediction, for what it is worth (nothing), is that MI won't touch this with a ten foot poll. I couldn't imagine a DCP trying to defend why Joseph Smith was still translating the Book of Abraham years after it was supposedly already translated, the spin on that would have to be in comparison of a army of millions riding tapirs to war...well maybe not, but it would be interesting.

wade wrote:I appreciate you sticking your former-member nose into LDS apologetic business and expressing your concerns.

LOL...isn't/doesn't LDS apologetics feed and exist partly due to"former-member's noses." I'm only doing my FAIR share Wade...pun intended.

The name-calling wasn't in defense. It was, I believe, an apt description of what is--i.e. my way of putting things into perspective.

LoL...You put things into perspective by calling people names? Okay?????

At any rate Wade don't get bent out of shape, it's not worth it. I appreciate your zeal.

Take care
Mark

Doctor Lars C Umlaut wrote:Don't know if this link will be allowed to stay up due to the personal information it contains, but I first read about this over at Post Mormon:
http://www.postmormon.org/exp_e/index.php/discussions/viewthread/28647/

Ah yes, I read about it on there too! I still believe that I saw it posted somewhere else (I'll see if I can find the other link).

Pahoran wrote: Even if we accept for the sake of argument that Will said everything that's been attributed to him -- including those things he disputes -- the fact remains that none of it was really that far out of the common way around here. It's so shockingly bad only because Will is a Mormon; if he'd been one of those on the "other side of the aisle," nobody would have turned a hair.

This is verifiably false. Critics at MDB have been called out by other critics for making misogynist statements many, many times before.

One recent example.

KimberlyAnn really nailed it here (emphasis mine):

KimberlyAnn wrote:Just to be clear: I love me some Porter. I'm no fan of Papa's. Still, I utterly disapprove of PP's comments, and unlike so many Mormon apologists, I'm not unwilling to call out my own if need be.

But MSJack, no one cared/cares about CamNC4Me/antishock8's blatant misogyny.

Why is that?

No one cares about harmony's misandry.

Why is that?

Simon Belmont wrote:But MSJack, no one cared/cares about CamNC4Me/antishock8's blatant misogyny.

Why is that?

No one cares about harmony's misandry.

Why is that?

I'm sure that many people would, provided you can substantiate your accusations and demonstrate a pattern of behavior. I don't think you can, though. Leaving that aside, that has little to do with the question of whether the behavior being discussed is acceptable. You are trying to change the issue.

Pahoran is a writer who has been published at the Neal A. Maxwell Institute???

I am shocked! His behavior is disgraceful on here....he should be embarrassed for his rude, ignorant posts.

Do they know he posts on here? Have they read any of what he's written? If so, why on earth would they EVER want him representing them?

Hi Simon,

You're welcome to round up these examples from antishock8/DoctorCamNC4Me and harmony, do a post about them, and see whether or not we don't care about them. I'm personally not familiar with the examples in question.

However, please note that the OP of my thread in Celestial went to great lengths to explain why I was calling out William's behavior and why I don't do the same for every person who posts on these forums whose behavior I disagree with.

I think there's also something to be said for religious ideology here. People do expect better behavior from those who claim to represent Jesus Christ, as Latter-day Saints do, so they are going to make a bigger deal about a Latter-day Saint engaging in poor behavior than a garden-variety agnostic engaging in poor behavior. Both miscreants may be asses, but at least the latter isn't a hypocritical ass.

Simon Belmont wrote:But MSJack, no one cared/cares about CamNC4Me/antishock8's blatant misogyny.

Why is that?

No one cares about harmony's misandry.

Why is that?

No one cares about Simon's posts.

Why is that?