Ray A.....total nut.

[_beastie]

Ray,

I suppose I ought to be flattered that you believe me to be omnipotent in regards to the exmormon internet world, but the sad fact is that I'm not. Although I know Nort posts now and then, I don't recall visiting his site, nor have I ever visited Sam's site, nor do I even know who he is. Yet somehow, the fact that I have not criticized them is proof of my utter hypocrisy. Yet you have seen me go toe to toe with exmormons on RFM. But that means nothing, because I'm not going after all of them.

Sure, human beings all have the capacity to engage in wishful violent thinking or actual violence, given certain circumstances. But that in no way means that all human beings share the same tendency to this trait.

You're really funny, you know. You blow your gasket about the fact that some "angry exmormons" personally attack certain Mormons, make predictions that violence will be the result of that behavior, and yet it seems to stick in your craw that I'm normally calm.

by the way, my attack on rcrocket had nothing to do with Mormonism. Yes, there are certain behaviors or statements that will goad even me into anger. It's easy to recognize when it's happened. The fact that it's so rare indicates that it just doesn't happen often, and whatever else I may or may not be, an "angry exmormon" is not one of them.

No one needs to discredit you, Ray. You do it all by yourself, over and over and over.

[_Ray A]

Gotta love this. Ray, you definitely can't read my mind, because your thinking, as demonstrated in your various posts, is alien to mine. So you have no idea what I "really think" unless I say it. It bugs you that I don't actually personally attack Mormons, instead of focusing on the Book of Mormon, doesn't it? You WANT me to be like you. Ain't gonna happen.

You DO personally attack Mormons. You have attacked Juliann, you have done your hen-spat about Crocket, and you are obsessed with criticising MADB, which is a Mormon-run board. Don't try to weave your way out of this one. You want to go on a campaign to make the Church stop it's reference to "evil apostates" (Note: NO campaigns against the "rabid dogs" on RFM!). Is that not personal criticism of Mormons? Do you think they differentiate between whether you attack them personally, or the Church? As far as they are concerned, an attack on the Church, is an attack on them. You don't post there because you KNOW that if you said there what you say here, you'd be mince-meat.

I don't attack PostMo anymore because I went there, and found out for myself what the people are really like. Despite some clear and lingering anger, I still think fairly positively of PostMo. All YOU wanted to do was kill any potential harmony. I have nothing personal against Jeff Ricks, and I liked many of the people I met there, and recognised many of them were sincerely trying to work through a maze of problems with leaving the Church. The reason for my different "tone" here, and there, is because I think many of them were sincerely looking for help (and some of them wanted me to stay), and direction, in a difficult exit-process. Many were not interested in bashing the Church, though many are. If PostMo goes the way of RFM, it will turn into just another Mormon-bashing site, like the direction this one has gone in, and RFM. thanks to your help too, beastie. You recognised one day that I had toned down, and was ready to listen to them. The next day you couldn't resist. LIke Gad you just had to go dig up all the old stuff, and stuff on other boards that was NOT relevant to that one. I have said, endlessly, I'm prepared to change, and even listen, but the professional Mormon-bashers will never allow that. They, not Mormons, are the greatest hinderance to any potential "bridge-building", and YOU are one of them.

[_beastie]

Oh, please. Of course I attack Juliann. She deserved it. My attacks on her have nothing to do with the fact that she's a Mormon, like my attack on crocket. You can't even keep your "beastie is evil" story straight. First I don't just tell what I REALLY think, which apparently you have figured out, and just tell how Mormons are some anachronism, or whatever you were trying to say. It bugged you that I stick to the Book of Mormon in mesoamerica. Now you're suddenly reversing your position, and I *do* openly attack Mormons. But it doesn't matter. I stopped expecting you to make sense a long time ago.

So tell me, Ray, did you actually PM the ZLMB mods that their "missionaries are dead"? What in the heck were you thinking? That is some kind of sick s*** that I doubt the most rabid RFMer would have dreamed up. I could be wrong, there may be one or two in your league, but certainly not many.

[_Ray A]

No one needs to discredit you, Ray. You do it all by yourself, over and over and over.

