Why I am not a Mormon

[_Daniel Peterson]

My criteria when I do something that could potentially cause harm (such as this situation) is to ask myself what I hope to accomplish by my action. In other words, what outcome do I hope will result from my actions. Then I ask myself if my action is likely to result in that good outcome.

If I can't think right off what outcome I want, I don't do it.

If I determine that the "right" outcome is unlikely, I don't do it.

A reasonably sound approach.

I keep wondering what outcome Dr. Peterson was hoping for.

I was hoping to inform a friend of something I thought he would want to know, because it was something I would have wanted to know.

I've said this many, many times.

Not knowing that, I could certainly predict what was going to happen: a father and a son with a strained relationship would be further embittered toward each other. I think the father's email to you and GoodK's response show that my prediction is the right one.

Historically, whatever may now be happening because of this thread (on which GoodK was the one, somewhat out of the blue, to raise the issue of Unspeakably Horrible GoodK Epistle 1), that does not appear to have occurred in the wake of Unspeakably Horrible GoodK Epistle 1.

Indeed, GoodK and GoodK's father and I actually engaged in a quite civil e-mail conversation for a while after I had sent, and GoodK had been made aware of, Unspeakably Horrible GoodK Epistle 1. (As a matter of fact, Unspeakably Horrible GoodK Epistle 2 came about as part of that quite civil e-mail conversation.) Although he's increasingly angry with me and his father, he didn't seem upset at that time back in March.

(I can supply the e-mails -- which, of course, I'm probably forging at this very moment -- if anybody doubts me on this.)

GoodK's father, with whom I had a pleasant telephone conversation today after he sent me the e-mail quoted a few pages ago -- incidentally, it was amusing to see Miniscratch accusing me of having "ghostwritten" it; I jokingly predicted when I posted it that, in line with Scratchite demonology, he might claim that I had "forged" it, and it turns out that my spoof prediction wasn't far wrong -- doesn't seem even slightly "bitter," and it seems that GoodK and GoodK's father were together at "the pool" last night.

I see GoodK as becoming increasingly angry now, though -- and not only toward me but toward his father -- and that concerns me. I'm afraid that he now feels that he has to dig in his heels and harden his stance, and I regret that.

I haven't escalated my claim here. I came under attack as unethical. I've defended myself.

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.

Since, for obscure reasons, this is now suddenly elevating itself into something far beyond what Unspeakably Horrible GoodK Epistles 1 and 2 ever caused, I think it really needs to end. Denouncing me on a message board, and even posting obscene messages about my wife, is one thing. What this is now threatening to become is something else again.

[_Runtu]

[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.

Dan, the only claim I made was that the outcome was fairly predictable. I stand by that. If you consider that an attack, I don't know what to say to you. I asked you what outcome you were hoping for, and as far as I can tell, there really wasn't a hoped-for outcome. You just thought it was something the father would want to know. Fair enough.

Since, for obscure reasons, this is now suddenly elevating itself into something far beyond what Unspeakably Horrible GoodK Epistles 1 and 2 ever caused, I think it really needs to end. Denouncing me on a message board, and even posting obscene messages about my wife, is one thing. What this is now threatening to become is something else again.

I have no idea what you're talking about, as I am not denouncing you, nor have I seen or posted any obscene messages about your wife.

I shared with you my decision-making process and asked you how your decision fit into that. That's all.

[_beastie]

I see GoodK as becoming increasingly angry now, though -- and not only toward me but toward his father -- and that concerns me. I'm afraid that he now feels that he has to dig in his heels and harden his stance, and I regret that.

Do you live under a rock? Never associate with human beings?

For heaven's sake - what did you or GoodK's father expect???

GoodK's father's letter basically said that GoodK left the church because he's young (implied lacking experience and judgment) and a sinner who loves the world more than The Lord.

Again, what the heck did you expect??????

On this very thread, you stated that a friendship would be changed and challenged if a friend left the church. In other words - this type of thing makes relationships more fragile.

Again, what the heck did you expect?????

This is exactly why so many of us have stated that your choice to tattle to GoodK's father, from the beginning, was a very poor and risky choice.

Here's the problem - Mormons tend to be so self-absorbed, so egocentric, so imbued with a sense of entitlement, that neither you nor GoodK's father apparently had the slightest clue how is letter would sound, and what effect it would have.

