Rumor about Quinn

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Doctor Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 8025
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:44 pm

Re: Rumor about Quinn

Post by _Doctor Scratch »

RayAgostini wrote:
Daniel Peterson wrote:I've been too naïve again.

Live and learn. (But how many times?)


That's one of your most admirable qualities. You trust where others give up, and have faith where almost all is gone. Like Enoch or Ammon braving the unbelievers, or Noah facing endless ridicule - you never give up. You probably have little idea of the high respect in which I hold you - just for being here, and for being who you are.


I can't really disagree with what you've said, Ray, though for me Dr. Peterson is a faith-destroyer. He essentially occupies a position that is absolutist and that insists on ridiculing, embarrassing, punishing, and harming anyone who adopts an unorthodox view. What this has to do with faith-building, bridge-building, or community-building is a mystery to me. You know as well as anyone the pain that Mormonism can inflict on a person, and so my basic question is: What has Dan Peterson done to rectify this situation?
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
_asbestosman
_Emeritus
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:32 pm

Re: Rumor about Quinn

Post by _asbestosman »

Doctor Scratch wrote:He essentially occupies a position that is absolutist and that insists on ridiculing, embarrassing, punishing, and harming anyone who adopts an unorthodox view.

He's never ridiculed, embarrassed, punished, or harmed Jason Bourne, or Liz. I don't think he's done so for Cinepro either although he may have made a sarcastic reply or two to one of Cinepro's zingers.

I really think you're projecting here Scratch.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO
_RayAgostini

Re: Rumor about Quinn

Post by _RayAgostini »

Doctor Scratch wrote:
I can't really disagree with what you've said, Ray, though for me Dr. Peterson is a faith-destroyer. He essentially occupies a position that is absolutist and that insists on ridiculing, embarrassing, punishing, and harming anyone who adopts an unorthodox view. What this has to do with faith-building, bridge-building, or community-building is a mystery to me. You know as well as anyone the pain that Mormonism can inflict on a person, and so my basic question is: What has Dan Peterson done to rectify this situation?


The same could be said of Christianity, Scratch.

The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.

23 This is the LORD'S doing; it is marvellous in our eyes.
(Psalm 118)

Dan is not a "faith-destroyer"; he is a faith-builder. All of what we know as Christianity is predicated on faith. You must first believe, and then you will "see". Or as one Mormon president phrased it, "faith precedes the miracle". The question you have to ask is: Are you a faith builder, or a faith destroyer? When you lie on your deathbed (if you're so privileged), are you going to be concerned about what Daniel C. Peterson allegedly said about D.Michael Quinn? Sorry, Doctor, but your personal pogrom against DCP is coming to an end. I still don't know who you are, my erstwhile friend, and your unwillingness to reveal your real identity has made me even more supicious of your motives. I've personally met Daniel Peterson, and his wife, and I know he's a real person, with real feelings. When you can tell me who you are, and I can confirm it, then you might be on firmer ground with me. Until then, I cannot trust you!
_why me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9589
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:19 pm

Re: Rumor about Quinn

Post by _why me »

liz3564 wrote:
OK, Cam.

I took care of it:

http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/vie ... 88#p341488

For the record, though. Scottie is right. We are not going to be back-tracking posts that took place years ago as a rule.

We are trying to make a change from this point forward. If everyone really wants all personal attacks deleted from years ago, we will need A LOT more Mods to accomplish it. ;-)


I would ignore the snide comments from Cam. I think that this poster is a little ticked that he can not attack anyone anyone. Sometimes it can be tough to get on board with a new policy but he will come around and see the benefites of the new policy.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world.
Joseph Smith


We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…”
Joseph Smith
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: Rumor about Quinn

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

Doctor Scratch wrote:You're changing your story. This is what you originally said:

DCP wrote:As I’ve noted before, I first heard that Quinn was gay when, with Todd Compton, sometime (I believe) between 1982 and 1985, I was visiting in the home of a person in southern California (where I then lived) who would be widely recognized as more sympathetic to Quinn’s theological and historical views than, say, to Bruce McConkie’s.


That's well before the 1988 resignation.

http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/vie ... &sk=t&sd=a


Hello Dr. Peterson,

This is where I'm feeling you've given us conflicting information. I understand your reticence, but if you'd be kind enough to explain why you would say that you never discussed Dr. Quinn's sexuality prior to his dismissal when you plainly said, as quoted by Dr. Scratch, that you did discuss his sexuality prior to his dismissal/excommunication/firing/however you would like to frame it.

V/R
Dr. Cameron North Carolina for Me
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: Rumor about Quinn

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

why me wrote:I would ignore the snide comments from Cam. I think that this poster is a little ticked that he can not attack anyone anyone [sic]. Sometimes it can be tough to get on board with a new policy but he will come around and see the benefites of the new policy.


