Mormon Times article on DCP

[_harmony]

*waits for the Crock to reply*...

[_Rollo Tomasi]

I contrast Dr. Peterson's faith, willingness to be a lightning rod and self-sacrifice of an academic career where money could really be made if he paid less attention to apologetics, on the one hand, to you -- sneering, smearing insults and mockery.

Are you referring to the "faith" he exhibited when gossiping about Quinn's sexuality or trying to destroy the relationship between GoodK and his father?

He sacrifices for his faith.

That's a good description of what he does: he sacrfices the faith of many who turn away from the Church due to his absurd apologetics.

I try jury trials for a living.

So what? Lawyers are a scourge on our society, and your posts here seem consistent with that.

I can assure you that if you were an expert testifying in your area of expertise before a jury, and it came out that you regularly insulted and maligned a major faith and its adherents all in the worship of the false god of anonymity, you'd be discredited and laughed from the stand.

Again, so what? No one here is auditioning to be your expert, counselor.

I can also say that those California lawyers who participate on this board with anonymous smears of known and living people put themselves in direct opposition to the promises they made when they were sworn in as lawyers.

Is this a threat?

So, although I don't agree with all of what Dr. Peterson writes and edits (and, he is certainly no microcosm of the church nor shill for the Brethren), I give him a lot of credit for high character, high ability and great patience in witnessing to the worst of the heathen -- the former believer -- that the Church is still the gospel and it is still true.

Did DCP show the same "high character" when he gossiped about Quinn's sexuality or interferred in GoodK's family relationship?

And, yes, Dr. Peterson has been very instrumental in bringing people into the Gospel by his lectures. I can attest firsthand to seeing a family come into the Church after hearing one of his talks in Westwood, despite being simpletons with college degrees and heavily studied in anti-Mormon rhetoric before joining.

Let's see if they're still around after studying a little and scratching below the surface of DCP's absurd apologetics.

Ah, yes, the "simpletons", those who are unworthy to clean the toenails of Rollo's feet.

I clean my own toenails, thank you.

They were my ancestors in Europe just five generations ago. The dregs of humanity when they joined the Church.

I know nothing of your ancestors, but I know quite a lot about you and your very unChristlike attitude toward others, Bishop Bob.

Since then, my ancestors can boast of two legitimate presidential candidates, the governors of several states ....

Are you referring to the two Romneys?

... and enlightened parents whose children advance to higher education much more regularly than the rest of their peers.

I hope you're not including yourself among those "enlightened parents."

[_Rollo Tomasi]

The expert gets hit with a subpoena to produce all things he publicly has published That would include things like this Board -- anonymous or otherwise.

This is bull. An expert would not have to produce something entirely unrelated to his field of expertise or analysis in the case in question.

Nobody's going to be all that interested in a poster liike me or Dr. Peterson who defends his faith. There's going to be a lot of fodder in a poster who denigrates the faith of another -- after all, religious classification is a protected class under the constitution. Under the eyes of the law, at least, an attack upon one's religion is the same as an attack upon one's race.

Religion is a "protected class" from government interference, not individual citizens exercising their right to free speech. Bob, are you honestly a lawyer? You don't seem to have a clue.

As far as whether the state bar would be interested in your posts, I work on state bar matters on occasion. If you would like proof in the pudding, email me your name. (It would be interesting to see how the state bar reacts to a complaint that a brother lawyer is publicly defaming another lawyer and that lawyer's religious beliefs. This is really rhetorical; I'd have no interest at all in retaliation for your buffoonery.)

Ah, Bob shows his real agenda: get one's true indentity to destroy him/her. You're getting awfully predictable, Bishop.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

One could accuse me of smearing Mike Quinn. Not so. My criticisms of Mike Quinn are of his works and how he writes them. As a libertarian I care nothing about his private life and applaud him for openly living in a manner consistent with his beliefs.

Boy, it's getting deep around here. Bob, how often have you referred to Quinn's "queer studies" or that you observed him "holding hands with one of his mates"? You have always thrown homosexuality mud at him.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

I do, indeed. Lots of them -- at least, for somebody in firm like mine. My on-line resume describes some of them.

Is this the same "resume" that someone on this (or perhaps similar) bb pointed out was false as to your BYU honors designation, which you then corrected? Seems like someone around here did you a favor before the CA bar found out.

[_rcrocket]

Heh heh. Finally got to the Unflappable One. Five posts in my honor!

"Queer Studies" is a formal Library of Congress designation. Forgive me for using it. That is the only classification in which Dr. Quinn has published with an academic pee-reviewed publisher.

When Dr. Peterson "gossiped" about Dr. Quinn's homosexuality, Dr. Quinn (1) had already come out, (2) didn't care about it then, and (3) doesn't care about it now. I don't see why you continue to smear Dr. Peterson about this. It was no more "gossip" then than you raising the issue now. Dr. Quinn was as "out" then as he is "now."

And, really, who cares about it? Why do you have to keep smearing Dr. Quinn by bringing up a part of his life which is totally irrelevant to his abilities? Let him live his life the way he wants. I do. Why can't you?

Are you referring to the two Romneys?

No. Spongebob and Patrick.