You have THE TRUTH. Not only do you KNOW - with a sure knowledge - that GOD exists, and Joseph Smith was his prophet, and God will not be mocked! that you can't see beyond the tips of your own noses.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

GoodK's father, with whom I had a pleasant telephone conversation today after he sent me the e-mail quoted a few pages ago -- incidentally, it was amusing to see Rollo accusing me of having "ghostwritten" it; I jokingly predicted when I posted it that, in line with Scratchite demonology, he might claim that I had "forged" it, and it turns out that my spoof prediction wasn't far wrong

I never said "forged," as you predicted. But the letter did seem to go out its way to repeat some of the more audacious things you've been writing here (and to praise you). Hence, my "ghostwritten" comment.

I see GoodK as becoming increasingly angry now, though -- and not only toward me but toward his father -- and that concerns me.

Perhaps you should have thought of that before you ratted him out.

I'm afraid that he now feels that he has to dig in his heels and harden his stance, and I regret that.

That's precisely what you have done in 13 or so pages of this thread.

I haven't escalated my claim here.

You certainly have, by pulling in GoodK's father.

I came under attack as unethical.

You came under attack for being a boob.

I've defended myself.

Poorly.

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.

There's that "ethically" qualifier again. Just keep digging the hole deeper.

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.

There's that "ethically" qualifier again. Your hole is getting so deep I can barely see you, Dan.

Since, for obscure reasons, this is now suddenly elevating itself into something far beyond what Unspeakably Horrible GoodK Epistles 1 and 2 ever caused, I think it really needs to end.

Thanks to your soliciting a response from GoodK's dad, for the sole purpose of your saving face, even if it meant the dad's throwing GoodK under the bus. Well done, bishop.

What this is now threatening to become is something else again.

The "threat" began when you decided to butt into another family's affairs. And your behavior on this thread has only made it worse. Again, well done, bishop.

[_Daniel Peterson]

This needs to end.

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.

Dan, the only claim I made was that the outcome was fairly predictable. I stand by that. If you consider that an attack, I don't know what to say to you.

The "you" was plural.

I asked you what outcome you were hoping for, and as far as I can tell, there really wasn't a hoped-for outcome. You just thought it was something the father would want to know. Fair enough.

And, moreover, the father has confirmed that he was grateful for my note, and that he would have done the same thing had our roles been reversed.

Since, for obscure reasons, this is now suddenly elevating itself into something far beyond what Unspeakably Horrible GoodK Epistles 1 and 2 ever caused, I think it really needs to end. Denouncing me on a message board, and even posting obscene messages about my wife, is one thing. What this is now threatening to become is something else again.

I have no idea what you're talking about, as I am not denouncing you, nor have I seen or posted any obscene messages about your wife.

The obscene message about my wife, since deleted, was one of poor antishock8's important contributions to the discussion.

What I have in mind, and what worries me, is that GoodK, who seemed not at all upset back in March when he learned of Unspeakably Horrible GoodK Epistle 1, has been growing increasingly shrill today, in July, roughly three months later. I don't know why, but certainly this thread isn't helping him.

I shared with you my decision-making process and asked you how your decision fit into that. That's all.

And I appreciate that. Sorry about the ambiguity of my response; only part of that post was actually directed at you. I've typically thought of you as a mostly fair-minded and charitable participant here. There don't seem to be many such, and they surely haven't been much in evidence on this thread.

[_GoodK]

[
Indeed, GoodK and GoodK's father and I actually engaged in a quite civil e-mail conversation for a while after I had sent, and GoodK had been made aware of, Unspeakably Horrible GoodK Epistle 1. (As a matter of fact, Unspeakably Horrible GoodK Epistle 2 came about as part of that quite civil e-mail conversation.) Although he's increasingly angry with me and his father, he didn't seem upset at that time back in March.

I know you are not really here right now, but just for pretend, here is a post you may have missed (as indicated by your phony curiousity as to why I am so "angry" about what you did in July, not March)

I had forgiven him, at least personally, until he came to this thread to point the finger at me and accuse me of being insensitive to my little sister (whom he has never met, as far as I know) and her illness.

