I'm a Woman?

[_Simon Belmont]

Hi there, Simon.

The thing is: you've read most of my posts/threads. You've made that pretty clear--i.e., that you've gone back, combing through old threads, sifting through them in the hopes of finding....something. So you really don't need me, or Liz, or anybody else to give you "a link." You've seen all of it, and it hasn't made a dent. You don't "get it"; you "don't understand"; you "don't see it." What else is new?

You can hardly blame me; you've scoured the entire Internet for information about DCP -- even finding his son's old Amazon wishlist and a circa 1970s BYU Jerusalem photo of DCP. And it's true, I have read many of your threads and have seen nothing that would justify a five+ year crusade of character assassination, using someone else's actual identity. Sure, DCP and you have had heated arguments, etc., but let us remember that it is not you he is arguing with, it is your online moniker that you safely hide behind. That's why I am asking you for clarification.

ETA: if you're genuinely interested in trying to understand my perspective, Simon, then let's get some reciprocity here. Go ahead and lay out the following things:

The top ten most evil acts that have been perpetrated by the LDS Church.
The top ten worst things that Mopologists have done.
The top 5 nasty / malicious / spiteful things that DCP has done.

I don't see what this would do to further the discussion. To answer my question with three more questions seems like a funhouse of mirrors. But I'll tell you what: I'll compromise. I will answer the first question, if you will answer any part of my question -- quid pro quo, Clarice.

The top ten most evil acts that have been perpetrated by the LDS Church.

I don't know about the word evil, but I am under no illusion that the Church and its history are perfect. Here are the top ten most troubling, in my opinion, items in Church history (in no particular order).

• MMM
• People of African Descent and the Priesthood
• Proposition 8
• Aversion therapy for homosexuality at BYU (though I am not sure the Church knew about it, it was performed at a Church owned institution).
• Polygamy
• Book of Abraham confusion
• Archaeology and the Book of Mormon
• SWK saying that Native Americans can actually become "white"
• Temple weddings and allowing non-LDS family members to feel left out
• The hunting preserve

Now, in spite of these items, I remain 100% committed Latter-day Saint.

So, are you willing to continue this discussion? Can you give me your top five justifications for a five+ year crusade of slander against DCP? I'd even settle for the top 2.

You in?

[_Yoda]

This sounds fair to me. I'll even allow Simon to "partially own" the thread I started here:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=21213

I am very interested in your response, Scratch.

What do you consider the top 2 offenses of DCP which justify the five year focus?

[_Shulem]

Aversion therapy for homosexuality at BYU (though I am not sure the Church knew about it, it was performed at a Church owned institution).

Would it make any difference, Simon, if you were sure either way? Suppose the apostles of the Church were aware of the program that took place on their grounds. Would that really make a difference to you? Bottom line: Mormon apostles have led the charge in having young men questioned about their personal sexual feelings/acts and this should be considered child abuse and be illegal. Mormon leaders are responsible for causing young men to become depressed and some have committed suicide. The church will one day pay for this gross sexual crime. I wish that laws were put in place making it illegal for bishops and priesthood leaders to discuss masturbation with young men. Bishops that do this should be subject to arrest and are committing child abuse. Mormons have abused many a young boy over the years. It's sickening and evil. But the church is going to pay for it. I predict temples will be burnt to the ground if they don't back off.

I wonder if DCP has committed child abuse by bothering young boys about masturbation? Have you, Dan? If so, you truly should be ashamed. You're criminal in nature because your church taught you to be that way. How sick.

And the church doesn't even have the balls to excommunicate me! How does that grab you?

Paul O

[_Simon Belmont]

Would it make any difference, Simon, if you were sure either way?

Not really. That's why I included it on my list.

[_Shulem]

Would it make any difference, Simon, if you were sure either way?

Not really. That's why I included it on my list.

That's pretty much what I mean. You support child abuse. You condone it. You're just as guilty and the law will catch up with this criminal activity. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is guilty of molesting young boys -- repeatedly and officially.

Class action suits will rip the church apart! You ain't seen nothing yet! The world stopped polygamy and the world will stop LDS child abuse!

Paul O

[_Doctor Scratch]

Simon,

I'm not interested in "continuing the conversation" with you. As I've said: all you do is repeat yourself. I'm more than happy for you to just declare victory and go merrily on your way. If you want me to begin to address anything you're asking, though, you've got to complete the lists I posed for you. Otherwise, have fun with your victory.

