FAIR, McCue, and the Law

[_Blixa]

The list I was referring to is this found (still) at the bottom of the empty "Bob McCue" page:

Further reading

Specific authors

Richard Abanes
Fawn McKay Brodie
Todd Compton
Charles Larson
Bob McCue
Christopher Marc Nemelka
Grant Palmer
D. Michael Quinn
Jerald and Sandra Tanner


Christopher Marc Nemelka?? Christopher Marc Nemelka????? Why would this need explanation/debunking? What an odd list.

[_truth dancer]

I'm also suprised that McCue was on The List of Big Time Anti-Mormons they are working out articles on (ok the list wasn't called that specifically).

Is FAIR working on articles about other "Big Time Anti-Mormons"?

As I mentioned in the OP, I think this tactic may open a door that FAIR may not really want to go through.

I could see this fight getting REALLY nasty....

~dancer~

[_harmony]

The list I was referring to is this found (still) at the bottom of the empty "Bob McCue" page:

Further reading

Specific authors

Richard Abanes
Fawn McKay Brodie
Todd Compton
Charles Larson
Bob McCue
Christopher Marc Nemelka
Grant Palmer
D. Michael Quinn
Jerald and Sandra Tanner


Christopher Marc Nemelka?? Christopher Marc Nemelka????? Why would this need explanation/debunking? What an odd list.

Why Todd Compton? Last I checked, he was active LDS. And why Grant Palmer? To put Palmer on the same list with the Tanners is just unbelievable.

[_harmony]

Christopher Marc Nemelka?? Christopher Marc Nemelka????? Why would this need explanation/debunking? What an odd list.

Because he claims to be able to translate the sealed part of the Book of Mormon, and the lost 116 pages. His claims threaten the prophet's seer-ness.

[_charity]

How does this constitute an Anti-Mormon board, Charity?

It doesn't matter what the mission statement it. The majority of posts are anti-Mormon. I see very little seeking for truth. Just debates. A debate isn't a search for truth. It is an I win you lose exercise.

Also, I notice that you didn't include me, Harmony, or Jason into the little categories you created. That's because we are neither "mild end of the spectrum ex-Mormons" or "flaming apostates". All three of us are calling holding, active Church members. Are there Church policies we disagree with? Yes. Do we enjoy discussing these issues as well as learning new things? Yes.

I am not an anti-Mormon, Charity. I would not be actively involved in the administration of a board that is anti-Mormon.

You do try to be a voice of moderation, and I don't mean that in a board mod sense. You are Jason are certainly edgy Mormons. Harmony has fallen off the edge. For all those who are about to jump out at me that I am judging Harmony, let me say, I don't know about the real person behind her screenname. But the Harmony persona she herself puts up here, certainly has. After all, except for a few cases where board members know each other in real life (and I only know one person here in real life) we only know each other through what information we, ourselves, provide.

[_harmony]

You do try to be a voice of moderation, and I don't mean that in a board mod sense. You are Jason are certainly edgy Mormons. Harmony has fallen off the edge. For all those who are about to jump out at me that I am judging Harmony, let me say, I don't know about the real person behind her screenname. But the Harmony persona she herself puts up here, certainly has. After all, except for a few cases where board members know each other in real life (and I only know one person here in real life) we only know each other through what information we, ourselves, provide.

On the contrary, charity, I am fringe, still clinging to the edge, doing my best to live the gospel of Jesus Christ with the tools I've been given, helping my neighbor and the stranger, being kind to others, forgiving those who have maligned me, loving and caring for my family, fulfilling my callings, sustaining my leaders. You and Coggins are the ones who will be called to repent, for Christ had little use for people who chastize others without first perfecting themselves. when you cast that stone, charity, you're the one who will have to answer for it, not me.