I never mentioned what you call the GoodK epistle in my original post, nor did I intend for this thread to be about that. My original post was about the very specific reasons as to why I am not a Mormon. Remember, 13 pages or so back a comment I made to Marg which apparently roped you in:

Breaking away from Mormonism is harder than it should be. Look at me. I can't post annonymously here without having a Professor at BYU tattling on me, and then trying to justify it as if he had some moral obligation to do so



I considered posting under another identity because the professor of Islamic Studies and Arabic in the Department of Asian and Near Eastern Languages at a prestigious University figured out my personal identity. Need I say more?

I see GoodK as becoming increasingly angry now, though -- and not only toward me but toward his father -- and that concerns me. I'm afraid that he now feels that he has to dig in his heels and harden his stance, and I regret that.

Don't you mean, exceedingly angry? LOL.

I haven't escalated my claim here. I came under attack as unethical. I've defended myself.

By shifting all guilt to me. The once anonymous poster, <snip real name, that was dumb>.

[_truth dancer]

I just briefly skimmed this thread so may have missed something, but here are my observations:

First, I think it was unfortunate GoodK shared the original letter online. However it was clear he did not intent to harm his family; he wrote anonymously, and didn't mention any names.

I think it is completely unethical/Christlike/decent (I don't care what a text book says), for others to get involved in a family dispute, and knowingly harm a father/son relationship. I don't understand how anyone can think this is anything but wrong and destructive.

But more than anything, what sort of father writes that kind of letter about his son with the knowledge it will most likely be posted on a message board for the son and others to read.

Seriously... I can't image a father doing such a thing. :-( Most fathers I know do whatever they can to show and express love, care, and concern to their children, especially when they feel their children are in need of help. (I'm not saying GoodK is in need of help only that the father seems to think he is a sinning, immature, *&%$). I just do not understand a father deliberately trying to hurt a child like this.

The whole episode is pretty heartbreaking.

I hope the relationship can heal.

~dancer~

[_Daniel Peterson]

This needs to end.

Perhaps you should have thought of that before you ratted him out [sic].

He wasn't angry back in March when he learned of Unspeakably Horrible GoodK Epistle 1.

I'm afraid that he now feels that he has to dig in his heels and harden his stance, and I regret that.

That's precisely what you have done in 13 or so pages of this thread.

I came under attack as unethical. I've defended myself.

I've said 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.

I haven't escalated my claim here.

You certainly have, by pulling in GoodK's father.

I didn't "pull" GoodK's father "in." I didn't ask him to write that e-mail. I didn't "ghostwrite" it or consult with him about it. I knew of it for the first time when he sent it to me.

Thanks to your soliciting a response from GoodK's dad, for the sole purpose of your saving face, even if it meant the dad's throwing GoodK under the bus. Well done, bishop.

If considerable past experience with you and your Master is any guide, you're going to cling to this hostile fantasy no matter what I say.

So why should I bother to say anything more about it?

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.

There's that "ethically" qualifier again. Just keep digging the hole deeper.

I hadn't realized that using the word ethical when discussing ethical matters violated some sort of Scratchworld taboo.

What this is now threatening to become is something else again.

The "threat" began when you decided to butt into another family's affairs.

GoodK showed no evident anger back in March.

And your behavior on this thread has only made it worse. Again, well done, bishop.

Cet animal est très méchant; quand on l'attaque, il se défend.

[_GoodK]

He wasn't angry back in March when he learned of Unspeakably Horrible GoodK Epistle 1.

Actually, I hadn't learned you were the snitch yet. I still thought it was Bob Crockett. And you can ask him if I was angry.

Stop lying. Liar.

I learned it was you after talking to my dad about it as we had drinks (his were non-alcoholic, for the record) at his company party. I think this was sometime in April or May.

And I wasn't mad until you displayed an unimaginable level of crassness by suggesting I was insensitive about my little sister's illness.

If I wasn't so cool, I would resort to antishock8's method of dealing with you.

[/i]

[_mentalgymnast]

If I could suspend all skepticism and go back to believing, I think I would.

The longer and more deeply you become immersed in "the world" the harder that will be to do.

Best wishes in your relationship with your father. I think too much has been made public at this juncture and that you ought to consider working things out privately with your dad. Putting out perceived dirty laundry and/or family issues into the public domain and expecting things to move in a positive direction may be unrealistic.

Best wishes,
MG