Brother Crockett vs...?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Post by _Droopy »

Chap wrote:
Droopy wrote:
Coggins7 has evidently been pupating; he now emerges as Droopy. The point of this tactic eludes me, though I suppose I should be grateful for the disappearance of the blankly staring avatar associated with his larval stage.

Goodness knows who this post is addressed to. It simply repeats points already made by rcrocket, which have already (in the opinion of all other posts apart from rcrocket, so far as I can see) been shown to be just a little silly.

I think this man is talking to himself.


What rc showed was that Beastie, with a slight change of punctuation, and the convenient editing of the statement in question, substantially altered the potential meaning of that statement. As rc pointed out, to an unbiased mind conversant with the LDS theology involved, the potential meaning of that statement would not be at all difficult to tease out. To biased demagogues seeking the conclusions at which they have already arrived, the situation is different.

Beastie engages in literary high jinks reminiscent of the worst of the populist EV polemical literature of the past several decades.


Nope. Beastie didn't edit anything.

She reproduced exactly what was in her source, and referenced the source she used.

Either you haven't read the thread, or ...



The ethical deterioration of the typical exmo is sometimes a frightening phenomena. Who hasn't been reading threads here? We have Beastie's version, and then rc posted the entire textual sample in question, with a the period Beastie had interpolated replaced with the original comma, and an entire sentence she had edited away restored.

We've all seen the result.

Is this a bald deception on your part Chap, or just an amusing head game?

Why was rc able to reproduce the correct text, while Beastie wasn't? Lack of homework? Intellectual sloppiness? Picking and choosing which source fit her template and which did not?
Last edited by Guest on Sun May 18, 2008 6:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
_the road to hana
_Emeritus
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:35 pm

Post by _the road to hana »

Droopy wrote:
We can only hope, but I'm not holding my breath. I've seen so little inspiration in our leaders in the last 37 years, it's pitiful.



Yes, and you're the expert on "inspiration" we should turn to for advice on how to discern when its present and when it isn't, is that right?



No, apparently you are. The prophet should be talking to you, since you've figured out that marriage is now supposed to be celibate. It should come as quite a splash to the mainstream media worldwide that the LDS Church is advocating marital celibacy. I dare you to make an appointment at 50 N. Temple to discuss your revelation on behalf of the worldwide church with the First Presidency. They'd set you straight in less than 15 minutes.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

Droopy wrote:
We can only hope, but I'm not holding my breath. I've seen so little inspiration in our leaders in the last 37 years, it's pitiful.



Yes, and you're the expert on "inspiration" we should turn to for advice on how to discern when its present and when it isn't, is that right?


I am an expert on my own personal inspiration, yes. You, of course, will have to look elsewhere.
_the road to hana
_Emeritus
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:35 pm

Post by _the road to hana »

Droopy wrote:The ethical deterioration of the typical exmo is sometimes a frightening phenomena.


You have firsthand experience with this, I take it? Is that something like a "typical white person?"
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Post by _Droopy »

No, apparently you are. The prophet should be talking to you, since you've figured out that marriage is now supposed to be celibate. It should come as quite a splash to the mainstream media worldwide that the LDS Church is advocating marital celibacy. I dare you to make an appointment at 50 N. Temple to discuss your revelation on behalf of the worldwide church with the First Presidency. They'd set you straight in less than 15 minutes.



Your arms are going to get very tired beating down these strawmen hana, so tired that, mercifully, you won't be able to tap the keys on your keyboard any longer.

If you could try actually engaging my points in a logical, philosophically substantive manner, as opposed to leaping into the dark flailing at the strawmen you believe to be there, just beyond the light, I'd be most impressed.
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Post by _Droopy »

harmony wrote:
Droopy wrote:
We can only hope, but I'm not holding my breath. I've seen so little inspiration in our leaders in the last 37 years, it's pitiful.



Yes, and you're the expert on "inspiration" we should turn to for advice on how to discern when its present and when it isn't, is that right?


I am an expert on my own personal inspiration, yes. You, of course, will have to look elsewhere.



As is always the case, the real golden calf is always in the mirror.
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Post by _Droopy »

You have firsthand experience with this, I take it?


Yes, some 30 years worth. I noticed it within the pages of the first anti-Mormon book I ever read.


Is that something like a "typical white person?"



No. Skin color is not within our control. The structure of our morality is.
_the road to hana
_Emeritus
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:35 pm

Post by _the road to hana »

Droopy wrote:
No, apparently you are. The prophet should be talking to you, since you've figured out that marriage is now supposed to be celibate. It should come as quite a splash to the mainstream media worldwide that the LDS Church is advocating marital celibacy. I dare you to make an appointment at 50 N. Temple to discuss your revelation on behalf of the worldwide church with the First Presidency. They'd set you straight in less than 15 minutes.



Your arms are going to get very tired beating down these strawmen hana, so tired that, mercifully, you won't be able to tap the keys on your keyboard any longer.

If you could try actually engaging my points in a logical, philosophically substantive manner, as opposed to leaping into the dark flailing at the strawmen you believe to be there, just beyond the light, I'd be most impressed.


While you're ducking and bobbing trying to make Joseph Smith into some sexless wunderkind?
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

Droopy wrote:
harmony wrote:
Droopy wrote:
We can only hope, but I'm not holding my breath. I've seen so little inspiration in our leaders in the last 37 years, it's pitiful.



Yes, and you're the expert on "inspiration" we should turn to for advice on how to discern when its present and when it isn't, is that right?


I am an expert on my own personal inspiration, yes. You, of course, will have to look elsewhere.



As is always the case, the real golden calf is always in the mirror.


Silver, Droop. Or chrome, depending on your point of view. I, unlike you, refuse to put my trust in anyone's arm of flesh besides my own. But you go ahead. Maintaining a relationship with men is always easier than maintaining a relationship with God. Just keep the mantra in your head "follow the prophet". No doubt that will suffice for you.
_the road to hana
_Emeritus
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:35 pm

Post by _the road to hana »

Droopy wrote:
You have firsthand experience with this, I take it?


Yes, some 30 years worth. I noticed it within the pages of the first anti-Mormon book I ever read.


I meant personal experience. Not observational.


Is that something like a "typical white person?"



No. Skin color is not within our control. The structure of our morality is.


Gosh, the church I was raised in taught that skin color absolutely was within our control, at least in the pre-existence. What decade were you born?
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
Post Reply