Every LDS MDB and MAD poster going against the prophets...

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_The Nehor
_Emeritus
Posts: 11832
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:05 am

Post by _The Nehor »

antishock8 wrote:Prove you're free. Walk away.


Are you illiterate? I told you I ALREADY DID THAT ONCE. I CAN. I DID.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics
"I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
_cksalmon
_Emeritus
Posts: 1267
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:20 pm

Post by _cksalmon »

Daniel Peterson wrote:
TAK wrote:Who am I ? Nobody dumb enough to believe in Joseph Smith..

This is the kind of welcoming, respectful discourse that is attracting believers here in droves. I predict a bright future for serious discussion here.


William Schryver wrote:We all know that you're really just a dorky-looking fat man who used to be a dorky-looking kid who wished he could hang with the cool people in high school, but was too freaking geeky to even get a date until he was eighteen-years-old. You aspire to cool, but you don't even know what it means. Cool is tossing fish food in a piranha tank and then smacking the little bastards with your fist when they rise to the bait.

And of course you'd regard my most recent work as "increasingly obnoxious." After all, you've never been averse to taking your place right in the middle of the circle, heartily pounding out an approving beat [this presumably referring to the act of stroking one's glans during a masturbatory act] for each and every orgiastic excess. You belong here.

This is the kind of tawdry, base ridiculousness that makes defenders of the purported "Restored Gospel" of Jesus Christ look utterly and profanely ridiculous, given that (per LDS Will), his LDS wife, his LDS stake president, and certain LDS associates of, yes, FARMS love this stuff.
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

cksalmon wrote:This is the kind of tawdry, base ridiculousness that makes defenders of the purported "Restored Gospel" of Jesus Christ look utterly and profanely ridiculous, given that (per LDS Will), his LDS wife, his LDS stake president, and certain LDS associates of, yes, FARMS love this stuff.


Aw, you're just an embittered anti, Chris.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

cksalmon wrote:This is the kind of tawdry, base ridiculousness that makes defenders of the purported "Restored Gospel" of Jesus Christ look utterly and profanely ridiculous, given that (per LDS Will), his LDS wife, his LDS stake president, and certain LDS associates of, yes, FARMS love this stuff.

If, having surveyed the writings and speeches of a representative sample of defenders of the faith (e.g., Louis Midgley, Brant Gardner, yours truly, William Hamblin, David Paulsen, Davis Bitton, Matthew Roper, John Welch, Blake Ostler, etc.), you find that tawdry, base ridiculousness and crude sexual metaphors are typical of them, or even publicly approved by them -- if, say, FARMS and FAIR provide a receptive venue for such discourse in the manner in which this board is receptive to the discourse of boaz & lidia, infymus, TAK, Mercury, Chap, poor antishock8, Some Schmo, Polygamy Porter, and the like -- you'll have a secure basis for your generalization.
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

Daniel Peterson wrote:If, having surveyed the writings and speeches of a representative sample of defenders of the faith (e.g., Louis Midgley, Brant Gardner, yours truly, William Hamblin, David Paulsen, Davis Bitton, Matthew Roper, John Welch, Blake Ostler, etc.), you find that tawdry, base ridiculousness and crude sexual metaphors are typical of them, or even publicly approved by them -- if, say, FARMS and FAIR provide a receptive venue for such discourse in the manner in which this board is receptive to the discourse of boaz & lidia, infymus, TAK, Mercury, Chap, poor antishock8, Some Schmo, Polygamy Porter, and the like -- you'll have a secure basis for your generalization.


Dan, Will is the one suggesting that you guys privately enjoy this kind of crudeness, so appealing to the idea that Mercury et al. are worse in public doesn't help.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_William Schryver
_Emeritus
Posts: 1671
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:58 pm

Post by _William Schryver »

cksalmon wrote:
Daniel Peterson wrote:
TAK wrote:Who am I ? Nobody dumb enough to believe in Joseph Smith..

This is the kind of welcoming, respectful discourse that is attracting believers here in droves. I predict a bright future for serious discussion here.


William Schryver wrote:We all know that you're really just a dorky-looking fat man who used to be a dorky-looking kid who wished he could hang with the cool people in high school, but was too freaking geeky to even get a date until he was eighteen-years-old. You aspire to cool, but you don't even know what it means. Cool is tossing fish food in a piranha tank and then smacking the little bastards with your fist when they rise to the bait.

And of course you'd regard my most recent work as "increasingly obnoxious." After all, you've never been averse to taking your place right in the middle of the circle, heartily pounding out an approving beat [this presumably referring to the act of stroking one's glans during a masturbatory act] for each and every orgiastic excess. You belong here.