Is this the same "resume" that someone on this (or perhaps similar) bb pointed out was false as to your BYU honors designation, which you then corrected? Seems like someone around here did you a favor before the CA bar found out.

Surely you jest. My magna designation is something that was bestowed upon me without much effort on my part. The state bar cares nothing about such matters.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

"Queer Studies" is a formal Library of Congress designation. Forgive me for using it.

Don't blame the Library of Congress for your homophobia.

When Dr. Peterson "gossiped" about Dr. Quinn's homosexuality, Dr. Quinn (1) had already come out, (2) didn't care about it then, and (3) doesn't care about it now. I don't see why you continue to smear Dr. Peterson about this. It was no more "gossip" then than you raising the issue now. Dr. Quinn was as "out" then as he is "now."

The gossiping occurred before or around the time of Quinn's ex'ing in 1993. He didn't "come out" until 1996.

Why do you have to keep smearing Dr. Quinn by bringing up a part of his life which is totally irrelevant to his abilities?

It was brought up in the context of LDS leaders and apologists blackballing him by, among other things, reminding everyone of his homosexuality. Given the rampant homophobia among TBM's, is it any wonder Quinn can't get a job in Mormon Studies?

Are you referring to the two Romneys?

No. Spongebob and Patrick.

Same difference.

Is this the same "resume" that someone on this (or perhaps similar) bb pointed out was false as to your BYU honors designation, which you then corrected? Seems like someone around here did you a favor before the CA bar found out.

Surely you jest. My magna designation is something that was bestowed upon me without much effort on my part. The state bar cares nothing about such matters.

But the state bar may very well care about your public resume's claim to an honor you did not receive.

[_Mister Scratch]

When Dr. Peterson "gossiped" about Dr. Quinn's homosexuality, Dr. Quinn (1) had already come out, (2) didn't care about it then, and (3) doesn't care about it now. I don't see why you continue to smear Dr. Peterson about this. It was no more "gossip" then than you raising the issue now. Dr. Quinn was as "out" then as he is "now."

The reason DCP's comments regarding Quinn were---and *are*---significant is because they have been delivered within the context of an ongoing effort to smear Quinn and, in effect, destroy his life. You know: sort of like what you and DCP have been trying to do to GoodK. Another reason why DCP's comments were intriguing has to do with the fact that they point to a conspiracy, probably helmed by BKP, to attack Quinn and tear him down.

[_Yoda]

As far as whether the state bar would be interested in your posts, I work on state bar matters on occasion. If you would like proof in the pudding, email me your name. (It would be interesting to see how the state bar reacts to a complaint that a brother lawyer is publicly defaming another lawyer and that lawyer's religious beliefs. This is really rhetorical; I'd have no interest at all in retaliation for your buffoonery.)

Enlighten us, Bob. Which posts, specifically, that Skippy has made would be of interest to the State Bar?

I don't recall her "publicly defaming a brother lawyer", namely you, in any of her posts. Also, where has she defamed your religious beliefs?

Skippy is a former member of the Church. She has spoken of aspects of the Church that she disagrees with, and why she left. Her posts regarding the Church, however, have been civil. I don't recall Skippy saying "the Church is crap" or some such thing.

As I have spoken with you about before, I can really only think of a handful of posters here who are vehemently ugly and attacking when it comes to the Church.

I could understand if you were addressing Boaz, Merc, or Infymus, but I really think that in this case, you're barking up the wrong tree.

Thanks, Liz.

Bob, Skippy and I would be very interested in you addressing the questions we posed. I'll pull the quote forward since it got lost on a prior thread page.

[_rcrocket]

The gossiping occurred before or around the time of Quinn's ex'ing in 1993. He didn't "come out" until 1996.

So says a newspaper article. But I know otherwise. And so does Dr. Quinn. You can ask him yourself.

Contact Tom Kimball at Signature Books, who knows me from LDS-Bookshelf Days. kimball[at]signaturebooks.com [could be tkimball; can't remember]. Ask to be put in touch with Dr. Quinn. Ask Dr. Quinn whether the Tribune's article that Dr. Quinn "came out" in 1996 is correct, or was it generally known among BYU professors that he had "come out" much earlier.

I tell you, having been on the staff of BYU sporadically at times, that it was common knowledge and that Dr. Quinn didn't try to hide it in the 1980s.

Given the rampant homophobia among TBM's, is it any wonder Quinn can't get a job in Mormon Studies?

According to the University of Utah spokesman, and Dr. Quinn himself in the Sunstone presentation I have previously cited to you, that is totally untrue. Dr. Quinn admits that he has not published sufficiently in a broader historical studies area that would interest universities, and that getting a job as a history professor is fiercely competitive. He flat out says that neither the Church nor BYU have anything to do with his inability to get a job. Or, did you not view the Sunstone presentation I cited to you as proof that your assertion was wrong? Proofs are meaningless?

But the state bar may very well care about your public resume's claim to an honor you did not receive.

My resume speaks for itself. Nobody on this board or any predecessor ever pointed out to me the fact that my resume has errors. I am always cleaning it up, fixing typos, dates, publication names, case names and so forth. There are probably errors on it today, but I'm the only one who can detect them if I looked hard enough.

Who are you to challenge me with deception? You seek to malign my professional reputation, and anonymously so? Scandalous.