FAIR, McCue, and the Law

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_charity
_Emeritus
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by _charity »

harmony wrote:
By their fruits we shall know them.


Yup, and I've got 27 fruits by which I can be evaluated. I won some, I lost some, and some were a draw. All of them are gainfully employed, all of them have a college education, all of them are active in the church, all of them are good citizens. I must have done something right.


You have 27 kids? I thought you had 8. Wow. I am impressed.
harmony wrote:
...you don't attend sacrament meeting except to partake of the sacrament. . . .


What other reason is there to attend SM? Taking the sacrament is the only reason to go. So now I'm being criticized for taking the sacrament? Holy Moses, charity. You need to repent of that one.


To learn, to support others. Only those who are not humble believe they know everything, they know more than anyone else can teach them.
harmony wrote:
This is a person who has fallen off the edge.


You are in no position to judge, charity. I am outside your stewardship. I've been on the fringe for years. I'm sure you'd rather I stopped going to church entirely, but I don't live my life to please the church's apologists. I live my life to please God and myself. And I finally figured out how to do both.


I would absolultely not wish you quit going to Church entirely. I would absolutely wish you were fully back in Church. That you weren't out in the world (cyberspace at least) defaming Joseph Smith, giving even more rabid anti-Mormons fuel for their attacks. I would wish you weren't giving parents something to try to explain to t heir kids why Sister X always leaves after the sacrament. God knows who you are and what you need. Maybe He giving you a pass right now. I am not your judge.

harmony wrote:
If you want to get back in the Church you need to do t hose things which will bring you back.


I don't need to "get back in the church". I never left. I realize that's a sticky point for some apologists, but nonetheless, it is true.


If you say so.

harmony wrote:
You keep telling us that you aren't. Unless you portray yourself differently here than you really are. You might just all be pulling our legs on this one.


You lost me. I have no idea what these sentences mean.


What I said was, that you keep telling us in describing your actions that you aren't really "in" the Church, even though you protest differently. If you are really sincere about being really "in" then I was suggesting that you are joking with us when you describe what you think and do. Maybe you are really a "Molly" in a costume, pretending to be something you aren't.
_Bond...James Bond
_Emeritus
Posts: 4627
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:49 am

Post by _Bond...James Bond »

Yeesh! Is anyone reading the thread over at MAD? Bob McCue must be a bad mother...

Edit: They just shut it down...before I got to respond :(
Last edited by Anonymous on Tue Jan 29, 2008 2:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
_the road to hana
_Emeritus
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:35 pm

Post by _the road to hana »

charity wrote:Maybe you are really a "Molly" in a costume, pretending to be something you aren't.


Maybe you two are in the same ward and don't even know it.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
_charity
_Emeritus
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by _charity »

the road to hana wrote:
charity wrote:Maybe you are really a "Molly" in a costume, pretending to be something you aren't.


Maybe you two are in the same ward and don't even know it.


Maybe. I don't watch the doors to see who leaves after taking the sacrament. I just hope I'm not in the same ward with Rollo Tomasi and don't know it. After some of the things he said on another board, one of these days a bolt of ligthning is going to come down and get him. I wouldn't want to be standing too close when that happened.
_Pokatator
_Emeritus
Posts: 1417
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:38 pm

Post by _Pokatator »

charity wrote:Maybe. I don't watch the doors to see who leaves after taking the sacrament. I just hope I'm not in the same ward with Rollo Tomasi and don't know it. After some of the things he said on another board, one of these days a bolt of ligthning is going to come down and get him. I wouldn't want to be standing too close when that happened.


I thought God was the judge? You've said things too.
I think it would be morally right to lie about your religion to edit the article favorably.
bcspace
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

Yeesh! Is anyone reading the thread over at MAD? Bob McCue must be a bad mother...

Edit: They just shut it down...before I got to respond :(




Up to the point where it was shut down, basically the believers seemed to be saying "ATTABOY" to greg smith for accusing mccue of adultery and abuse.

Is anyone surprised? The church teaches that people who leave the church and openly teach against it are "satan's minions", to use charity's phrase.


And, by the way, when the mod shut the thread down he/she insinuated chris may have also engaged in libel by starting the thread itself. :O
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
_dartagnan
_Emeritus
Posts: 2750
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:27 pm

Post by _dartagnan »

Just when you think things cannot possibly get any worse for FAIR.

charity starts defending it.... making it worse.

Since we can't see the original article, we can just take the word of a very partisan crowd that any libelous, etc. happened?


Well, I remember seeing the article but I asumed the details were correct. It is just the typical
ad hominem
that apologists are trained to fabricate. David Bokovoy started doing the same thing about me shortly after I found out that Ritner claimed Gee and Peterson were lying about him. This is just how they respond to critics with valid cases. It is rather childish. And this is how the Church teaches its members to view all apostates. The assumption is always that the person sinned and didn't want to repent.

Lawsuit huh.... it looks like he has a good case. I'm just waiting to see how FAIR explains the removal of the article if they decide to maintain their innocence. What are they going to say? Probably the same thing Dan Peterson said. He wasn't going to defend his rumor mongering because he said he would trigger a lawsuit, and would then have to pay legal fees whether he was innocent or guilty. A legal dispute is rarely beneficial to the innocent, etc.

This just might be the big blow to put FAIR out of business.

I hope it doesn't happen.
“All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it...Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality." - Albert Einstein
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Post by _Mister Scratch »

beastie wrote:
Yeesh! Is anyone reading the thread over at MAD? Bob McCue must be a bad mother...

Edit: They just shut it down...before I got to respond :(




Up to the point where it was shut down, basically the believers seemed to be saying "ATTABOY" to greg smith for accusing mccue of adultery and abuse.

Is anyone surprised? The church teaches that people who leave the church and openly teach against it are "satan's minions", to use charity's phrase.


And, by the way, when the mod shut the thread down he/she insinuated chris may have also engaged in libel by starting the thread itself. :O


Very interesting. This would seem to lend further creedence to my theory that Greg Smith = "Opie Rockwell".
_charity
_Emeritus
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by _charity »

I hope McCue doesn't decide to sue, but not for the reasons you might think. For his own good. He can't win. He can't prove that he was damaged in any way. It seems maybe 3 people saw the article before it was taken down. The only play it got was among his friends. IF there was anything libelous or slanderous, I never can remember which is written and which is oral, there has to be damage. Just saying it hurt your feelings isn't enough. You have to lose a job or a client, etc.

And FAIR will have all kinds of really sharp pro bono support. He will end up looking as silly as the Tanners in their suit agaisnt FAIR.
Last edited by Guest on Tue Jan 29, 2008 4:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
_dartagnan
_Emeritus
Posts: 2750
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:27 pm

Post by _dartagnan »

I hope McCue doesn't decide to sue, but not for the reasons you might think. For his own good. He can't win.


This, coming from a woman who bases her legal knowledge on drama sitcoms.
“All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it...Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality." - Albert Einstein
Post Reply