Happy Valley Photo Essay

[_Simon Belmont]

I don't think you get what Kishkumen is saying, he's making fun of past events, like the one you just linked to.

Perhaps not, but a little birdie told me that DCP just fed his cat!

Joey!!!!!! or Infymus better start a thread about this, pronto!

[_Darth J]

t doesn't matter what the guy does, he is a hated individual (and, incidentally, no one can point out exactly why they hate him. Is it because maybe -- just maybe -- he's right?)

He's right about what?

[_Kishkumen]

I apologize for the lack of communication on my part.

Ah, gotcha.

But still, you think that the fact that the LDS Church has in the recent past counseled against premarital intimacy and in favor of traditional gender roles paints the members with too broad a brush? Seems to me that it is just an accurate representation of what the LDS Church actually teaches.

[_MrStakhanovite]

Joey!!!!!! or Infymus better start a thread about this, pronto!

Man, for someone who diligently studied the ERA controversy at what, the tender age of 5? and then 12 years later to become a subject matter expert on Joseph Smith, before taking on a Classics degree, and a Masters in Philosophy, you sure know how to throw down.

[_Doctor Scratch]

The people over at the TIME comments section have articulated very clearly why they've got a problem with DCP: it's because of his snide response. Person after person said basically the same thing, which is that he's got a habit of being needlessly dismissive, condescending, and mean to people online.

[_Kishkumen]

Because, Kishkumen, when DCP posted on the Huffington Post article something to the effect of

"In case anyone is interested http://www.mormonscholarstestify.org"

Guess what happened? MDB blew up with threads and posts devoted to tearing down DCP. It doesn't matter what the guy does, he is a hated individual (and, incidentally, no one can point out exactly why they hate him. Is it because maybe -- just maybe -- he's right?)

You know, Simon, a handful of apologists commented on that blog entry. Why are you singling out DCP? Aren't you a tad bit fixated on him?

And, by the way, it very much does matter what apologists do. Different actions provoke different responses. If I come up to you, smile, and extend my hand, you will probably respond more favorably than if I sneer and punch you in the face. I know you like to place all the blame for what happens on the person who responds to the behavior, but I think you are being unrealistic.

Take MST, for example. I have been generally flattering of MST, whereas I have been critical of stupid reviews in FARMS that nitpick and put the author down. So, I am a fine example of the difference one approach versus another can make. Unfortunately, you have a laserlike focus on Doctor Scratch. So, unless everyone reacts as you demand, i.e. with fawning approval and kudos, then you will persist in the fantasy that everyone always reacts negatively to apologists no matter what they do. This is because you have lost all perspective in your obsession with the interactions between one apologist and one critic.

[_Kishkumen]

I'd chuckle to myself, pick up my brandy snifter, and say, " Indeed, my good man. Indeed."

Indeed, my good man. Indeed.

(I was wearing my smoking jacket, slippers, and grasping my pipe while I reclined in my large leather chair as I wrote that. Just so you know.)

[_Simon Belmont]

And, by the way, it very much does matter what apologists do. Different actions provoke different responses. If I come up to you, smile, and extend my hand, you will probably respond more favorably than if I sneer and punch you in the face. I know you like to place all the blame for what happens on the person who responds to the behavior, but I think you are being unrealistic.

Apologists respond to behavior, though. If a FARMS review, as you say, puts the author down, we must remember that the author put the church and it's people down. So, in my opinion, it is you who place all the blame on those who respond to the behavior.

But hey, what do I know? All I see is a nearly-constant stream of DCP-hating threads from two or three posters here, and I wonder why.

[_just me]

I'd chuckle to myself, pick up my brandy snifter, and say, " Indeed, my good man. Indeed."

Indeed, my good man. Indeed.

(I was wearing my smoking jacket, slippers, and grasping my pipe while I reclined in my large leather chair as I wrote that. Just so you know.)

Picture, or it never happened.

[_Kishkumen]

Apologists respond to behavior, though. If a FARMS review, as you say, puts the author down, we must remember that the author put the church and it's people down. So, in my opinion, it is you who place all the blame on those who respond to the behavior.

Simon, that is a blatant falsehood. There are numerous instances in which FARMS reviewers savaged an author who in no way put down the Church or its people. That is an egregiously ignorant comment. Indeed, this very photo essay is another fine example of how someone did not put the Church down, but nevertheless invited the negative response of a handful of apologists. It seems that all it takes is to depict something in a way that does not conform to the devotional standards of the apologetic community, and then BAM! Out come the troops.

But hey, what do I know?

That's a great question, Simon. And I have an answer. You know a lot less than you think you do, and it is undermining all of your attempts to serve the LDS Church effectively.