This is the kind of tawdry, base ridiculousness that makes defenders of the purported "Restored Gospel" of Jesus Christ look utterly and profanely ridiculous, given that (per LDS Will), his LDS wife, his LDS stake president, and certain LDS associates of, yes, FARMS love this stuff.

Don't add your commentary within the quotes you attribute to me. Let my quotes stand on their own. We've all seen you tell people what I've said. In future, please quote me directly; add your commentary and interpretations afterwards, if you'd like. But quote me directly. That way objective observers will be able to more quickly see the pronounced differences between your brazen propagandizing and the things I have actually said.

And, lest there be any doubts, I am neither ashamed of nor do I regret anything I have written on this message board. I stand by it all, and would say it the same way again tomorrow.

Furthermore, you are a cowardly and shameless liar, sir. You are a whorish panderer to the sordid desires of your clientele here in the GSTP™. You and Scratchy are a matched pair of filthy harlots whose stench must even wrinkle the noses of long-time residents.

Yeccchhh!
... every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol ...
_cksalmon
_Emeritus
Posts: 1267
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:20 pm

Post by _cksalmon »

Daniel Peterson wrote:
cksalmon wrote:This is the kind of tawdry, base ridiculousness that makes defenders of the purported "Restored Gospel" of Jesus Christ look utterly and profanely ridiculous, given that (per LDS Will), his LDS wife, his LDS stake president, and certain LDS associates of, yes, FARMS love this stuff.

If, having surveyed the writings and speeches of a representative sample of defenders of the faith (e.g., Louis Midgley, Brant Gardner, yours truly, William Hamblin, David Paulsen, Davis Bitton, Matthew Roper, John Welch, Blake Ostler, etc.), you find that tawdry, base ridiculousness and crude sexual metaphors are typical of them, or even publicly approved by them -- if, say, FARMS and FAIR provide a receptive venue for such discourse in the manner in which this board is receptive to the discourse of boaz & lidia, infymus, TAK, Mercury, Chap, poor antishock8, Some Schmo, Polygamy Porter, and the like -- you'll have a secure basis for your generalization.

You're downwind of his stink.

or even publicly approved by them

Oh, not publicly, of course. But, according to Will, some FARMS associates are following this running exchange and are privately delighting in his "tawdry, base ridiculousness and crude sexual metaphors."
Last edited by Guest on Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_William Schryver
_Emeritus
Posts: 1671
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:58 pm

Post by _William Schryver »

Runtu wrote:
Daniel Peterson wrote:If, having surveyed the writings and speeches of a representative sample of defenders of the faith (e.g., Louis Midgley, Brant Gardner, yours truly, William Hamblin, David Paulsen, Davis Bitton, Matthew Roper, John Welch, Blake Ostler, etc.), you find that tawdry, base ridiculousness and crude sexual metaphors are typical of them, or even publicly approved by them -- if, say, FARMS and FAIR provide a receptive venue for such discourse in the manner in which this board is receptive to the discourse of boaz & lidia, infymus, TAK, Mercury, Chap, poor antishock8, Some Schmo, Polygamy Porter, and the like -- you'll have a secure basis for your generalization.


Dan, Will is the one suggesting that you guys privately enjoy this kind of crudeness, so appealing to the idea that Mercury et al. are worse in public doesn't help.

You, too, are a shameless and cowardly liar.

Par for the course here in the GSTP™.

Don't tell what I've said. Quote me.

cksalmon:

But, according to Will, some FARMS associates are following this running exchange and are privately delighting in his "tawdry, base ridiculousness and crude sexual metaphors."

Again, you are a shameless and cowardly liar.

Don't tell what I've said. Quote me.
Last edited by The Stig on Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
... every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol ...
_Yoda

Post by _Yoda »

*shakes head*

I was going to respond, but don't have the energy.

I have to teach a voice lesson....will check on these threads later.

Will....*sigh*


I was going to say stay out of trouble until I get back, but that's a rather futile request. LOL

by the way....thanks for the comment about the tank top. I think I'll forgo the tattoo, though, if that's all right with you. ;)
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

Runtu wrote:Dan, Will is the one suggesting that you guys privately enjoy this kind of crudeness, so appealing to the idea that Mercury et al. are worse in public doesn't help.

I've said (and I think it should be obvious) that it's not even remotely my style, and that I know of nobody at FARMS who follows this board. In fact, I'm not absolutely sure that anybody at FARMS even knows that it exists -- though I'm aware of at least one person who has written for FARMS in the past who has heard of it (and, I'm confident, doesn't follow it at all).

What else do you want me to say? I assume that you're not among the apparent majority here who seem to imagine that lying comes as naturally to me as breathing does.
Post Reply