FAIR Journal - Message from Gordy

[Guest]

Thanks for the good wishes. We live in a box canyon on a long private street shared with 30 others. When flames came within a few hundred yards we were ordered out of our homes. But the streets were clogged with people with horse trailers trying to get up to the horse ranch at the end of our canyon, fire trucks, people trying to leave, and real suspicious characters in old vans and trucks trying to get up the canyon. I stopped the suspicious characters, and while smoke was filling the air, flames were seen on the ridge, and they were trying to advance up my driveway, I asked them what they wanted. They were "scouting" a film location, they claimed. Not on my driveway, you're not.

The fire trucks used my house as a staging place; the bombers and helicopters put out the fire. But, the winds are up again this weekend.

Those damn Gadianton robbers - should have flashed em a quick sign telling them not to harm your stuff.... but then you're one of them, you're a lawyer.

[_Trevor]

I don't think he had sex with all his wives, but there is enough evidence to believe that sex was the default, so one would have to assume he had sex in the absence of evidence he didn't.

I think it is truly hilarious that, whereas most people assume that sex and marriage naturally go together, LDS apologists want all kinds of proof that Joseph Smith had sex with his wives. The whole Fanny Alger incident didn't occur over Joseph's reputed wedding ceremony with Fanny, but over being caught in flagrante delicto with her. Nope. The man certainly was not interested in sex. He was, after all, the man who was quoted as saying, "every time I see the turn of a woman's ankle, I have to pray for grace," or something very close to that. Sex was obviously never on this guy's mind.

[_guy sajer]

Thanks for the good wishes. We live in a box canyon on a long private street shared with 30 others. When flames came within a few hundred yards we were ordered out of our homes. But the streets were clogged with people with horse trailers trying to get up to the horse ranch at the end of our canyon, fire trucks, people trying to leave, and real suspicious characters in old vans and trucks trying to get up the canyon. I stopped the suspicious characters, and while smoke was filling the air, flames were seen on the ridge, and they were trying to advance up my driveway, I asked them what they wanted. They were "scouting" a film location, they claimed. Not on my driveway, you're not.

The fire trucks used my house as a staging place; the bombers and helicopters put out the fire. But, the winds are up again this weekend.

You're welcome.

I'll be in San Diego later this month. My daughter's soccer team is competing in the Surf Cup. It's become a family tradition for the last 3 years. My son is coming from ASU and we're sticking around another day to go to a Chargers' game. (He's a huge Chargers fan.)

[_Trevor]

Before I respond to this post I'll need you to concede, for purposes of argument only, that plural marriage is (1) nowhere prohibited in scripture, (2) was sanctioned by god in the Old Testament, and (3) was considered by Joseph Smith to be part of the package of the restoration of all things. If you can't concede for purposes of my argument only these facts, then absolutely of course I cannot engage you with the specifics of Hyde and Huntington Smith Young. I will not be able to get over your revulsion to plural marriage, so why even attempt with the specifics of these two wives?

Where was polyandry (1) permitted by scripture, (2) sanctioned by God in the Old Testament, (3) practiced by Old Testament patriarchs, prophets, or kings and not called for what it was: adultery?

[_rcrocket]

Those damn Gadianton robbers - should have flashed em a quick sign telling them not to harm your stuff.... but then you're one of them, you're a lawyer.

Yep, you really singed me with that insult.

[_Sethbag]

Thanks for the good wishes. We live in a box canyon on a long private street shared with 30 others. When flames came within a few hundred yards we were ordered out of our homes. But the streets were clogged with people with horse trailers trying to get up to the horse ranch at the end of our canyon, fire trucks, people trying to leave, and real suspicious characters in old vans and trucks trying to get up the canyon. I stopped the suspicious characters, and while smoke was filling the air, flames were seen on the ridge, and they were trying to advance up my driveway, I asked them what they wanted. They were "scouting" a film location, they claimed. Not on my driveway, you're not.

