DiscussMormonism.com

Tator wrote:

UtahTexan wrote:Are you? This thread was about another board...not about doctrine. Are you so dense not to know that? How pathetic!

UT, are you reading out of the ldsfaqs playbook?

Are you reading out of every anti's playbook?

Ya'll are great as pack dogs......

The Erotic Apologist wrote:

UtahTexan wrote:Common decency? I have not seen any here. I give as I get. So, stop with the victim comments.

And since antis have made sure my ID was known here, there, and even posted stuff from a catholic board on the MAD board, your courtesy comments mean very little. I was never shown it, so I figured y'all set the standard, I would play along. I had no idea you held such double standards. Now I do. My apologies.

All I did was say, "Hi Craig".You saw that.

So instead of discussing pre-Columbian metalurgy, or debating whether pre-Manifesto polygamy was a benign institution, or opining on the legal ramifications of Nauvoo-era bogus making, you come here to bitch and moan about how nobody here likes you? What are you, twelve?

utahtexan wrote:Are you? This thread was about another board...not about doctrine. Are you so dense not to know that? How pathetic!

You missed his point. "You come here" refers to coming to the forum, which he further elucidated by listing topics beyond this single thread. You might also come to realize, if you do a little background research (always a valuable technique when joining a new group), that threads can easily encompass more than a single topic. It's one of the things I find so invigorating here.

Re: your 'ya'll are packdogs' comment, I posted the definition of splitting, yes? Thinking through that concept and the reputation you are developing might be helpful to you.

On the other hand, given you seem hell-bent on joining ldsfaqs as another poster child for the stunted character of a uniquely unfortunate subset of the adult Mormon cohort, carry on!! You're doing great!

I am so sorry I caused so much trouble here Craig, I apologize.

Yes...I am doing great. I do not need help. Y'all attack in groups. Y'all can't stand on your own. never have. So, yes...I am doing great.

Thanks

UtahTexan wrote:
Are you reading out of every anti's playbook?

Ya'll are great as pack dogs......

There are anti playbooks? I need to read those. Are they available on Amazon?

Quasimodo wrote:

UtahTexan wrote:
Are you reading out of every anti's playbook?

Ya'll are great as pack dogs......

There are anti playbooks? I need to read those. Are they available on Amazon?

awww....stop being modest....

UtahTexan wrote:Are you?

Sure I am, watch me: The fact that you got a booboo and no one will kiss it better is apparently (to you) more significant than the creepy phallic imagery of Joseph's angel-with-the-flaming sword visitation. There, are you happy now? Did your booboo go away?

by the way, I was here long before you showed up.

UtahTexan wrote:This thread was about another board...not about doctrine.

See above, wanker.

Self-appointed Elementary School Hall Monitor wrote:Are you so dense not to know that?

Are you so dense not to know that a conversation is not a one way street?

UtahTexan wrote:How pathetic!

Indeed!

The Erotic Apologist wrote:

UtahTexan wrote:Common decency? I have not seen any here. I give as I get. So, stop with the victim comments.

And since antis have made sure my ID was known here, there, and even posted stuff from a catholic board on the MAD board, your courtesy comments mean very little. I was never shown it, so I figured y'all set the standard, I would play along. I had no idea you held such double standards. Now I do. My apologies.

All I did was say, "Hi Craig".You saw that.

So instead of discussing pre-Columbian metalurgy, or debating whether pre-Manifesto polygamy was a benign institution, or opining on the legal ramifications of Nauvoo-era bogus making, you come here to bitch and moan about how nobody here likes you? What are you, twelve?

It's because he knows he would get his ass summarily kicked. Instead he has to fantasize about Temple Square Thunderdome with evil antis.

The Erotic Apologist wrote:

UtahTexan wrote:Are you?

Sure I am, watch me: The fact that you got a booboo and no one will kiss it better is apparently (to you) more significant than the creepy phallic imagery of Joseph's angel-with-the-flaming sword visitation. There, are you happy now? Did your booboo go away?

No injuries on me.....but you have that head injury you need looked at.

by the way, I was here long before you showed up.

And? Want a wittle pwize?

UtahTexan wrote:This thread was about another board...not about doctrine.

See above, wanker.

Sorry.....you need to find someone else to wank

Maksutov wrote:It's because he knows he would get his ass summarily kicked. Instead he has to fantasize about Temple Square Thunderdome with evil antis.

lol...u huh