Ray A: The Gandhi of Internet Mormonism?

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:I didn't ask if anyone took your threat seriously. I would assume they did, particularly since it was not a singular threat.

But what I asked was if we should have taken your threat seriously.

I guess I will have to spell it out for you. You tell us now, and Dan assures us likewise, that you were never really threatening anyone, that this, apparently, was some sort of temper tantrum, or perhaps you were under Satan's control. Who knows. But you never really were a threat.

But somehow you now ask us all to believe that those who engage in polemics, I suppose mainly on RFM - much milder polemics than threatening to kill missionaries, no matter what you pretend - should be taken seriously, because, apparently, although you were not capable of following through on your threats, they are capable of following through with violence.

In your case, we're supposed to believe that you were just acting out in a fit of temper. We're supposed to forget about it - it was five years ago. But, for those on RFM, it's a different story. They aren't just acting out in a fit of temper. No, they are either capable of real acts of violence or encouraging those acts.

There's no need to answer. There's nothing you can say - except, of course, call me a name or something, or tell me I should eat dinner with scratch.


As if I didn't know you were coming with this. Yawn. Okay, can we go back to a basic level?

Do all threats, of any nature, materialise? Truth be told, I hear them almost every night, like when someone gets angry at security at a nightclub, and they hop in the cab and say, in real anger, "I could have killed that SOB, and he's lucky I didn't". Serious, I hear this often. We live in an increasingly violent society, and sometimes I'm at my wits end trying to predict who might, or might not be violent. I've had police called three times so far, just as a precaution. I honestly often don't know who might, or might not pull a gun or knife. Last Saturday night there was a stabbing at a nightclub, and two months ago a club patron was shot dead. One month ago a man asked his neighbour to turn down the early morning music, and when he didn't, he yelled threats. The music continued, and the angered man got a gun, walked into the other's man home, and shot him dead in front of his family (but he was a former criminal). Front page news here. You don't believe me - read:

http://illawarra.yourguide.com.au/artic ... topstories

I do not lie when I say it's impossible to know who will do what. I pick up and transport volatile people all the time, but in MOST cases I know the threats are simply verbal expressions of real anger, and in most cases, fortunately, the violence doesn't actually occur. That doesn't mean it can't, obviously.

What I have said in tha past about potential future violence, is exactly that - potential. We do not know how much more violent society can, or will become.

I have to end here, because I have to go. I can continue next week. But I doubt you're getting the drift of my point.
_The Nehor
_Emeritus
Posts: 11832
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:05 am

Post by _The Nehor »

Mister Scratch wrote:Are screenshots not alterable? In any case, why not go one step at a time? After Ray submits his version to Dr. Shades, we can then move on to screen shots. I am totally fine with this.

by the way, Nehor, since we are on the subject of proof, I think I am going to need videotaped evidence that your friend did not find Hamblin's diatribe offensive, since you have been known to lie about things, such as your Belial sockpuppet. Also, as a sidenote: isn't it kind of ironic for a TBM such as yourself to be demanding physical evidence? Do you require the same kinds of evidence for the truth claims of the Church?


No, screenshots are alterable but it takes more effort. In any case, I was just making a suggestion. I'm not really that interested.

Belial was a lie? Are you telling me you actually believed there was a demon posting on this message board? Silly Scratch. It's called a joke, a game, a facade. I was dropping hints the whole time to see how soon someone would figure out who it was. I never made a claim as to who Belial was except that he was a demon from hell. I admit....that was a joke. If you failed to catch on to that being an untruth, then you are an idiot. The physical evidence I have that the Church is real would blow your mind or you would check yourself into a mental health ward. And no, I'm not sharing.

Though perhaps as a TBM I should follow the critic's stereotype of how we make decisions: I FEEL that this argument is mostly a waste of breath and therefore it is.

There, glad that got solved.

Oh, and I asked permission from my friend to post our correspondence. He read the thread in question and a few other things and then declined. He did think many of the posters here come across as deranged though but pointed out that it was more civil than X-Box 360 vs. PS3 boards. So no videotape of him taking a polygraph. Sorry, I tried.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics
"I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

Dan - you mean you're interested enough to have actually formed an opinion on the issue? And here you've been assuring us that the reason you're not sharing your opinion is just that you haven't been interested enough to think about it. Why, my goodness, apparently there's some other reason you haven't been willing to share your opinion. I'm shocked, I tell you, just shocked.

If you're only interested in group behavior, why don't you study your own church? Its leaders frequently propagandize about "why people leave the church" with insulting, dehumanizing generalizations, and most of its members swallow the propaganda hook, line and sinker. Does that "fascinate" you? Let me make a wild guess - no, you're not interested.

And Ray, of course you knew where it was going, and of course you want to get "back to basics" and instead go on about how people can be violent. Yes, Ray, we know people can be violent. We know you can't always predict who will be violent. This doesn't help your case, because you were making a case about one specific group engaging in future violence, and you were making this prediction based on their polemics - (I won't even say based on their threats, because despite your assurances otherwise, I haven't read such threats, other than the time travel shoot Joseph Smith scenario, which can hardly be called a threat. Moreover, if you're reading these threats somewhere, I don't believe they're on RFM because the mods on RFM remove any post that threatens illegal behavior of any kind, once they're aware of them.)

