Congratulations DCP

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

beastie wrote:No, Ray, you're not a hypocrite because of your pagan lifestyle, you're just weak due to that. You're a hypocrite because you claim that the bad behavior of exmormons in the internet will result in acts of real life violence against Mormons, while simultaneously engaging in just as bad behavior towards exmormons.

But your bad behavior is noble, somehow, and not a precursor of real life violence.

I've told you this many times before. Maybe you never understand my point.


And maybe you'll not get my point either. You criticise my bad behaviour, yet still say nothing about PP and Mercury. How hypocritical is that?
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

beastie wrote:You missed my entire point, Ray. You're a hypocrite in your bad behavior, unlike PP and Merc. That is why I don't ignore you.


But, isn't the greatest example of hypocrisy more easily apparent on this board from others?

Kevin Graham claims to be an active member of the Church but says his posting name is a pseudonym. So, his religious face in Brazil is one supporting of the Church; his pubilc face on this board is one of persistent attack. Moreover, his vile bigotry against Muslims and liberals is never condemned by any of you.

There are others on this board who are the same. As far as I can tell about Merc, he remains a member of the Church and attends. Isn't that the rankest of hypocrisy, with his posts on this board?

Many others on this board fall into the same category. They rely upon anonymous posts to say things in public they'd never say around their church friends or bishops where they work. Their posts have the effect of weakening the weak, who say: "Gee, here's a good member of the Church saying these things?"
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

And maybe you'll not get my point either. You criticise my bad behaviour, yet still say nothing about PP and Mercury. How hypocritical is that?


I'm criticizing you for being a hypocrite Ray. It seems to me you are being deliberately obtuse. I have made it painfully clear that what I can't tolerate is the Juliann Mindset, which is deeply based in hypocrisy, ie, a different standard of behavior is expected from believers than critics.

Perhaps you never noticed that I didn't begin criticizing your behavior until you made the claim that the bad behavior of folks on RFM was going to result in real life acts of violence against Mormons - while ignoring the fact that Mormons also engage in bad behavior that could, by your logic, also result in acts of violence against exmormons. All my criticisms of you are a reaction against this open hypocrisy on your part.

Merc and PP behave badly, but don't insist that their bad behavior is somehow different than the bad behavior of Mormons, as far as I've seen. When and if they do, I will start pointing that out to them as well, instead of ignoring their more juvenile posts. I don't care if people want to act out on the internet, as long as they're not being hypocrites and attacking others for the same behavior they're engaged in.

Do you get it yet? You attack the bad behavior of exmormons in a very serious way - comparing them to people whose statements were later used by the nazis to justify killing millions of jews. Yet you engage in behavior that is just as bad as theirs. But your behavior is noble, somehow.

I don't know how to be more clear than that.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

But, isn't the greatest example of hypocrisy more easily apparent on this board from others?

Kevin Graham claims to be an active member of the Church but says his posting name is a pseudonym. So, his religious face in Brazil is one supporting of the Church; his pubilc face on this board is one of persistent attack. Moreover, his vile bigotry against Muslims and liberals is never condemned by any of you.

There are others on this board who are the same. As far as I can tell about Merc, he remains a member of the Church and attends. Isn't that the rankest of hypocrisy, with his posts on this board?

Many others on this board fall into the same category. They rely upon anonymous posts to say things in public they'd never say around their church friends or bishops where they work. Their posts have the effect of weakening the weak, who say: "Gee, here's a good member of the Church saying these things?"


I know the pseudonym issue is your pet peeve. I think it's good sense, based on safety precautions. I would never, never post under my real name, for safety reasons alone.

I don't think it's hypocrisy for members of the church to discuss troubling issues on the internet rather than at church. You know as well as I do that church meetings are not amenable to that purpose.

I haven't seen Kevin attacking liberals. If I did I would speak out, although I tend to avoid political threads. And I do not have adequate background knowledge about Islam to really judge if his past statements are incorrect and based in prejudice.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

beastie wrote:
I'm criticizing you for being a hypocrite Ray. It seems to me you are being deliberately obtuse. I have made it painfully clear that what I can't tolerate is the Juliann Mindset, which is deeply based in hypocrisy, ie, a different standard of behavior is expected from believers than critics.

Perhaps you never noticed that I didn't begin criticizing your behavior until you made the claim that the bad behavior of folks on RFM was going to result in real life acts of violence against Mormons - while ignoring the fact that Mormons also engage in bad behavior that could, by your logic, also result in acts of violence against exmormons. All my criticisms of you are a reaction against this open hypocrisy on your part.

Merc and PP behave badly, but don't insist that their bad behavior is somehow different than the bad behavior of Mormons, as far as I've seen. When and if they do, I will start pointing that out to them as well, instead of ignoring their more juvenile posts. I don't care if people want to act out on the internet, as long as they're not being hypocrites and attacking others for the same behavior they're engaged in.

Do you get it yet? You attack the bad behavior of exmormons in a very serious way - comparing them to people whose statements were later used by the nazis to justify killing millions of jews. Yet you engage in behavior that is just as bad as theirs. But your behavior is noble, somehow.

