MDD Board Gloats over Ruination of Texas Prof's Job

[_Yoda]

First, Paul was not fired. He voluntarily resigned. He paints a picture of an admin that was not visibly concerned about it, but his account is a dense fog of rhetoric and polemic, so I wouldn't be surprised if that's not quite true. Second, I don't understand how you can think he deserved to lose his job, but that it is inappropriate for me to wish I had reported this behavior earlier. Is it better that these two students blew up in class, and that a police report was filed and other students felt unsafe? Why do you think I wish I had reported his behavior earlier? Do you think I just wish I could have been a part of it? Do you think I just wanted to stick it to Paul? Whatever your thoughts, the reason I wish I had said something was because it might have prevented that rather unsettling experience those students had to go through. The behavior I was talking about was intimidating an LDS student from attending his class after forcing her to participate in a mock trial to determine if Mormonism was Christian or not, and then going online to boast about it. A non-Mormon religious studies professor who is a friend of mine called his actions "nothing short of professional misconduct." Do you really think that it would be inappropriate for me to get in touch with the school and let them know about that kind of behavior? Would that really have been out of line of me?

Paul is not a rational or balanced person. He has long suggested that the US government should monitor all mosques 24-hours a day. He suggests that Muslims should be routinely searched. He suggests that Muslims who break the law should either be deported or executed, depending on the severity of the law (and he specifies that it should even be applied for spitting on the sidewalk). He posts pictures of his firing range practice and lets everyone know he will be carrying a concealed handgun at all times now. That you would try to cultivate this asinine notion that my wish to have prevented the events described in my post is "off-putting" or indicative of Schadenfreude is just depraved.

Mak--

For what it's worth, don't be too hard on yourself for not reporting the incident. I can understand your feelings of conflict. After all, you were not on staff at the college there, nor a student, or a parent of a student. I am sure that you probably felt, as I would have in that situation, that a complaint should probably come from someone more directly involved.

As far as your motive, I don't see Schandenfreude at all. It sounds like this jerk got what he deserved. He was an embarrassment to all of us in higher education who teach, and I, for one, am glad he is no longer in that position.

[_Doctor Scratch]

I think you've misunderstood my central point, Dan. As I noted in my OP: if your reportage is accurate, then the guy surely deserved to be given his walking papers. My main point is this: Why turn up on the MDD board to announce this? What were you hoping to accomplish there? Further, if *this* kind of bigotry merits this degree of proactive commentary from you, why are you silent on things like Prof. Hamblin's k-word-laced rant? Or his using the classroom to trash Mike Quinn's reputation? (And this in light of the FARMS Review publishing articles label homosexuals "traitors" and "Korihors"). How is that "okay"?

That's my point, Mak--you're selectively singling out acts of bigotry, and then inviting your Mopologist pals to join you in tearing this guy to shreds. It's not as if you yourself actually did anything beyond firing off several blog and MB posts at this guy. It's not as if it would be difficult to find people to side with you on this one. Heck, you could have posted *here* and most of the folks would have sided with your position vis-a-vis this prof's conduct (as is farily obvious from the responses). But you chose to do this over at MDD; you've got a history of picking fights with this person; and as MCB and Jaybear have both pointed out, the LDS Church, LDS profs, teachers, and writers have a big, embarrassing, and long history and discrimination, "bigotry," etc., and so for you--a "rising" Mopologist--to single this incident out in the way that you did it... Well, that strikes me as problematic. It seems polemical and rhetorically cunning rather than like an act of goodwill and ethical charity.

[_Runtu]

I don't know. If I had a hand in getting rid of a bigoted professor, I might gloat a little.

[_maklelan]

I think you've misunderstood my central point, Dan. As I noted in my OP: if your reportage is accurate, then the guy surely deserved to be given his walking papers. My main point is this: Why turn up on the MDD board to announce this?

Because numerous people there have had direct interaction with PaulD in the past, and I knew that they would like to be updated on any significant developments in his campaigns against religions he doesn't like. Are you trying to say there's something inappropriate or suspicious about my having posted that information on that board?

What were you hoping to accomplish there?

Inform the public. That's why I put it on my blog, too. Why didn't you criticize my blog post? My blog has a much more general audience. Certainly a noted bigot like PaulD is of more interest to Latter-day Saints than to a generic biblical studies crowd. Why is it my post to an LDS discussion board that raises questions?

