rcrocket wrote:No, I see myself as one of the few outspoken voices willing to express my outrage in Argentina, or Brazil or Poland during World War II about outrages committed against the Jews. While "paint cans" were being handed out to thugs, some people spoke out. Very few real believers, real attenders of the Church are willing to venture into this forum to take the abuse that I take. I do it to speak out against those who seek to crucify the Lord anew.
Such grandiosity about something you claim is pure entertainment! There is something truly askew about the way you approach your involvement with this board. If fighting anti-Semitism would be your idea of entertainment, you need therapy. By the way, it is not WWII, and the LDS Church is not persecuted as the Jews were during that conflict. I know you don't know your Classics, but it looks like you could also use a refresher in 20th century European history, as well as a little perspective.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
KimberlyAnn wrote:You claim many of us are "thinly read", but it seems to me that your lawyerly skills may be a bit on the thin side. I'm certainly as qualified to judge your professional skills as you are to judge how well read the folks are on this board.
Thinly skilled lawyer, you're off my radar. Not that you were ever on it...
KA
Interesting. I started my internet career in debate in EV boards. It was a lot of fun. There were many knowledgeable people. I found it fun because it involved a lot of work with the scriptures which I love to use in analysis, but which few rely upon here.
But, when some of the EVs became disenchanted with me, and when I thought I was doing rather well in Scripture and ancient Church history, I started reading lots of comments like -- "you must be a lousy lawyer," "I'd hate to have you as a lawyer, based upon your logic here," and the like.
I get it here too, and from the likes of you. I don't think that me being a lawyer, or a doctor, or a school teacher, or a computer geek, should play any role in analyzing what I have to say.
Crockett, you like to sling undeserved insults. You call posters here "thinly read" when you've no qualifications to make such judgments. As I said in my earlier reply, I am as qualified to judge your lawyerly merits as you are to declare posters "thinly read"; which is, not at all.
I didn't check your bio. I don't care what kind of lawyer you are. You're not a poor lawyer, and many of the people you deem "thinly read" and "cowardly" aren't at all what you label them, either.
rcrocket wrote: If you must write anonymously, it means you have something to hide.
Bob,
In the earlier versions of the Doctrine and Covenants Joseph Smith is referred to by the name "Barak Ale". Supposedly code names were used by him and other early leaders to hide their identity as a form of protection. This is remarkably similar to what smart posters do today.
But according to you, he must of had something to hide.
KimberlyAnn wrote:You claim many of us are "thinly read", but it seems to me that your lawyerly skills may be a bit on the thin side. I'm certainly as qualified to judge your professional skills as you are to judge how well read the folks are on this board.
Thinly skilled lawyer, you're off my radar. Not that you were ever on it...
KA
Interesting. I started my internet career in debate in EV boards. It was a lot of fun. There were many knowledgeable people. I found it fun because it involved a lot of work with the scriptures which I love to use in analysis, but which few rely upon here.
But, when some of the EVs became disenchanted with me, and when I thought I was doing rather well in Scripture and ancient Church history, I started reading lots of comments like -- "you must be a lousy lawyer," "I'd hate to have you as a lawyer, based upon your logic here," and the like.
I get it here too, and from the likes of you. I don't think that me being a lawyer, or a doctor, or a school teacher, or a computer geek, should play any role in analyzing what I have to say.
Robert doesn't look anything like I expected. I was expecting someone along the lines of Al Pacino in Devil's Advocate but instead he's more like the dad in Leave it to Beaver. The very model of suburban domesticity.
Boy, what a let down.
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."
rcrocket wrote:No, I see myself as one of the few outspoken voices willing to express my outrage in Argentina, or Brazil or Poland during World War II about outrages committed against the Jews. While "paint cans" were being handed out to thugs, some people spoke out. Very few real believers, real attenders of the Church are willing to venture into this forum to take the abuse that I take. I do it to speak out against those who seek to crucify the Lord anew.
I doubt there are many "real believers, real attenders of the church" who actually even KNOW about boards like this and the issues that are discussed on them.