Charitys offensive comments from the anonymity thread

[_beastie]

Charity,

If you really do not intend to offend when you refer to people as "satan's minions", for example, then you are completely and utterly clueless.

[_Coggins7]

"The unbelievers are like beasts which, call out to them as one may, can hear nothing but a shout and a cry. Deaf, dumb, and blind, they understand nothing" (2:172).

"The devils will teach their votaries to argue with you. If you obey them you shall yourselves become idolaters. . . . God will humiliate the transgressors and mete out to them a grievous punishment for their scheming" (6:121–25).

"[T]heir hearts were hardened, and Satan made their deeds seem fair to them. And when they had clean forgotten Our admonition We granted them all that they desired; but just as they were rejoicing in what they were given, We suddenly smote them and they were plunged into utter despair. Thus were the evil-doers annihilated. Praise be to God, Lord of the Universe!" (6:43–45).

"We had made them more powerful in the land than yourselves [the Meccans], sent down for them abundant water from the sky and gave them rivers that rolled at their feet. Yet because they sinned We destroyed them all and raised up other generations after them. If We sent down to you a Book inscribed on real parchment and they touched it with their own hands, the unbelievers would still assert: ‘This is but plain sorcery.' They ask: ‘Why has no angel been sent down to him [Muhammad]?' If We had sent down an angel, their fate would have been sealed and they would have never been reprieved" (6:5–8).

"Those that deny Our revelation We will burn in fire. No sooner will their skins be consumed than We shall give them other skins, so that they may truly taste the scourge. God is mighty and wise" (4:55–56).

"Believers, if you yield to the infidels they will drag you back to unbelief and you will return headlong to perdition. . . .We will put terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. . . . The Fire shall be their home" (3:149-51).

There are two reasons why people are offended by these verses. One, if someone is really offensive, rude, disgusting, blasphemous, profane, etc.

The second is for the reason quoted in the passage of scripture. They are guilty, and the truth is not comfortable to hear. But instead of taking the truth and learning and repenting, they get angry so they don't have to hear the truth.

Muslims don't apologize for the truth, either.

You're going to need a great deal of water to put out the strawmen you've set on fire in your field Beastie.

Not even a nice try this time. You disappoint me.

[_Coggins7]

A very wise person said to me that we are not required to give Satan equal time, in the interest of being "fair."

Uh, this comment was "offensive? To whom, precisely?

[_Coggins7]

There are two reasons why people are offended. One, if someone is really offensive, rude, disgusting, blasphemous, profane, etc.

That's right. The fact is you only see yourself in the second category, and not in the first, which shows complete lack of introspection.

It also may only show that individuals such as yourself choose to feel "offended" when another critiques your lifestyle, attitudes, or behavior from a Gospel perspective.

[_beastie]

by the way, there is a difference between taking offense and giving offense. I haven't taken offense to anything charity has said, including when she said I was dumb. But that doesn't mean charity didn't give offense.

[_Coggins7]

We are living in a society in which anytime anyone takes a determined, settled, passionate stand on an issue, showing conviction and any sense of certitude, they are condemned and cast out as bigots, as offensive, and as "divisive".

Anyone who does not spout the standardized, formatted, received Oprahfied drivel on each and every issue of the day stands as a pariah. Only those who, in true Nietzschean fashion, strike a pose of enlightened, sophisticated relativism and uncertainty can be part of the politically correct culture club.

There is, however, one exception to this general rule. There is one stand one may take with passion and certitude that will not be subject to ridicule, and that is the the view that one is certain their can be no certainty; the absolute truth that there are no absolute truths, and the passionate defense of nihilism.

We are in the postmodern moment, and this board stands as another witness of the further division and spread of its cancerous cells.

[_the road to hana]

There are two reasons why people are offended. One, if someone is really offensive, rude, disgusting, blasphemous, profane, etc.

That's right. The fact is you only see yourself in the second category, and not in the first, which shows complete lack of introspection.

It also may only show that individuals such as yourself choose to feel "offended" when another critiques your lifestyle, attitudes, or behavior from a Gospel perspective.

The things Charity generally directs my way in posts don't have to do with anything from a "Gospel perspective." They're usually personal and not Gospel related.

[_charity]

The things Charity generally directs my way in posts don't have to do with anything from a "Gospel perspective." They're usually personal and not Gospel related.

I absolutely call for references here. I want to see actual quotes from my posts that show any personal attacks on you.

[_skippy the dead]

While I admire Charity's "gumption" in responding to the various attacks leveled at her in this thread (among others), it's a shame that she needs to. I don't find the statement in question to be offensive - it is a part of her religious beliefs, not a personal commentary. While many of us either don't believe that there is a Satan to influence us or that our actions are reflective of Satan's influence, Charity's comments are reflective of LDS teachings. Since I'd like to see more LDS posters engaging in substantive discussions (and Charity has shown herself willing to do so), it seems like a damn shame to run off each one for expressing their beliefs.

Or maybe I'm just wearing my cranky pants.

[_Coggins7]

While I admire Charity's "gumption" in responding to the various attacks leveled at her in this thread (among others), it's a shame that she needs to. I don't find the statement in question to be offensive - it is a part of her religious beliefs, not a personal commentary. While many of us either don't believe that there is a Satan to influence us or that our actions are reflective of Satan's influence, Charity's comments are reflective of LDS teachings. Since I'd like to see more LDS posters engaging in substantive discussions (and Charity has shown herself willing to do so), it seems like a damn shame to run off each one for expressing their beliefs.

Or maybe I'm just wearing my cranky pants.

Well, and this is the problem. Too many here look at the doctrine and philosophy of the Church, see that much of it is directed at personal behavior (even to apparently small things like earrings), and feel threatened. That perception of threat is then transmuted to a sense of having been personally attacked.

There are many who, for whatever reason, cannot deal with the Church's standards regarding behavior without invoking a fight or flight response from beliefs or ideas counter to what they have been comfortable with. Disagreement with the Church over these issues is different from claiming that someone who espouses them is attacking you personally if you are engaging in behavior inconsistent with Church teachings. I've had many friends who's behavior was so inconsistent, and I never felt the need to attack them personally, and, to the best of my knowledge, they never felt that way, even thought they knew I disagreed with some aspects of their lifestyle and behavior.

Frankly, with the hardcore antis, I don't think such criticisms are really ingenuous in any case.