Further, if *this* kind of bigotry merits this degree of proactive commentary from you, why are you silent on things like Prof. Hamblin's k-word-laced rant?

I don't know what you're talking about.

Or his using the classroom to trash Mike Quinn's reputation? (And this in light of the FARMS Review publishing articles label homosexuals "traitors" and "Korihors"). How is that "okay"?

I don't think that would be ok, but I don't know what you're talking about, and so don't feel it's my place to start criticizing.

That's my point, Mak--you're selectively singling out acts of bigotry, and then inviting your Mopologist pals to join you in tearing this guy to shreds.

I'm not selectively doing anything, Scratch, so stop making assumptions about my motivations.

It's not as if you yourself actually did anything beyond firing off several blog and MB posts at this guy. It's not as if it would be difficult to find people to side with you on this one.

So I am only allowed to post when my conclusions would be unpopular?

Heck, you could have posted *here* and most of the folks would have sided with your position vis-à-vis this prof's conduct (as is farily obvious from the responses).

When was the last time I started a thread here? Am I required to post on all available boards now?

But you chose to do this over at MDD; you've got a history of picking fights with this person;

I have a history of picking fights with this person? That's demonstrably false. PaulD has been the instigator and the aggressor in all of our interactions, Scratch. You're just making stuff up to aid in your cultivation of a specific view of my activities. I don't appreciate that dishonesty.

and as MCB and Jaybear have both pointed out, the LDS Church, LDS profs, teachers, and writers have a big, embarrassing, and long history and discrimination, "bigotry," etc., and so for you--a "rising" Mopologist--to single this incident out in the way that you did it... Well, that strikes me as problematic.

I'm not an apologist, Scratch, and I quite disagree on Jaybear's rather silly notion that BYU is bigoted because it can expel people who violate the honor code.

It seems polemical and rhetorically cunning rather than like an act of goodwill and ethical charity.

So now my post is polemical and rhetorically cunning, and it's all because I didn't insert a comment about how I should be fair and point out that Mormons are equally as bigoted? Man, you just don't let the facts at all get in the way of your rhetoric, do you?

[_maklelan]

I'd like the opinion of those following this thread. Do you think Scratch's judgments of my motivations for posting that MDD thread are accurate? Feel free to elaborate on your answer. It seems to me that he feeds off of the reticence of people here to disagree with him. He seems to interpret it as tacit approval of his methods and his conclusions.

[_Runtu]

I'd like the opinion of those following this thread. Do you think Scratch's judgments of my motivations for posting that MDD thread are accurate? Feel free to elaborate on your answer. It seems to me that he feeds off of the reticence of people here to disagree with him. He seems to interpret it as tacit approval of his methods and his conclusions.

As I said, I probably would have gloated about it a little and not have been ashamed. But, no, I don't think there was anything wrong with posting what you did.

[_maklelan]

As I said, I probably would have gloated about it a little and not have been ashamed. But, no, I don't think there was anything wrong with posting what you did.

Thanks Runtu. Congrats on your book, by the way. Hopefully I'll get some time to look at it sometime this summer.

[_Runtu]

Thanks Runtu. Congrats on your book, by the way. Hopefully I'll get some time to look at it sometime this summer.

Thanks for the kind words. Got a call from one of my wife's mission companions last night telling us how much she and her husband (my former ZL and a current bishop) loved the book. They said they were a little startled at the blunt honesty at first, but she said, "I'm so glad you told the story the way it was. It wouldn't have been right to tone it down or sugar-coat it." I figure I must have done something right if people across the belief spectrum appreciate the book.

[_Carton]

It appears that you've either forgotten about that conversation or are intentionally misrepresenting events in an effort to have something to bitch about.

I guess Schryver isn't the only one who knows how to use these special words. I just love it when message boards expose the real person underneath the holy mopologist veneer.

[_Yoda]

It appears that you've either forgotten about that conversation or are intentionally misrepresenting events in an effort to have something to bitch about.

I guess Schryver isn't the only one who knows how to use these special words. I just love it when message boards expose the real person underneath the holy mopologist veneer.

There is nothing wrong with using the word, "bitch", in the fashion he used it.