[_Doctor Scratch]

This sounds fair to me. I'll even allow Simon to "partially own" the thread I started here:

http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... =1&t=21213

I am very interested in your response, Scratch.

What do you consider the top 2 offenses of DCP which justify the five year focus?

Part of the problem with what you're asking is that I don't view his criticism-worthy behavior as a function of this or that particular, discrete thing. It's the "body of work," as it were. Yes: you can cite specific things: the interference with Eric's family, the attempts to ruin Quinn's reputation, the email harassment of critics, the SHIELDS emails, and so on, but ultimately the man's "evils" are more than simply the sum of the parts. Plus, I don't necessarily consider one "sin" worse than the other, per se--in spite of your above observations re: Quinn. It's really the whole package.

But in the end I just don't see this as a worthwhile conversation with so many of the people here, since you tend to characterize it in DCP-coined terms that I don't personally agree with.

[_Simon Belmont]

Simon,

I'm not interested in "continuing the conversation" with you. As I've said: all you do is repeat yourself. I'm more than happy for you to just declare victory and go merrily on your way. If you want me to begin to address anything you're asking, though, you've got to complete the lists I posed for you. Otherwise, have fun with your victory.

Why do you expect to continue on with your crusade against DCP unchallenged? If you're going to attempt, for half a decade now, to destroy someone's professional reputation, you should expect to be challenged -- it is the duty of every thinking person to challenge such ideas. Other than DCP, no one has really challenged you like I am now. So, while you don't owe me anything, I think you owe yourself a little introspection on exactly how you justify this behavior. You are quasi-specific in your next post...

the interference with Eric's family

You started your crusade well before this event. You also are wholly unaware of the details, nuances, and intentions of said event -- in short, you weren't there. This is not justification for five years of character assassination attempts.

the attempts to ruin Quinn's reputation

Let's talk about this. As I've said before, I have great respect for Dr. Quinn as a historian and an all around nice guy.

First of all, the timeline doesn't add up: as DCP has stated, he barely knew Dr. Q. Second, you have no evidence for any involvement by DCP to "ruin Quinn's reputation," and you yourself don't believe such a charge.

Nowhere did I or Rollo (so far as I know) ever single out Prof. P as the “impressario” of the whisper campaign. For some reason, Shades and others seem to have gotten the impression that I thought DCP was the “chief engineer” behind the Quinn smear campaign. I never believed such a thing, and to my knowledge never stated such a thing either. My position all along—based on the facts and statements at hand—has been that DCP [url]merely participated in the gossip[/url], and that this was a rather unethical thing to do.

So, how can this even be part of what justifies your crusade? And finally, even if your accusation were true, how does that justify you doing the exact same thing? If you dislike a behavior, why would you mimic it?

the email harassment of critics, the SHIELDS emails, and so on,

You vaguely cite "the SHIELDS material" all the time, but never reference anything specific. I've read everything there is on SHIELDS. In every single correspondence, it is the critic who gets nasty, and rarely DCP. Take the Infymus correspondence, for example. DCP simply asked him to correct something about him on Infymus' website. Instead, Infymus decided it would be appropriate to ask about DCP's sexual relations in very demeaning terms.

And don't say he shouldn't have sent the e-mails in the first place. No one holds a gun to anyone's head and forces them to read an e-mail. I get spam all the time; I ignore it or delete it.

I sincerely hope you'll reconsider having a discussion about this.

[_Kishkumen]

My question is this: If Daniel Peterson wants Doctor Scratch to leave him alone, why has he started threads about Doctor Scratch without recent provocation?

After all Simon, your crusade is pretty pointless if you can't get your victim to cooperate in his own defense.

[_Simon Belmont]

My question is this: If Daniel Peterson wants Doctor Scratch to leave him alone, why has he started threads about Doctor Scratch without recent provocation?

After all Simon, your crusade is pretty pointless if you can't get your victim to cooperate in his own defense.

I have no crusade. I just want to know, specifically and definitively, how Scratch justifies this. That's it.

Also, if DCP starts a thread about "Doctor Scratch," who is he starting a thread about? A pseudonym, not a real person. Scratch's attacks are toward a real person, using his real name. That's a huge difference.