TAL BACHMAN RESPONDS TO PRESIDENT KEYES

[_moksha]

This place is far from level.

I disagree. Where this place is not level simply seems to be in the fact that a larger number of anti/counter/exmo's post here than TBMs.

Excellent point BC. Bring on the Pro Mos!

[_harmony]

I think my point has been made Shades and you've not countered it. Just as you didn't counter my post on page 6 from that thread you linked to for Chap. My post on page 6 addressed your linked post from page 3.

You have no policy in the Celestial to protect any individual from persistent harassment. Your mod board policy seems to be to limit a few choice words out of Celestial, and you've stopped your absurd policy of moving threads based on one trouble maker which never did anything to curtail ad homs in the first place. Their ad homs are still not being curtailed by your policy, and if more people jump in to attack I believe the policy you have in place is to move the thread to a lower level where attacks are legitimately sanctioned the same policy you had previously in place.

So no individual can expect to come to this board and be protected from harrassment via moderation as per your current polices applicable to all, if that were to evolve in the Celestial.

This place is not about protection, from ideas or other posters. This place is about the freedom to express oneself, even if one's position does not agree with the board owner's. This is the Wild Wild West. Wide open. And if you can't stand the heat, then stay out of the dang kitchen.

And yes, marg, I've been harassed. I've probably been harassed more than anyone else on this board by several posters on several different boards including this one, so don't think JAK is unique.

If Midgley were to come here and post (something that will happen immediately after hell freezes over), he would no doubt be given approximately the same treatment as Daniel gets. He'd be respected as long as he was respectful. Daniel and I had a fairly respectful conversation not long ago. He was actually quite mellow. However, no insult, real or implied, gets by the people here. At the first Midgley missle, the dogs of hell would descend. And then the fight would be on. No one protects Daniel just because he's Daniel here; no one would protect Midgley either.

Ya gotta have balls to stick around and post here consistently. Obviously Gaz, BC, LOAP, Coach T are at least above average in that department.

[_antishock8]

God. A bunch of Mormons complaining about "respect" or "protection" when they themselves dish it out either overtly or passive-aggressively. MAD is a perfect example of the kind of sandbox they have created for themselves... And yet... Here they are. Here. They. Are. Ramping up their victim status on a board that allows a free exchange of ideas.

Marg, et al.. Y'all need to grow a thich skin. Life is tough. Deal with it. No one respects you unless you merit it, and even then it's a crapshoot. Quit yer damn whining and either post or don't. But for Christ's sake you're a damn adult. Either accept the parameters offered here or go back to the MAD echo chamber. You're more than welcome to offer your opinion, but if someone thinks your opinion is stupid, a lie, a spin, or deceitful and calls it as such then deal with it. That's how things are done in the real world. This ain't Sunday School. We're not your friends. We're not family. We're not here to make you feel "awesome". We're here to read what you have to say, and then offer up a different point of view. Sometimes it's harsh, juvenile, short, asinine, intelligent, cogent, irrational, or otherwise... And I have to tell you that's a 100x better than what you get at MAD. If you prefer MAD and its censors and backpatters then have at it. More power to you. But don't expect it here, and whining about it doesn't change anything except to make you look like a biatch.

[_harmony]

God. A bunch of Mormons complaining about "respect" or "protection" when they themselves dish it out either overtly or passive-aggressively. MAD is a perfect example of the kind of sandbox they have created for themselves... And yet... Here they are. Here. They. Are. Ramping up their victim status on a board that allows a free exchange of ideas.

Marg, et al.. Y'all need to grow a thich skin. Life is tough. Deal with it. No one respects you unless you merit it, and even then it's a crapshoot. Quit yer damn whining and either post or don't. But for Christ's sake you're a damn adult. Either accept the parameters offered here or go back to the MAD echo chamber. You're more than welcome to offer your opinion, but if someone thinks your opinion is stupid, a lie, a spin, or deceitful and calls it as such then deal with it. That's how things are done in the real world. This ain't Sunday School. We're not your friends. We're not family. We're not here to make you feel "awesome". We're here to read what you have to say, and then offer up a different point of view. Sometimes it's harsh, juvenile, short, asinine, intelligent, cogent, irrational, or otherwise... And I have to tell you that's a 100x better than what you get at MAD. If you prefer MAD and its censors and backpatters then have at it. More power to you. But don't expect it here, and whining about it doesn't change anything except to make you look like a biatch.

Marg isn't from MAD. Marg is an atheist with a persecution complex.

[_Gadianton]

Over on FAIR/MAD, the board which has recently sustained the logic that it's not only ok to kill in the name of God, but ok to keep on killing in an out-of-control spree of personal blood revenge contrary to God's orders, Bsix raises an awfully absurd point:

Has there every been a single instance where it has been claimed that Keyes made statements in private of doubt/disbelief similar to what the Bachman's are claiming? Are there any instances where Keyes has voiced doubts/disbelief in a church setting -- sacrament talks, Sunday School, Priesthood, etc.? Is there a single published instance where Keyes has expressed doubt in an article, interview, blog, website, etc.?

After Romeny threw Craig under the bus for being 1/59th the pervert that his founding prophet was, what did Craig do? "Hey, ask anyone who knows me, I'd never say anything like that!" Is there a single instance where it has been claimed that Craig made similar statements in sacrament meeting or Sunday school? Has he ever made racey statements on a blog or a website? If not, then the episode in question obviously didn't happen!

Code: Select all

Why would Keyes risk everything by making statements akin to apostacy to a congregant whom he seems to know very little about and does not seemt to have a long term relationship with?

Why would anyone think Keyes risked anything at all? Has a single Mormon since the incident believed Tal's story? Is there any indication Keyes' wife would have doubted her husband? Have church authorities questioned Keyes even in the slightest?

[_harmony]

Why would anyone think Keyes risked anything at all? Has a single Mormon since the incident believed Tal's story? Is there any indication Keyes' wife would have doubted her husband? Have church authorities questioned Keyes even in the slightest?

Just because an incident is not generally believed does not mean it did not happen.

[_Coggins7]

Evolution is true

It would more scientifically and philosophically precise to say that substantial parts of evolution are true, while future discoveries will most certainly modify and reorganize our understandings of it. Evolution is a theory the phenomena it was created to explain, at least the macroevolutionary phenomena, are lost for all time to empirical verification. Evolution is a theoretical reconstruction of singular, random, highly improbably past events that can never be verified or falsified in a direct empirical way. It is therefore always, all theroies being tentative forever, as Popper said, open to revision and modification.

Further, while evolution may be considered to be true, the quasi-religious belief system of Darwinism that Tarski and others hold to is another matter entirely. The first is a manifestation of science, the second, of scientism, which is not a manifestation of science but of world views and psychological attitudes attached to it.

[_Coggins7]

Would it be possible to get rid of that long web address above so that the thread could be readable?


Thanks.

[_Jersey Girl]

Loran,

If I knew how to shorten it from within, I would. I just don't know how to do it.

Edit: I did it!

[_Coggins7]

Thanks, much better.