Remember, charity... the first law of the gospel: love God, and the second is like unto it: love thy neighbor as thyself. You, and all others who take upon themselves the name of Christ, are commanded to cast your bread upon the waters (which is what we do here), do good to those that despise you, turn the other cheek, and treat others as you would treated... if you have done it unto the least of these (that would be me. I am definitely the least), you have done it unto Christ himself. Treat me, and people like me, and everyone whoever comes into contact with you as if we were Christ himself, and you will have succeeded in living a Christ-like life. Do anything less, and you will have failed. No matter how much tithing you pay, no matter how many sessons you take in the temple, no matter how many times you raise your hand to sustain our leaders, if you treat anyone anyone differently than you would treat Christ, you have failed. Procrastinate not the day of your repentence. I care about you, I wouldn't want to lose you, but only you can repent. No one can do it for you.

[_moksha]

How right you are Charity. FAIR is not the Church and so is not bound by any ethical conventions and is free to do whatever misdeeds they choose to pursue. It should not reflect back on the Church and any legal disputes should be referred to the law firm of Dahmer, Bundy and McConkie.

Not you, too, mocksha. So, when a topic is started about legal issues of slander and libel and suing FAIR and the Church, it is all right to talk about legal issues. But when we talk about the legal issues from FAIR's view, then we can't talk about legal issues anymore. Nice.

Mocksha? Trying to parody my name? Yikes!
Actually Charity, I was trying to express my dismay that any such FAIR Wiki posting would be worthy of justification or defense. Much better to say something like it is good the offending post was removed or something like that. I should apologize for being flippant in the first place and perhaps have mentioned instead that it is important for FAIR to be ethical in all things.

[_rcrocket]

A few points. I haven't read the entire thread.

1. McCue can't spell libelous, can he? (I can't spell anointing, but who's counting?)

2. Harmony ins't a member of the church at all, so quit swallowing her posts hook line and sinker. She is a troll, a good one, pretending to be "on the edge." I challenge her to prove otherwse (but she can't). Harmony is like one of those characters in a simulated world. So's Scratch, Rollo, Jason. They aren't here what they really are. Prove me wrong.

3. An apology or retraction doesn't remove the sting of libel; McCue can still sue.

4. U.S. libel laws are much more difficult for the plaintiff in the U.S. than in Canada. FAIR will probably be able to say that he is a public figure and, hence, certain First Amendment protections apply.

5. FAIR is not the Church. FAIR is a pretty good source of informaton, but it isn't prophetic or controlled by the Church.

rcrocket

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Harmony is like one of those characters in a simulated world. So's Scratch, Rollo, Jason. They aren't here what they really are.

False, so far as your absurd statement relates to me.

[_harmony]

A few points. I haven't read the entire thread.

Why bother? You already know everything.

2. Harmony ins't a member of the church at all, so quit swallowing her posts hook line and sinker. She is a troll, a good one, pretending to be "on the edge." I challenge her to prove otherwse (but she can't). Harmony is like one of those characters in a simulated world. So's Scratch, Rollo, Jason. They aren't here what they really are. Prove me wrong.

It's not a matter of "can't", Crock. It's a matter of "won't". I much prefer to see you twist in the wind as you flail about, trying desperately to find something concrete, something usable to call my SP with.

3. An apology or retraction doesn't remove the sting of libel; McCue can still sue.

Even if it would, they won't. Humility is in short supply at FAIR. One must feel remorse, seek to make recompense, and repent in order to apologize. FAIR has none of that either.

4. U.S. libel laws are much more difficult for the plaintiff in the U.S. than in Canada. FAIR will probably be able to say that he is a public figure and, hence, certain First Amendment protections apply.

He's a public figure? How?

5. FAIR is not the Church.

Finally, we agree on something! FAIR is definitely NOT the church. Which is why the church requires that disclaimer on FAIR's website. They want no confusion when FAIR does stupid things...like write unsubstantiated bullshaloney in a WIKI.

FAIR is a pretty good source of informaton, but it isn't prophetic or controlled by the Church.

First phrase is manifestly incorrect; second phrase is manifestly correct. Too bad you couldn't string two correct phases together in the same sentence.