Current GA Being Accused of Child Abuse; the 12 Ignore It

[_Tator]

I'm talking about saying mean/unwarranted things in regards to parents.

I take that personally.

There is no need for that kind of stuff.

Regards,
MG

Grow up MG take a deep breath, see you aren't the only one that can use smilies but you can't see anyone else use them. I think everyone here can realize I was referring to your "fake" parents and not your "real" parents. So what is the difference "fake" plates or "real" plates or "no" plates? I know you are barely hanging on to your faith and you jump at anything to hang on, even fake plates. No horses, tapirs are good enough, right? It doesn't end for you, rinse and repeat...... ruby slippers.....

[_mentalgymnast]

If the plates were real fakes, you are saying that the very God they/you believe in uses fakery to bring forth scripture.

I'm choosing door number one.

Regards,
MG

[_Jersey Girl]

If the plates were real fakes, you are saying that the very God they/you believe in uses fakery to bring forth scripture.

I'm choosing door number one.

Regards,
MG

There is no door number one in the above comment, MG. Read it for what it says.

[_Jersey Girl]

When people see that MG replied to the post that contained Dan's denial of default position and instead cherry picked a remark for reply out of it, they saw that as evidence that MG was being dishonest and/or disingenuous.

Jersey Girl, mentalgymnast has used this exact technique, twisting a statement so he can use it as false support, so many times just in the last several months that I have lost count. Many people, even on this thread, have commented on the disingenuous nature of this exact trick and his overall dishonest style.

Just wanted to give some context for why people absolutely saw the above process you related as evidence that mentalgymnast was being dishonest and/or disingenuous.

It's a well-engrained habit in mg.

I don't think he's a less than careful writer, I think the intentional lying takes a great deal of very careful writing to say things just so. But, just my opinion. Others have weighed in on exactly this behavior, several this afternoon in this thread, maybe take a look at their comments.

You're probably right, Lemmie. I'm starting to experience deja vu over here. I think I might have stepped into something he was involved in before.

I think I should step out.

Let go or be dragged, I say!

[_Lemmie]

When people see that MG replied to the post that contained Dan's denial of default position and instead cherry picked a remark for reply out of it, they saw that as evidence that MG was being dishonest and/or disingenuous.

Jersey Girl, mentalgymnast has used this exact technique, twisting a statement so he can use it as false support, so many times just in the last several months that I have lost count. Many people, even on this thread, have commented on the disingenuous nature of this exact trick and his overall dishonest style.

Just wanted to give some context for why people absolutely saw the above process you related as evidence that mentalgymnast was being dishonest and/or disingenuous.

It's a well-engrained habit in mg.

I don't think he's a less than careful writer, I think the intentional lying takes a great deal of very careful writing to say things just so. But, just my opinion. Others have weighed in on exactly this behavior, several this afternoon in this thread, maybe take a look at their comments.

You're probably right, Lemmie. I'm starting to experience deja vu over here. I think I might have stepped into something he was involved in before.

I think I should step out.

Let go or be dragged, I say!

Well I for one am glad you stepped in. In what? Who knows, but it was a fun day and I appreciated the support. Plus now midwifery goes on your resume. All in all, a good day.

[_mentalgymnast]

I know you are barely hanging on to your faith and you jump at anything to hang on, even fake plates.

You know, Tator, you're not the first one to say this lately. What do you and others mean by "hanging on to faith"? Everyone that has faith is hanging onto faith. That's sort of the definition/nature of faith. If you're believing in something that you don't have sure knowledge of, you have no choice but to hang onto it always looking for a better hold rather than letting go and falling...

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

If the plates were real fakes, you are saying that the very God they/you believe in uses fakery to bring forth scripture.

]
I'm choosing door number one.

There is no door number one in the above comment, MG. Read it for what it says.

I did.

Earlier in the thread I said:

I would, no surprise, default to the plates being real. That is, if I have to make a choice. And well, I do, because it can't go both ways.

If there were plates...they were either 'real', as in gold plates from a stone box delivered by and angel...or they were fake.

I choose real.

That's door number one.

There does seem to be some kind of a disconnect between what I say and what is understood/perceived at times. Why might that be?

I suppose I need to slow...down and spell things out better. Otherwise I could be lying by default.

Regards,
MG

[_Jersey Girl]

That's[/i] door number one.

There does seem to be some kind of a disconnect between what I say and what is understood/perceived at times. Why might that be?

I suppose I need to slow...down and spell things out better. Otherwise I could be lying by default.

Regards,
MG

I'll tell you exactly where the disconnect is. You're not responding on point and that is exactly the reason that I went one for one earlier with you. You're referring back to something that happened earlier in the thread and you expect me to recognize that as relevant.

Try replying to what is directly in front of you.

People dislike it when I go one for one with them, but with some posters, I think it's the most effective way to get to the crux of what they are trying to convey. Baby steps.

I need to be done with this, MG.

[_mentalgymnast]

I think I might have stepped into something he was involved in before.

Not really. Same Modus operandi as usual. Some folks see it as being something other than what it is. That isn't a big surprise, however. As I've said elsewhere, I think that there is a naturally occurring impasse between believers and non-believers that is VERY difficult to bridge. Throw in the fact that on message boards when one is writing at light speed...reeading at light speed...and has in real life things shooting through the head while 'playing' in a forum like this...there are going to be some perceived missteps where none was intended. It's often a problem of 'broken language' and/or incomplete expression. I'm willing to take some responsibility for that.

But I am NOT intentionally being dishonest.

As I just said, if anything I should slow down at times when I'm writing. There are going to be those that look for ANY 'slip' where a believer is not expressing a complete thought or a 'slip' on not reading another comment fully with all the contextual baggage associated with it...as a lie...or just plain dishonesty. That's why it's good, as I think it was you that said, for others to ask QUESTIONS rather than jumping to conclusions. But, there will be times when no answer is forthcoming...because the believer may not know the answer. I think that is at least partially what was going on with Lemmie. Of course, I'll never convince her of that or others that are looking for reasons to 'diss' the 'other' that doesn't go along with their own agenda/beliefs/non-belief.

That's to be expected. The river is wide and the bridge seems to be very fragile, at times, between believers and those that are defensive in their non-belief. Sometimes hyper-sensitively so. And that can cause impulsive comments, which may be lacking in 'truth'...which we have seen here.

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

That's[/i] door number one.

There does seem to be some kind of a disconnect between what I say and what is understood/perceived at times. Why might that be?

I suppose I need to slow...down and spell things out better. Otherwise I could be lying by default.

Regards,
MG

I'll tell you exactly where the disconnect is. You're not responding on point and that is exactly the reason that I went one for one earlier with you. You're referring back to something that happened earlier in the thread and you expect me to recognize that as relevant.

Try replying to what is directly in front of you.

I consider the whole conversation/thread to be accessible for being "on point".

Thanks for your participation Jersey. It was interesting so see what 'shook out'. Being a mid-wife is hard, isn't it?

Regards,
MG