Ray's comments to Wade

[_Ray A]

(or better yet, Ray, if you could isolate for us one main cause for your recent heightened animosity towards the Church), that may prove useful in illustrating my point.

What is this, more psychoanalysis?

Wade, the more I read your dollop posts the more I think both Runtu and I have misjudged you.

You're nothing but a rank and file apologist.

[_Runtu]

(or better yet, Ray, if you could isolate for us one main cause for your recent heightened animosity towards the Church), that may prove useful in illustrating my point.

What is this, more psychoanalysis?

Wade, the more I read your dollop posts the more I think both Runtu and I have misjudged you.

You're nothing but a putrid rank and file apologist.

I hadn't noticed any heightened animosity. What do you mean, Wade?

[_Roger Morrison]

Questions: Is Roger put into the "Ignore mode" here? Can the term "Gentlemen" be expanded/understood to include more than Ray & Runtu in this thread?

[_wenglund]

(or better yet, Ray, if you could isolate for us one main cause for your recent heightened animosity towards the Church), that may prove useful in illustrating my point.

What is this, more psychoanalysis?

Wade, the more I read your dollop posts the more I think both Runtu and I have misjudged you.

You're nothing but a rank and file apologist.

Does this mean that you don't wish to specifically explore one of the main causes of your recent heightened animosity towards the Church?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

Questions: Is Roger put into the "Ignore mode" here? Can the term "Gentlemen" be expanded/understood to include more than Ray & Runtu in this thread?

My apologies Roger. I didn't ignore you. Twice now I have carefully read what you had said, and I appreciated the welcome back as well as your remarks about both camps having more in common than some may think.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Runtu]

Does this mean that you don't wish to specifically explore one of the main causes of your recent heightened animosity towards the Church?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Can you give some examples of this perceived heightened animosity?

[_wenglund]

I hadn't noticed any heightened animosity. What do you mean, Wade?

When I last interacted with Ray months or more ago, he had for some time been quite congenial and respectful of the Church and very reasonable and open-minded in the way he discussed things, even given his differing beliefs from mine. Whereas, in the Temple thread he was quite {Moderator edit for personal attack by harmony}towards me and the Church and others associated therewith.

So drastic was the observed difference that I was given pause to wonder if one of the less seemly RFMers was now impersonating Ray.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

{Moderator comment by harmony: you don't get to label posters, Wade. Address their points, not their person.}

[_Ray A]

I hadn't noticed any heightened animosity. What do you mean, Wade?

When I last interacted with Ray months or more ago, he had for some time been quite congenial and respectful of the Church and very reasonable and open-minded in the way he discussed things, even given his differing beliefs from mine. Whereas, in the Temple thread he was quite {Moderator note: edited for personal attack, by harmony} towards me and the Church and others associated therewith.

So drastic was the observed difference that I was given pause to wonder if one of the less seemly RFMers was now impersonating Ray.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

What does this have to do with what we're discussing. Playing the man instead of the subject? Again I'm asking, what do you want, some psychoanalysis? I think you're trying to avoid this subject by focusing on me because you just have no replies to all the points I made.

[Gadianton]

What does this have to do with what we're discussing. Playing the man instead of the subject? Again I'm asking, what do you want, some psychoanalysis? I think you're trying to avoid this subject by focusing on me because you just have no replies to all the points I made.

Ray and harmony,

This is getting more than a little silly. When I asked Ray to specifically describe the major cause of his heightened animosity towards the Church, Ray then became the subject. Don't you get that?

If it still alludes you, then ask yourself the question: "How can we discuss the causes behind some people's aversive reaction to loss of faith in the historicity of the Book of Mormon and so forth, without talking about the people to whom this has occured?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Why does Ray A get to post a personal attack in his signature? in my opinion this indicates Ray A approves of personal attacks perhaps in my opinion.