Per Kevin Graham’s inquisition, Dan is allegedly guilty of belittling Ritner by publicly stating that Ritner may be biased against Gee and Mormonism as evidenced by the alleged fact that Gee petitioned to have Ritner removed from his dissertation committee.
An inquisition, you idiot? I sent an email to Ritner out of curiosity. His response claims that Peterson is slander. It isn’t my claim. But according to Bokovy, this is an inquisition! As I stated before, I do not know which side is telling the truth. I was simply reporting that the accused has, for the first time in five years, denied the only version we were privy to.
Kevin however is guilty of belittling Ritner by publicly stating that Ritner is biased against Gee and Mormonism as evidenced by the alleged fact that Ritner may be a homosexual.
Was guilty you idiot. There is a five year gap, for which much has happened and changed since. Everyone knows I have “turned to the dark side” as early as three years ago. I have become friends with Brent Metcalfe, Richard, Shades, and numerous others who were once my sworn enemies. To all I have offended, I have apologized. And yes, I let Ritner know that I was among those who believed and propagated rumor about him, and I also apologized to him. I sense he feels my email was sincere since I did him a favor and brought to his attention the rumors that have been spread about him.
Bad Kevin! How dare you!
In my mind, Kevin is not “just as guilty as the next person.” I’m disgusted by his actions both past and present.
Which actions? All I did was send an email asking for Ritner’s side of the story. You see, this is how LDS apologists react. They only want you to hear their side, and nobody else’s.
Why do I seriously doubt that Kevin’s apology to Ritner divulged the fact that Kevin attempted to publicly defame Ritner because of his sexual orientation.
Because you need to. And for the record, I did not start the rumor. The rumor was alive and well on the FAIR e-list – perhaps if the archive is still available someone on the list can find the source? - and I was the only one to drag it out on the forum. A bad idea, but again, I was a TBM in the spirit of Pacman and William Schryver, who have said far worse about Metcalfe, myself, and others who they choose to malign instead of debating. Sometimes I think the rational side of me did it because I was struggling within myself, and a part of me wanted the public to know just how despicable the rumors on the FAIR e-list were becoming. In fact, I was banned from the e-list shortly afterwards because of a rant I gave against rumors. I was sick of them. I was sick of believing and spreading them. It is like a disease, and the LDS Church is a welcoming host.
Three cheers for Brent Metcalfe for originally calling Kevin to task for his public assassination. Who cares what the man's sexual orientation may be!!
Ask Dan Peterson, who made sure people knew the sexual orientation of Michael Quinn.
Unbelievable that given his history, Kevin would have the nerve to start this madness in the first place when he himself is in fact much, much more guilty than the next person.
How the hell am I much guiltier than anyone else when I am the only person who has repented?
Is Dan backing away from his position? Hardly. He stands by it. I backed away from mine and apologized shortly afterwards. This was several years ago! In fact, it was that period where I decided to take a U-Turn, mainly because I didn’t like the kind of person I was becoming as an apologist. I was resorting to lows that only Schryver and Pacman would appreciate, but lows which no other LDS apologist would argue against. It is easy for you to look back and say you are “disgusted” with what I said, but the fact is I was on that forum with a few dozen apologists, many of whom were conversing in email with me, and none of whom spoke up in protest. I recall several emails as a matter of fact, with comments like “Ha ha, that last comment got on Brent’s nerves! Good one!”
In LDS apologetics, there are no limits. The means justifies the end.
Ad for the record, I had no earthly idea Ritner would threaten lawsuit. All I do is research and report. You and your clan do nothing but sit in on your little chatter groups and rumor-monger. I’m sorry if what I have done lately has dropped a bomb on your tea party. Wait a minute… no I’m not.
Whether Ritner is or is not a homosexual and whether Ritner was kicked off Gee’s committee or voluntarily left, the two men obviously have a personal history that when all is said and done does little in my mind to establish the validity and/or problematic nature of their claims.
You’re full of it. The LDS position relies strictly on the premise that Ritner is a biased anti-Mormon and the number one piece of evidence, aside from the work with IRR, was that he was allegedly thrown off Gee’s dissertation advisory board. Dan Peterson has brought it up virtually EVERY time Ritner is mentioned on the forums. He started the rumor back in 2002 and he hasn’t stopped saying it. He presents it as a matter of fact, and even alludes to unnamed persons who confirm it for him. Obviously this is a very important point for Dan and the rest of the apologetic world. Ritner must be categorized as an anti-Mormon in the worse sense, because something needs to be done on the opposite end of the spectrum to compensate for his impressive credentials.
This entire exchange is simply one more example of Kevin Graham trying any means necessary to attack his perceived adversaries.
Do you have any idea how STUPID you sound David? You and your little circle of BYU “scholars” have been spreading these rumors for years. And you’re all upset now because someone took time out to verify the rumor. Gee, how dare I!
The fact that he did it as an apologist by spreading rumors regarding Ritner’s sexuality speaks volumes, as does his recent email exchange with Ritner regarding Peterson’s on line comments that Kevin has now posted as a critic.
“All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it...Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality." - Albert Einstein