DCP Admits to "LDS Academic Embarrassment"

[_harmony]

Professors make upwards of $80,000 a year, even in a lower tier school like Portland State. That is not chump change. Beats MacDonald's by a miile.

So why wouldn't those people possessing a PhD in Mormon Studies or Bible Studies from BYU be able to gain employment at any university that has a Religious Studies department?

So you think our well educated Book of Mormon scholars are going to take their degrees in Book of Mormon and be hired to teach theology anywhere except in Utah? Would you be interested in some ocean view property near Phoenix, AZ?

Not even in Utah, if that other post holds true, that no Utah university has a department of Religious Studies.

[_Mister Scratch]

Yeah, you're right, Beastie. He does have a pretty nasty tendency to wander off-topic, or dodge the point. On another thread (I believe it was "Ray A--Total Nut"), I tried to get him to explain why my anonymity made me so bad, but he never did. Ultimately, he just bailed out, or "fled the scene," as Kevin Graham would say.

I'm still here, and I've explained ad nauseam why you're a hypocrite for indulging in character assassination under the cover of anonymity.

No, you have never provided a good explanation. I issued a "CFR" and you totally ignored it, mate. Do you remember? Here's a refresher:

Sure, you might not know certain personal details, such as my Church membership status, or my gender, but what does that matter?

That is precisely what matters.

I tried very hard to get you to tell me why disclosure of my personal details was important, but you never provided an answer.

[_Ray A]

I tried very hard to get you to tell me why disclosure of my personal details was important, but you never provided an answer.

One more time, okay?: It is important to your credibility, which is why I give you none. Again, you have said you don't want to disclose personal details for the fear of being personally attacked. In other words, you must be the judge of others, while no one is allowed to judge you! I think any fair-minded person can see how hypocritical this is.

Even Tarski spoke out about your venomous and obsessive attitude to DCP, and if I recall, Sethbag also. I give them credibility for that, because I can give it where it's due. Also, let your victims decide if their characters have been assassinated, and be more careful in drawing conclusions (which you did, that DCP was basically a corrupt person) about people with high profiles in public life. I wouldn't care if it was Dan Vogel, or DCP, who was under your attack, I'd still say the same things. In fact, when some on MAD were saying Vogel was an anti-Mormon, I objected to that, and gave my reasons.

You take an awful license and set yourself up as an anonymous judge of others' character, and you do it obsessively, from your protected ivory tower.

[_beastie]

Again, thanks, but I don't need your "help" (in fact, you would be the last person I would call on if I thought I needed "help"). Your negative obsession with MADB is no different. When you disagree with something, or someone, you become obsessed with that person or thing, just like you did on PostMo, when I was trying to understand them better, and just like you lashed out at Bob. Remember your words, "THIS is anger". Fortunately, others called you on it.

Yes, I was quite angry at Bob, for reasons entirely unconnected to Mormonism. But did you notice, even at my worse, I didn't engage in an actual threat of physical violence? You see, very few people, even on the internet, descend to that level. You have the honor of being one of the few.

[_charity]

Wait a sec... Now you are claiming that LDS scholars won't present their arguments to the outside world because of prejudice? Prejudice against what, pray tell? Moreover, I'm not sure how this squares with DCP & et. al.'s claim that secular scholars are totally oblivious to LDS theories and arguments.

You are too funny. Wait a sec yourself. I said they wouldn't be HIRED. You really do have a talent for misreading or mistating. Please stay with what I say if you want to comment on it. Don't make something up.

The bottom line is this, Charity: if LDS scholars are not going to attempt to share their theories with secular scholars and the rest of the academic world, then LDS scholars have no business characterizing their work as "scholarly" at all.

This is a crock. "Scholarly" is a function of methodology. It has nothing to do with who the theory is shared with. If Royal Skousen uses the accepted methods of textual criticism, it doesn't matter whether the object of his study is the Book of Mormon or Pride and Prejudice.

[_beastie]

So why wouldn't those people possessing a PhD in Mormon Studies or Bible Studies from BYU be able to gain employment at any university that has a Religious Studies department?

It's odd. Several apologists, notably Juliann, insist that the time for Mormon scholarly studies have finally begun, and Mormon scholars are being given the respect they deserve.

[_harmony]

Yeah, you're right, Beastie. He does have a pretty nasty tendency to wander off-topic, or dodge the point. On another thread (I believe it was "Ray A--Total Nut"), I tried to get him to explain why my anonymity made me so bad, but he never did. Ultimately, he just bailed out, or "fled the scene," as Kevin Graham would say.

I'm still here, and I've explained ad nauseam why you're a hypocrite for indulging in character assassination under the cover of anonymity.

One cannot engage in charater assassination if the allegation is the truth. Refute the allegation, not the guy who delivers the message.

[_Ray A]

Yes, I was quite angry at Bob, for reasons entirely unconnected to Mormonism. But did you notice, even at my worse, I didn't engage in an actual threat of physical violence? You see, very few people, even on the internet, descend to that level. You have the honor of being one of the few.

Ask all the abused women if actual violence is any less than verbal abuse. Do you think black people were always subjected to violence? Do you think Australian Aborigines are murdered in the street every day. No, it's the verbal abuse that "kills" them. That can be just as bad, and sometimes worse than physical violence.

I'm surprised if you don't understand this, after what you wrote about your own experiences in Barrel's blog. Was your ex-husband physically violent to you? (You don't have to answer.)

[_Ray A]

One cannot engage in charater assassination if the allegation is the truth. Refute the allegation, not the guy who delivers the message.

And who determines truth? You determine the truth of DCP's character by what Scratch writes? Tarski didn't agree, and I know for a fact he was sickened by it, because he PMd me. So you know the truth?

[_Mister Scratch]

I tried very hard to get you to tell me why disclosure of my personal details was important, but you never provided an answer.

One more time, okay?: It is important to your credibility, which is why I give you none. Again, you have said you don't want to disclose personal details for the fear of being personally attacked.

What is wrong with that? I have no problem with people attacking my arguments, or pointing out when I behave badly. But I see no reason to open myself up for personal attacks, particularly amongst people such as the rabid TBMs on MAD, who have shown a creepy penchant for delving into people's personal lives and smearing them. I have already been harrassed at my residence by TBMs over my writings. I see no need to welcome any further "contact" of that kind.

In other words, you must be the judge of others, while no one is allowed to judge you! I think any fair-minded person can see how hypocritical this is.

Anyone can "judge" me, Ray. You're doing it right now. See: what you are really advocating is that people be able to dig around in my private, personal life. For some reason, you don't find it adequate that people engage only my arguments, and my online behavior. You evidently want people to be able to go rummaging around in my personal life as well.

Even Tarski spoke out about your venomous and obsessive attitude to DCP, and if I recall, Sethbag also.

They did? Let's see it then, Ray. CFR.

I give them credibility for that, because I can give it where it's due. Also, let your victims decide if their characters have been assassinated, and be more careful in drawing conclusions (which you did, that DCP was basically a corrupt person) about people with high profiles in public life.

The conclusions I've drawn regarding DCP have been supported by mountains of evidence. You can read my blog to find out why I view The Good Professor in a less-than-always-noble light.

I wouldn't care if it was Dan Vogel, or DCP, who was under your attack, I'd still say the same things. In fact, when some on MAD were saying Vogel was an anti-Mormon, I objected to that, and gave my reasons.

You take an awful license and set yourself up as an anonymous judge of others' character, and you do it obsessively, from your protected ivory tower.

People judge my character, too, Ray. Your argument doesn't hold any water.