Why I am not a Mormon

[_beastie]

An interesting question. The fact that my religious solidarity with GoodK's father might make it more likely for me to alert him to GoodK's mockery than I would be to do something similar in a parallel case involving an atheist -- and this is most likely true, but largely only because our common Mormonism facilitates our friendship, while a Mormon/atheist divide would interfere with a friendship to some degree or another -- has absolutely no bearing on the question of whether my action was ethical or not.

I would regard a note to an atheist father as entirely, unproblematically ethical, just as I regard my note to GoodK's theist father as entirely, unproblematically ethical.

Mormons can't be friends with atheists? Ok.

Here's why I think you would not have alerted the atheist father, even if you were friends with him (yes, I know, highly unlikely). The fact that you and the investigator were on the same side would predispose you to be able to empathize with his/her situation, and would enable you to put his/her comments into perspective.

[_EAllusion]

Heh. This is the type of conversation DCP has ample time and energy to participate in on end. It's his forté' on the interwebs. Threads like this? http://mormondiscussions.com/discuss/vi ... g&start=63

Not so much. He's got an important academic work to do.

[_Daniel Peterson]

It was based on DCP's admitting to mixing up GoodK and Chap, which is the only time I can remember his admitting a mistake among the thousands of posts of his that I have read over the years.

Tsk tsk. You risk losing your status as Principal Miniscratch if you don't keep better files.

There was a nice case just a few days ago on this very board where I mistakenly attributed some quotations to CKSalmon that actually belonged to somebody else. I granted my error, and apologized. You can find it, if you care to do so.

I think you just regret the fact that I haven't acknowledged my Scratch-imputed guilt for leading a smear campaign against Mike Quinn, serving as a minion of the Strengthening Church Members Committee, lying about Church funding of "Mopologetics," and various other important elements of Scratchite demonology. Which, if I were to admit my alleged culpability, would instantly damn me as a liar.

You and your Master are completely wrong on those and many other points, but you never admit it or apologize. Instead, you fault me for failing to toe your line.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Mormons can't be friends with atheists? Ok.

Not okay, and I didn't say it.

Don't twist my words.

Here's why I think you would not have alerted the atheist father, even if you were friends with him (yes, I know, highly unlikely). The fact that you and the investigator were on the same side would predispose you to be able to empathize with his/her situation, and would enable you to put his/her comments into perspective.

That may well be true. Just as I said. (And, as I also said, it's an interesting question.)

But, as I said, that has no bearing on the ethical question.

As I said.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

There was a nice case just a few days ago on this very board where I mistakenly attributed some quotations to CKSalmon that actually belonged to somebody else. I granted my error, and apologized.

I stand corrected.

I think you just regret the fact that I haven't acknowledged my Scratch-imputed guilt for leading a smear campaign against Mike Quinn, serving as a minion of the Strengthening Church Members Committee, lying about Church funding of "Mopologetics," and various other important elements of Scratchite demonology.

Not at all -- your constant denials in light of overwhelming evidence simply made you out the fool.

You and your Master are completely wrong on those and many other points, but you never admit it or apologize.

I may be wrong, but Jesus never is.

Instead, you fault me for failing to toe your line.

It's not my "line" -- it's the "line" of good judgment, common sense, and butting out of another's family affairs, that you crossed when you sent those messages to GoodK's dad.

[_beastie]

You said that an "atheist/Mormon divide" would "interfere with a friendship to some degree or the other." You made this statement to explain why the scenario would be so unlikely. Now, I understand you're uncomfortable with my stark summary, but your statement is pretty clear.

So, out of curiosity, if you had just overheard GoodK call his father a blowhard, would you still have felt morally obligated to inform his father?

[Guest]

Heh. This is the type of conversation DCP has ample time and energy to participate in on end. It's his forté' on the interwebs. Threads like this? http://mormondiscussions.com/discuss/vi ... g&start=63

I easily found a reference from me to what I called "the Spencer Lake Fraud" on the board formerly known as FAIR, dated "Apr 10 2008, 10:24 PM." When and if I publish something on the topic, which may not happen for a while since New World horses aren't an issue I concentrate on, you can count on my acknowledging the now generally recognized fraudulence of the Spencer Lake skull.

Not so much. He's got an important academic work to do.

Alas, I do.

I think you just regret the fact that I haven't acknowledged my Scratch-imputed guilt for leading a smear campaign against Mike Quinn, serving as a minion of the Strengthening Church Members Committee, lying about Church funding of "Mopologetics," and various other important elements of Scratchite demonology.

Not at all -- your constant denials in light of overwhelming evidence [sic!] simply made you out the fool.

Must . . . resist . . . temptation . . . to . . . make . . . obvious . . . retort.

It's not my "line" -- it's the "line" of good judgment, common sense, and butting out of other's family affairs, that you crossed when you sent those messages to GoodK's dad.

I've said sufficiently often that I don't think that there's anything even remotely ethically problematic in sending a friend a link to a post on a public message board. You disagree.

You can repeat your claim as often as you care to do so. It won't change my fundamental response, which is that there's nothing even remotely ethically problematic in sending a friend a link to a post on a public message board.

If you and your supporters will simply mentally supply my response every time, over the next several pages, whenever you repeat your claim, that will minimize the waste of valuable electrons.

[_Daniel Peterson]

So, out of curiosity, if you had just overheard GoodK call his father a blowhard, would you still have felt morally obligated to inform his father?

I would have found that somewhat less problematic. Message boards are ephemeral, but not as ephemeral as spoken conversations. And, even here, the audience is somewhat larger than is included in the typical conversation.

Incidentally, did I mention that I have atheist friends and relatives? If not, I do.

[_beastie]

I easily found a reference from me to what I called "the Spencer Lake Fraud" on the board formerly known as FAIR, dated "Apr 10 2008, 10:24 PM." When and if I publish something on the topic, which may not happen for a while since New World horse aren't an issue I concentrate on, you can count on my acknowledging the now generally recognized fraudulence of the Spencer Lake skull.

In the meantime, it's every buyer for him or herself. In other words - beware.

[_Daniel Peterson]

In the meantime, it's every buyer for him or herself. In other words - beware.

It always is -- in every field.