I don't know how to be more clear than that.


Do I really have to go to RFM again and fetch quotes calling "Hinkster" and "Old Joe" the vilest of names? Even attacking their wives and families? No, I won't, because you will never see it in your blindness. You equate me with bile on RFM, when even Samuel The Utahnite and other anti-Mormons have disowned them. The "crack whore" remark about my daughter was greeted with mostly mysterious silence. This is what you equate with me? I have sworn at people, and called people dickheads, but I have not gone as low as ex-Mormons have. Here is one choice snippet:

like the ones you mentioned, [Name deleted], who are exmo and willing to take on the Mormon doctrinal challenge in a scholarly manner. I could not possibly do so. I can no longer even look at Mormon scripture without wanting to claw my own eyes out. To me, trying to argue with a TBM about doctrine would be akin to arguing with a sociopath about his book on the best way to torture a kitten. In trying to make my argument to him that torturing a kitten is wrong, I'd have to read his book and basically go somewhere I don't want to go mentally.


Yet, if I call you a "bitch", I'm inciting revolution. WOW!!
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

beastie wrote:I know the pseudonym issue is your pet peeve. I think it's good sense, based on safety precautions. I would never, never post under my real name, for safety reasons alone.


For the same reason, I like the invention of masks. It makes it easier and safer to rob banks. Here, you have let the medium justify the means.

rcrocket
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

Do I really have to go to RFM again and fetch quotes calling "Hinkster" and "Old Joe" the vilest of names? Even attacking their wives and families? No, I won't, because you will never see it in your blindness. You equate me with bile on RFM, when even Samuel The Utahnite and other anti-Mormons have disowned them. The "crack whore" remark about my daughter was greeted with mostly mysterious silence. This is what you equate with me? I have sworn at people, and called people dickheads, but I have not gone as low as ex-Mormons have. Here is one choice snippet:


Ray,

Get real. You said that the rabid RFMers - AND the people who did not go over there and somehow make them shut up, like ME - were the moral equivalent of the people whose anti-semitic statements later resulted in the holocaust. You, and pahoran like you, act as if these people would DELIGHT in violence against Mormons - and that their statements would cause such rampant violence against Mormons they would need their own version of ACLU.

It can get no lower than that.

Here's your example, which, in your view, far exceeds your own hyperbole:



like the ones you mentioned, [Name deleted], who are exmo and willing to take on the Mormon doctrinal challenge in a scholarly manner. I could not possibly do so. I can no longer even look at Mormon scripture without wanting to claw my own eyes out. To me, trying to argue with a TBM about doctrine would be akin to arguing with a sociopath about his book on the best way to torture a kitten. In trying to make my argument to him that torturing a kitten is wrong, I'd have to read his book and basically go somewhere I don't want to go mentally.


This is your best example? This is the bile that will incite some future holocaust? You do realize that this individual was not calling Mormons sociopaths, but was stating that if he/she were to argue with Mormons, he/she would have to do that which "make me want to claw my own eyes out" - ie, read their scripture. Certainly he/she engaged in hyperbole by comparing his/her distaste for Mormon scripture to a distaste for reading a book about how to torture a kitten, but if this is an example of the "bile" you think will incite the holocaust, your perception is even more skewed than I had ever suspected.


Yet, if I call you a "bitch", I'm inciting revolution. WOW!!


Oh, Ray, you don't give yourself enough credit. You did far more than call me a bitch.

But no, in my worldview, that won't incite a revolution. It's YOUR worldview in which calling the "hinkster" names, or making fun of DCP, will result in mass violence against Mormons. So if I adopted YOUR worldview, then, yes, calling me a bitch would be part of "inciting revolution".

But my point is that your worldview is bizarre and twisted. So no, I won't be adopting it.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

rcrocket wrote:
beastie wrote:I know the pseudonym issue is your pet peeve. I think it's good sense, based on safety precautions. I would never, never post under my real name, for safety reasons alone.


For the same reason, I like the invention of masks. It makes it easier and safer to rob banks. Here, you have let the medium justify the means.

rcrocket


Masks were not invented to make it safer and easier to rob banks.

By your reasoning, the same could be said of clothes.
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

For the same reason, I like the invention of masks. It makes it easier and safer to rob banks. Here, you have let the medium justify the means.


I have a hard time taking you seriously, rcrocket. You are just not rational on this point.

All sorts of people lurk on the internet, and some are people that - completely aside from religious issues - you really would not want to have personal information about you. And it has nothing to do with what you may or may not say about Mormonism.

I've said to you before, I can only hope that if you have children who get on the net, you have enough sense to encourage them to use pseudonyms, and to NEVER give out personal information that would allow someone to track them down.

Are you really this naïve?
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

beastie wrote: I would never, never post under my real name, for safety reasons alone.



This is choice. So you think my warnings are balderdash? You want to protect yourself, yet you stand by and watch Mormons get verbally slaughtered. "It's 'only' the Internet." "They are 'only' venting." You are afraid of violence against you, yet you think all the verbal attacks on Mormons "can never lead to violence". That is what I would have to call breath-taking hypocrisy.
Post Reply