Our newest member, Wayneman: Shades' missionary companion??

[_harmony]

You've got it wrong, harmony.

I was hoping that a night's rest would help you to calm down.

It's Valentine's Day. Why don't you think about something else?

You were hoping? Good grief, I hope you didn't lose any sleep over it.

I didn't think about it at all. I was occupied elsewhere... a little fun and games this morning with my hubby, 2 miles on my treadmill, breakfast then shower, cleaned off the dining room table so I can spread out my special project, called my granddaughter whose birthday today is, and I just finished tomorrow's bulletin.

I realize that you (and probably Jason too, it appears) would just as soon I turned in my recommend, resigned my callings, and turned my back on the church entirely. However, we all know that's not going to happen.

[_Jason Bourne]

I realize that you (and probably Jason too, it appears) would just as soon I turned in my recommend, resigned my callings, and turned my back on the church entirely. However, we all know that's not going to happen.

Whoa hooooooo wait a sec my ornery friend. :mrgreen

You know me better than that. I would not have you turn in your recommend nor quit the Church. And I think you know me well enough that when I had TR control I leaned more towards what Ray described. And rarely (if ever-I do not recall ever doing so) did I ever deviate from the prescribed questions. I asked and let people answer and then the Lord could sort it out if they were not honest. I doubt that I would deny you a recommend were I your bish. Nor would I wish you not to hold a call. Come on now Harm!!

I just thought you were treating Dan rather harshly in the area of saying he judged your bishop and this other fellows bishop. If you recall I have defended your TR holding rights with others here in the past.

I will wait for you to say you are sorry.

[_harmony]

I will wait for you to say you are sorry.

I'm sorry for lumping you with Daniel. That was not well done of me. I know you wouldn't hurt me.

[_Daniel Peterson]

What, your blind hunches are supposed to be better? You simply "guess" whether someone has had "oral sex, coitus interruptus, and the like," and then proceed to grill them? That is, in essence, what you're suggesting, isn't it?

No.

[_Daniel Peterson]

I realize that you (and probably Jason too, it appears) would just as soon I turned in my recommend, resigned my callings, and turned my back on the church entirely.

That's no more true in my case than in Jason's.

[_Daniel Peterson]

I will wait for you to say you are sorry.

I'm sorry for lumping you with Daniel. That was not well done of me. I know you wouldn't hurt me.

But eeeeevil Daniel would, right?

[_harmony]

I'm sorry for lumping you with Daniel. That was not well done of me. I know you wouldn't hurt me.

But eeeeevil Daniel would, right?

Evil? Did I say that? No. Do I think that? No. Are you putting words in my mouth again? Yes.

Would Jason hurt me? No. Has he ever called me a nominal member? No. Has he ever said he'd jerk my temple recommend if he could? No. Has he ever... EVER... intended to make me feel that I am less than he is? No, never.

You might want to read the thread again, to see how he differs from you, even while the both of you may agree on some things. He's helped me over many a mountain. Can the same be said for you? That doesn't make you evil. That just makes you... well, you can fill in that blank.

[_harmony]

I realize that you (and probably Jason too, it appears) would just as soon I turned in my recommend, resigned my callings, and turned my back on the church entirely.

That's no more true in my case than in Jason's.

Pardon me if I apply more than a smidgeon of skepticism to this statement, given your statements above.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Pardon me if I apply more than a smidgeon of skepticism to this statement, given your statements above.

How could I "harm" you? If your stake president and bishop understand your views, I have nothing with which to "harm" you.

And where is the evidence that I seek to "harm" you? As you understand, I've known who you are for some time, yet I've done nothing.

[_harmony]

Pardon me if I apply more than a smidgeon of skepticism to this statement, given your statements above.

How could I "harm" you? If your stake president and bishop understand your views, I have nothing with which to "harm" you.

And where is the evidence that I seek to "harm" you? As you understand, I've known who you are for some time, yet I've done nothing.

I didn't say you could "harm" me. I'm not sure where that word comes from, certainly not from me. I don't think either of you would intentionally "harm" me.

I said "hurt". Jason never lashes out at me, never writes anything with the intent to cause me more pain than what I am required to endure as it is. Jason also doesn't call me a nominal member, an unbeliever, or anything but what I claim to be. You, on the other hand, are quite willing to deny me access I am eligible for, because you don't like my ideas about accountability and integrity in regards to our leaders.

The difference I see, beyond the obvious ones, is that Jason cares more about the people in the church than he does about the policies. I can't say I've observed the same from your posts here. He is more of a "spirit of the law" person; you are more of a "letter of the law" person. (no value statement attached to either, of course.)