And you discredited yourself with your hen-spat at Crocket, for one. Good God, even Marg could see that, and she is no friend to Mormonism. She also had a ferocious dig at GIMR. At least she, like Nort and Sam, is consistent. You will pick and bleed Mormonism, regardless, and every one can see your own obsession with doing that. You don't come across with any semblance of real conviction when you "criticise" your rabid exmo mates. You'd prefer to taunt the likes of Dan Peterson like the cross-examiner and questioner of personal motives. Look at how you go on about Dan Peterson's motives, style, and everything else, ceaselessly. Let's see that same obsession with some of the "rabid dogs" on RFM.

[_beastie]

Ray,

Even you ought to realize you've reached a desperate point when you're calling on marg for support.

by the way, did you actually PM the Z mods with that malicious note about their missionaries being dead? What were you thinking? I'm serious, I want to know. I simply cannot get inside the mind of someone who would actually not only THINK such a thing, but then decide to PM the thought to other people.

I'm off to bed now, but will look forward to reading your explanation in the morning.

[_Ray A]

I'm off to bed now, but will look forward to reading your explanation in the morning.

You're not going to have it in the morning because I am off to work - where I sometimes have to deal with real violence. I'm not trying to use Marg for support. I really do think she has more consistency than you do. And I've often been criticised by her.

[_beastie]

You can't bring yourself to admit what you did, can you, much less try to explain it!

You have a lot of nerve. And then, even worse but predictable, you get angry when people bring up the horrible things you've said in the past. I've seen this pattern of behavior before, and it's troubling to recognize.

[_gramps]

I'm off to bed now, but will look forward to reading your explanation in the morning.

You're not going to have it in the morning because I am off to work - where I sometimes have to deal with real violence. I'm not trying to use Marg for support. I really do think she has more consistency than you do. And I've often been criticised by her.

Ray, for someone who is so against violence, weren't you the one that told me you would kill someone who called your daughter a crack whore?

Would you still do that, Ray? If so, me thinks we have a lot more to fear from you than you do from us ex-mormons (at least, the angry ones)!

Get a grip on yourself Ray. Your manic, psychotic moments really do make you out a fool.

[_Mister Scratch]

You, Scratch, Gad, and others want to go digging up old stuff nearly five years old. Why? Because I changed my perspectives, and YOU don't like it!

No, Ray. It is not a simple matter of you changing your perspectives; rather, it is a matter of how positively *wild* your change of heart has been. Really, the only commonality amongst your two "sides" is the pure rabidity and hostility.

Any defence of Mormonism will bring out your cat-paws, but you leave all of your exmo mates virtually untouched! Way to go. Scratch could be employed for years if he were to comment on some exmo rantings, but he too is only interested in bashing Mormonism.

You are positing a false analogy, Ray. Exmos are almost uniformly "hurt" by their experiences with Mormonism; Mormons are not. Exmos do not rely upon a multi-billion dollar company to back themselves up and offer reassurance; not so with TBMs. Exmos tend not to make claims as to having the ultimate truth; TBMs, on the other hand, do.

You are like some sick jurist, who, after seeing a battered woman divorced from her wealthy and powerful spouse, thinks that the woman deserves to be as equally criticized as the man. The fact is that exmos do not, nor will they ever, harbor anywhere near the power and wealth of the LDS Church.

I have criticised everyone, on both sides, at some stage.

And yet there doesn't seem to be a moral or ethical compass undergirding your criticism. Hence, you seem like a complete whack-job.

[_Sam Harris]

No one needs to discredit you, Ray. You do it all by yourself, over and over and over.

And you discredited yourself with your hen-spat at Crocket, for one. Good God, even Marg could see that, and she is no friend to Mormonism. She also had a ferocious dig at GIMR. At least she, like Nort and Sam, is consistent. You will pick and bleed Mormonism, regardless, and every one can see your own obsession with doing that. You don't come across with any semblance of real conviction when you "criticise" your rabid exmo mates. You'd prefer to taunt the likes of Dan Peterson like the cross-examiner and questioner of personal motives. Look at how you go on about Dan Peterson's motives, style, and everything else, ceaselessly. Let's see that same obsession with some of the "rabid dogs" on RFM.

Now how the hell did I get pulled into this?