You gave the answer before you asked the question.
Lol
The real question has been purposefully avoided through silly deflection thus far:
Participation in the acts of intimate homosexual activity are against the doctrinal teachings of the church. Are there those here that would have BYU change their policies so as to come out in direct opposition to church doctrine?
And again, I think BYU’s response was measured and appropriate. Much ado about nothing.
Besides the fact that BYU is not able (because of church doctrine issues) to condone/permit intimate homosexual behavior on campus or in off campus BYU housing, are there specific discriminatory practices that demand resolution?
The fact is, the church doctrine doesn’t allow for the intimate physical expression of homosexuality on its private campus or in campus approved housing.
Are there specific instances that can be presented that show BYU’s policies to be prejudicial towards the LGBTQ community?
You gave the answer before you asked the question.
The real question has been purposefully avoided through silly deflection thus far:
Participation in the acts of intimate homosexual activity are against the doctrinal teachings of the church. Are there those here that would have BYU change their policies so as to come out in direct opposition to church doctrine?
And again, I think BYU’s response was measured and appropriate. Much ado about nothing.
Besides the fact that BYU is not able (because of church doctrine issues) to condone/permit intimate homosexual behavior on campus or in off campus BYU housing, are there specific discriminatory practices that demand resolution?
If so, name them.
Regards,
MG
Note that the “question” bolded above is NOT the question Morley and others responded to. MG has “quoted“ himself by asking a different question, saying it hasn’t been answered, even though his “quote” disingenuously changes the question.
When Bret Ripley noted the logical fallacy of your original question, he didn’t say make up a “quote” that changes the question at hand, then pretend that’s the question you were always asking.
Intellectual dishonesty on full display once again, in the service of trolling and derailing a thread.
Moving on.....
———————
I would be interested to know whether BYU uses the Common App question about gender in their app process.
The real question has been purposefully avoided through silly deflection thus far:
And again, I think BYU’s response was measured and appropriate. Much ado about nothing.
Besides the fact that BYU is not able (because of church doctrine issues) to condone/permit intimate homosexual behavior on campus or in off campus BYU housing, are there specific discriminatory practices that demand resolution?
If so, name them.
Regards,
MG
Note that the “question” bolded above is NOT the question Morley and others responded to. MG has “quoted“ himself by asking a different question, saying it hasn’t been answered, even though his “quote” disingenuously changes the question.
When Brett Ripley noted the logical fallacy of your original question, he didn’t say make up a “quote” that changes the question at hand, then pretend that’s the question you were always asking.
Intellectual dishonesty on full display once again, in the service of trolling and derailing a thread.
Moving on.....
———————
I would be interested to know whether BYU uses the Common App question about gender in their app process.
And here we have the self appointed board nanny pronouncing judgement. Using her conniving ways to deflect and maintain the illusion that she is the master practitioner of intellectual honesty.
The questions I’m asking seem to make you uncomfortable, yes?
Lemming, if you can’t step into the hot water without simply throwing cold water into it and try to neutralize it, maybe you ought to just back off?
Someone may actually step up and answer the question I’ve repeatedly asked.
“Moving on” she says...how condescending. Apparently women can be arrogant too. I thought it might just be a man thing.
And here we have the self appointed board nanny pronouncing judgement. Using her conniving ways to deflect and maintain the illusion that she is the master practitioner of intellectual honesty.
The questions I’m asking seem to make you uncomfortable, yes?
Lemming, if you can’t step into the hot water without simply throwing cold water into it and try to neutralize it, maybe you ought to just back off?
Someone may actually step up and answer the question I’ve repeatedly asked.
“Moving on” she says...how condescending. Apparently women can be arrogant too. I thought it might just be a man thing.
Regards,
MG
Lol. And now the troll adds sexism, while doubling down on his changed “quote” and continuing to show his intellectual dishonesty.
Moving on once again....
———————
I would be interested to know whether BYU uses the Common App question about gender in their app process.
“Moving on” she says...how condescending. Apparently women can be arrogant too. I thought it might just be a man thing.
Regards,
MG
Speaking of a man thing, what's the King's name in Facsimile No. 3? But wait! There were some female kings who ruled Egypt during different dynasties. So, you'll have to take that into consideration as you apply Joseph Smith's revelation of King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head.
What's the name?
I will NEVER stop asking you. So get used to it. Over and over again for years to come. I will never stop asking you.
When Bret Ripley noted the logical fallacy of your original question, he didn’t say make up a “quote” that changes the question at hand, then pretend that’s the question you were always asking.
Ah! But you can't prove it's not what I actually-though-secretly-and-unintentionally meant; that's the beauty of it. When facts are fungible commodities all bets are off. Or possibly on, if that's more convenient.
Try to see things from his perspective: when equivocation is the only arrow in your toolbox, simply everything looks like a horse of a different feather. You may quote me.
The real question has been purposefully avoided through silly deflection thus far:
So, the other question you asked, and I answered, wasn't a real question? You need to point out which questions you ask are real and which ones are not, so we'll know how to respond.
Participation in the acts of intimate homosexual activity are against the doctrinal teachings of the church. Are there those here that would have BYU change their policies so as to come out in direct opposition to church doctrine?
If I reply to this query, will you say that it wasn't a real question either, and demand I answer another, different question? My answer is "Yes, I'm sure there are."
You gave the answer before you asked the question.
Lol
This is mg-tier mental gymnastics. The level of sheer stupidity to answer your own question, and then state your question hasn't been answered is head slapping spinning in place door knobbery.
- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
The real question has been purposefully avoided through silly deflection thus far:
Participation in the acts of intimate homosexual activity are against the doctrinal teachings of the church. Are there those here that would have BYU change their policies so as to come out in direct opposition to church doctrine?
And again, I think BYU’s response was measured and appropriate. Much ado about nothing.
Besides the fact that BYU is not able (because of church doctrine issues) to condone/permit intimate homosexual behavior on campus or in off campus BYU housing, are there specific discriminatory practices that demand resolution?
If so, name them.
Regards,
MG
I clarified my original post because it became rather obvious that I was being misunderstood. Of course BYU is going to have issues with students that engage in intimate homosexual acts/behaviors. The doctrine of the church requires this to be so. Let me ask again, are there other specific policies/procedures in place that are prejudicial against LGTBQ students that would require action in order to alleviate their concerns?
I mean, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that church doctrine and policy in regards to engaging in intimate homosexual practices or behaviors isn’t going to change.
Or is this what those lighting up the Y are pushing for?
If so, I can see why the church and BYU are taking the position of tolerance and forbearance...but not caving into permissiveness. I’m guessing that you would side with permissiveness.
When Bret Ripley noted the logical fallacy of your original question, he didn’t say make up a “quote” that changes the question at hand, then pretend that’s the question you were always asking.
Ah! But you can't prove it's not what I actually-though-secretly-and-unintentionally meant; that's the beauty of it. When facts are fungible commodities all bets are off. Or possibly on, if that's more convenient.
Try to see things from his perspective: when equivocation is the only arrow in your toolbox, simply everything looks like a horse of a different feather. You may quote me.