It was the fact that you - and everyone else - knew where it was going that resulted in your refusal to answer my question. D'uh!

So either we should have taken Ray's threats very seriously, or if we should not have taken his threats seriously (and both he and Dan have assured us that they weren't serious), and his current diatribes about the future holocaust are nothing more than - could it be? - polemics (using the term as it is commonly used on these boards).
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
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

beastie wrote:Dan - you mean you're interested enough to have actually formed an opinion on the issue? And here you've been assuring us that the reason you're not sharing your opinion is just that you haven't been interested enough to think about it. Why, my goodness, apparently there's some other reason you haven't been willing to share your opinion. I'm shocked, I tell you, just shocked.

You're obsessed. Just obsessed.

And, on account of some neurochemical factor, you desperately want my validation for your quarrel with Ray.

beastie wrote:If you're only interested in group behavior, why don't you study your own church?

You know, maybe you're right. Maybe I'll have to read something about Mormonism someday.

beastie wrote:Its leaders frequently propagandize about "why people leave the church" with insulting, dehumanizing generalizations, and most of its members swallow the propaganda hook, line and sinker. Does that "fascinate" you?

Your wildly overstated summary is mildly interesting.

Give it a rest, Beastie. No matter how much you beg, I'm not going to share your obsession.

It's nearly Winter Solstice, Beastie. The Sun's position in the sky is very nearly at its greatest annual angular distance on the other side of the equatorial plane. Rejoice! Experience subjectively pleasant synaptic firings!
_Gadianton
_Emeritus
Posts: 9947
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:12 am

Post by _Gadianton »

One thing I'm going to be scratching my head over for a long time is the disparity in extrapolations over the cases of threatening language vs. lying and the relative moral culpability of these respective sins. Threatening language we're assured is usually just "hot air" and almost never should be taken seriously. Those who denounce it are PR freaks with no sense of humor. On the other hand, a "lie" on the scale of deleting a swear word out of a PM would ensure us the next Mark Hoffman. And then there's moral culpability. Threatening language can be mitigated by life circumstances and only taken seriously consequentially, if it didn't lead to physical violence, then the case should be closed. Yet, "lying" somehow rips the very fabric of Celestial moral code independent of all consequences. And if Ray is guilty of so much as altering a PM, that would mark him as a "brazen liar".

Daniel Peterson wrote:It's nearly Winter Solstice, Beastie. The Sun's position in the sky is very nearly at its greatest annual angular distance on the other side of the equatorial plane. Rejoice! Experience subjectively pleasant synaptic firings!


I guess Beastie could likewise wish you a Merry Christmas, with all the semantic objectivity and ontological substance that implies. I know I surely hope that your experiences this holiday season are manufactured pleasantly as your synaptic firings meet the substance of your immortal soul within the confines of your mysterious penial gland. However dry or juicy that slice of Christmas ham might be, I do hope the penial gland errors on the side of "yummy" for you!
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.

LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
_Trinity
_Emeritus
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:36 pm

Post by _Trinity »

Gadianton wrote:I know I surely hope that your experiences this holiday season are manufactured pleasantly as your synaptic firings meet the substance of your immortal soul within the confines of your mysterious penial gland. However dry or juicy that slice of Christmas ham might be, I do hope the penial gland errors on the side of "yummy" for you!


That would make a helluva Christmas card.
"I think one of the great mysteries of the gospel is that anyone still believes it." Sethbag, MADB, Feb 22 2008
_Blixa
_Emeritus
Posts: 8381
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:45 pm

Post by _Blixa »

Trinity wrote:
Gadianton wrote:I know I surely hope that your experiences this holiday season are manufactured pleasantly as your synaptic firings meet the substance of your immortal soul within the confines of your mysterious penial gland. However dry or juicy that slice of Christmas ham might be, I do hope the penial gland errors on the side of "yummy" for you!


That would make a helluva Christmas card.


Yeah, I just may have to send out xmas cards now!
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

beastie wrote:So either we should have taken Ray's threats very seriously, or if we should not have taken his threats seriously (and both he and Dan have assured us that they weren't serious), and his current diatribes about the future holocaust are nothing more than - could it be? - polemics (using the term as it is commonly used on these boards).


I like your new signature lines. I'm flattered to be quoted, possibly for the first time, by anyone on this board.
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

Gadianton wrote: And if Ray is guilty of so much as altering a PM, that would mark him as a "brazen liar".



You have my permission to mark me as anything, if I ever altered any PM. I don't think it's beyond Scratch to keep trying to show I did (and in some way trying to make further alterations. I don't need to send Shades or keene a damn thing, because I know the truth), and this is the seminal point that must be made here, Gad. I know the truth, and Scratch knows the truth.

And nothing will ever change that, no matter what anyone else believes.
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Post by _Mister Scratch »

Ray A wrote:
Gadianton wrote: And if Ray is guilty of so much as altering a PM, that would mark him as a "brazen liar".



You have my permission to mark me as anything, if I ever altered any PM. I don't think it's beyond Scratch to keep trying to show I did (and in some way trying to make further alterations. I don't need to send Shades or keene a damn thing, because I know the truth), and this is the seminal point that must be made here, Gad. I know the truth, and Scratch knows the truth.

And nothing will ever change that, no matter what anyone else believes.


Yes, the truth is that you made a false accusation.
Post Reply