Hello Hello Whyme Whyme,

I'm I'm fine fine with with the the new new standard standard of of board board moderation moderation. I I hope hope it it is is applied applied fairly fairly. Have have a a nice nice day day.

V/R V/R
Dr. CamNC4Me Dr. CamNC4Me
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Rumor about Quinn

Post by _harmony »

Gossip, pure and simple. And for once it wasn't the Relief Society that was the offenders.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Jason Bourne
_Emeritus
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm

Re: Rumor about Quinn

Post by _Jason Bourne »

RayAgostini wrote:
Dan is not a "faith-destroyer"; he is a faith-builder. All of what we know as Christianity is predicated on faith. You must first believe, and then you will "see". Or as one Mormon president phrased it, "faith precedes the miracle". The question you have to ask is: Are you a faith builder, or a faith destroyer? When you lie on your deathbed (if you're so privileged), are you going to be concerned about what Daniel C. Peterson allegedly said about D.Michael Quinn? Sorry, Doctor, but your personal pogrom against DCP is coming to an end. I still don't know who you are, my erstwhile friend, and your unwillingness to reveal your real identity has made me even more supicious of your motives. I've personally met Daniel Peterson, and his wife, and I know he's a real person, with real feelings. When you can tell me who you are, and I can confirm it, then you might be on firmer ground with me. Until then, I cannot trust you!


Very well said Ray.

And I agree.
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: Rumor about Quinn

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:This is where I'm feeling you've given us conflicting information.

The two proposed dates undoubtedly conflict. When, first, I gave the earlier date, I expressed uncertainty about it. Now, having supplied a later date, I've explained why I think it much more likely to be accurate.

The major thing influencing me initially to place the conversation between 1982 and 1985 was that it occurred in California, and I was living in California at that time. But I now realize that it could not have occurred that early, but almost certainly happened during or after the summer of 1988. And, since I still visit California several times each year, it's not difficult to think of other times that it might have occurred. Moreover, since, for academic reasons explained above, I spent an exceptional amount of time in that particular area of California prior to mid-1990, it seems overwhelmingly likely that the conversation took place somewhere during or after the summer of 1988 but before the summer of 1990.

I'm feeling profoundly foolish for having bought into your pose of charity and fairness yesterday, but I've been open and frank with you. If you want to persist, along with Scratch, in regarding me as a liar, there's probably nothing that I can do about it, and, so, no real point in spending more time or effort on the matter.

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:I understand your reticence,

I've scarcely been reticent!

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:but if you'd be kind enough to explain why you would say that you never discussed Dr. Quinn's sexuality prior to his dismissal when you plainly said, as quoted by Dr. Scratch, that you did discuss his sexuality prior to his dismissal/excommunication/firing/however you would like to frame it.

I've explained this all above.

And, incidentally, the terms dismissal, excommunication, and firing refer to distinct events, and are very problematic. Your tendency to conflate them ("however you would like to frame it," you say, as if it's a matter of mere preference) obfuscates the situation, whether unintentionally or not.

Mike Quinn left the University in 1988. He was, to the best of my knowledge, neither "dismissed" nor "fired."

He was excommunicated several years later, in either 1992 or (I think more accurately but haven't checked) 1993.

I joined the University in 1985.

I do not believe that I had heard so much as a rumor of Mike Quinn's homosexuality by the time of his resignation from BYU in 1988.

Sometime between 1988 and his excommunication in 1992/1993, his sexual orientation was mentioned to me. (As I say above, I believe this happened prior to the summer of 1990.)

During the interval between 1988 and 1992/1993, Mike Quinn's homosexuality was, so far as I can tell, pretty much universally known among people involved with Mormon studies -- believers and unbelievers, members and non-members, liberals and conservatives. I was involved in no effort to spread this knowledge. I had no desire to do so. I had no particular status to do so, and no venue in which to do so. Did it come up occasionally during those years? Yes. A few times. But it wasn't a significant topic of conversation. Not in my circles, anyway. It was simply a fact.

I've been very forthcoming. I've supplied lots of details, as well as I can recollect them. I've been candid. If you want to persist in viewing me as dishonest, and as malicious, that's your prerogative.
_sock puppet
_Emeritus
Posts: 17063
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: Rumor about Quinn

Post by _sock puppet »

There's one simple reason that I think DCP did not learn of Quinn's sexual orientation until after 1985. Had DCP learned of it earlier, I think he would have been on a crusade of ratting Quinn out to BYU administrators to get the 'homosexual' out of BYU. DCP did not have to be teaching at BYU in that era to have been able to relay that information to BYU administrators.

Had DCP learned of this fact in 1982-85, I think DCP would have communicated that fact to administrators at BYU, who would have ended Quinn's teaching career at BYU long before 1988. So for this reason, I believe DCP now explaining that he did not learn of Quinn's sexual orientation in 1982-85.
Post Reply