The fire trucks used my house as a staging place; the bombers and helicopters put out the fire. But, the winds are up again this weekend.

Ah, you must live in the area where the fire was accidentally started by that 10-year old kid playing with matches. What a bummer, for everyone involved.

[_rcrocket]

Where was polyandry (1) permitted by scripture, (2) sanctioned by God in the Old Testament, (3) practiced by Old Testament patriarchs, prophets, or kings and not called for what it was: adultery?

I am way beyond making that particular defense from the Old Testament. But, your post intrigues me. Where does the Old Testament "call it for that it was," adultery? That's a new one.

rcrocket

[_rcrocket]

.

I'll be in San Diego later this month. My daughter's soccer team is competing in the Surf Cup. It's become a family tradition for the last 3 years. My son is coming from ASU and we're sticking around another day to go to a Chargers' game. (He's a huge Chargers fan.)

I am looking forward to L.T. and the Chargers playing LA this . . . Oh, well, what the heck.

[_dartagnan]

I take it you weren't at Dr. Gee's presenation at the FAIR conference 2007.

Like they would let me through the door.

So you really don't know what he said about measuring papyri fragment. Or else you would know not to parade your ignorance.

I know his argument is absurd, as I have several authorities far more knowledgeable than Gee, who said so. You have nobody. You have nothing except Gee’s say-so. He presents this not in an academic presentation but at an apologetic conference where none of listeners have the ability to critique it. You guys merely buy anything anyone says at these conferences because it is all about feeling good about your positions. You rely on each other to confirm what you want to believe.

I know anything that mentions the Book of Abraham throws you into a tizzy.

Only when ignorant people like you pretend to have a clue about the subject; hence, my signature line. All you do is worship FARMS articles and any Mormon who writes about it and then consider the case shut. The case is pretty much shut, however you’re on the losing side and you’re in denial.

You got so heated when you thougth I said you were the apologist who got handed his head in a basket, you assumed I was talking about the licking you took over the Book of Abraham (It was someone else in a different situation, and it wasn't the Book of Abraham.)

Now you’re just flat out lying. I got “heated” because you were rumor-mongering just like good apologists do, and everyone here knew you were referring to me. If not, then who? Oh yea, you can’t tell us. How convenient.

But it is obvious you see red so quickly on the subject, you can't see clearly.

I defend myself when people suggest I’m lying. You have already done this once and you’re also a faithful member of that crowd over there who hates my guts. Don’t insult anyone’s intelligence here by pretending you were not rumor-mongering about me. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out who you’re alluding to, anymore than it takes a genius to figure out who Bokovoy has in mind when he goes to MAD, immediately after one of our spats, and starts explaining why some apologists turn critics.

Any good counselor can tell you that it is never a good idea to get into a discussion when you are overly emotional. Emotion clouds the logical thinking processes.

Which is why the Mormon testimony is logically bankrupt. This is why the entire LDS apologetic position is virtually void of reasoning. Good grief, one of your top apologists just announced to the world that he thinks struggling members should engage in logical fallacies to overcome their concerns. If the evidence leads someone to disbelieve, then he doesn’t recommend leaving. He recommends we change our assumptions and never allow our presupposition that the “Church is true” to be overthrown by evidence.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Guy...

I think I've made it clear that I don't take my moral marching orders from the social conventions of sexist, racist, misogynist, blood thirsty, backward, superstitious iron age pastoralists as codified in a book of historical fiction.

LOL!

I wish the world would follow your example! :-)

You're right, I can't get over my revulsion to plural marriage. Mind you, it's not the more than one spouse, per se, that repulses me, but it's the reduction of women to chattel, it's the emotional and sexual abuse of minors, it is the gedner-related power assymetries that it implies, etc. the repulse me.

In addition to reducing women to chattel, it reduces men to animals. I mean it is a serious return to a primitive, animalistic, males-as-sperm-donors, form of mating.

It is so great to have real men who respect women, value their wives, honor their marriage, and who want to be decent human beings!

:-)

~dancer~