DCP Launches an Attack on Kishkumen

[_America Jane]

Angels above us are silent notes taking...

especially as they read blogs...

[_RayAgostini]

The exception that I last recall was when you found that issue of the FROB in which he quoted a deplorably bad scholar who tried to argue the causal relationship between homosexuality and apostasy.

If it's the same essay I'm thinking of, it's not focused on homosexuality. In his Mormon Stories interview, DCP expressed the opinion that the issue of homosexuality was one of the more challenging and complex ones facing Mormons today. He may well have had different, or "simpler" views 22 or so years ago. It's not necessary for authors to go back and re-write everything they've previously written. It's more incumbent upon us to be up to date with their most recent views. People do change their opinions, and as far as I'm aware, that's also how "good science" should work. Many of us change our views in months, weeks, and sometimes even days. I'm not saying that DCP has had some sort of radical change, but to me, he has acknowledged that this subject is anything but simple.

[_Doctor Scratch]

The exception that I last recall was when you found that issue of the FROB in which he quoted a deplorably bad scholar who tried to argue the causal relationship between homosexuality and apostasy.

If it's the same essay I'm thinking of, it's not focused on homosexuality. In his Mormon Stories interview, DCP expressed the opinion that the issue of homosexuality was one of the more challenging and complex ones facing Mormons today. He may well have had different, or "simpler" views 22 or so years ago. It's not necessary for authors to go back and re-write everything they've previously written. It's more incumbent upon us to be up to date with their most recent views. People do change their opinions, and as far as I'm aware, that's also how "good science" should work. Many of us change our views in months, weeks, and sometimes even days. I'm not saying that DCP has had some sort of radical change, but to me, he has acknowledged that this subject is anything but simple.

The only thing that's "changed" is that he has realized that he has to be more clever in terms of concealing his actual feelings and prejudices. What he did to Mike Quinn on this topic (circa 5 years ago or thereabouts--and Quinn was probably the Signature Books author he alluded to in that FARMS article, by the way), coupled with his cash donation to the Prop 8 campaign, ought to tell you pretty much everything you need to know about his opinion on homosexuality.

[_RayAgostini]

coupled with his cash donation to the Prop 8 campaign, ought to tell you pretty much everything you need to know about his opinion on homosexuality.

I'd be very surprised if he supported homosexuality. I'd be shocked to hear one of my many Lebanese Muslim friends support it. Do you expect him to condemn the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and wave a freedom flag at a Gay Pride march?

I don't condemn Paul O for who he is, and I'm glad he's found his happiness in life. Likewise, I accord "religious people" the right to believe as they see fit, and even to denounce what they think is harmful to society in the long term.

[_zeezrom]

by the way Kish, I want to emphasize that I'm not happy to see anyone attacking you but rather interested in knowing DCP is maintaining a blog that will provide lots of fodder for more Dr. Scratch posts.

Wow, Zeez... Are you really, actually requesting that I write more posts about DCP?

Hmmm. Now that you repeat it, I'm not so sure. I still want to eat at Los Hermanos with DCP so I need to take care. Oh, darn it! There must be something you can critique without hurting anyone's feelings; for I love the way you write.

Anyone: proper use of the semicolon? I've always been afraid of that little winker but I'm trying to be strong. It's you and me, semicolon! Runtu?

[_Kishkumen]

If it's the same essay I'm thinking of, it's not focused on homosexuality. In his Mormon Stories interview, DCP expressed the opinion that the issue of homosexuality was one of the more challenging and complex ones facing Mormons today. He may well have had different, or "simpler" views 22 or so years ago. It's not necessary for authors to go back and re-write everything they've previously written. It's more incumbent upon us to be up to date with their most recent views. People do change their opinions, and as far as I'm aware, that's also how "good science" should work. Many of us change our views in months, weeks, and sometimes even days. I'm not saying that DCP has had some sort of radical change, but to me, he has acknowledged that this subject is anything but simple.

You know, Ray, that's just great. I'm glad to find he could go on Dehlin's podcast and say the gay issue is complicated. That certainly is true. But in a history of exchanges between two people there is a certain give and take that exists to allow room for comment. I am not calling Daniel a bigot. I am saying that he is stingy in that give and take. A cool guy will say, "you know, I may have been wrong about that," and then others around him say, "no problem, you're just human like the rest of us." I've opened up to Daniel and there is very little reciprocity in that. So I comment that he might not want to leave that essay up that was written by a guy who later turned out to be a virulent antisemite. No judgment. It just doesn't look good. Anyone can see that. And now what do I see? Daniel mining my statements for a little venting that he can take out of context, and stick on a blog where I can't respond. I would say that's pretty petty. I wasn't slamming the LDS Church. I wasn't talking about him personally. I am not a public figure talking about Mormonism. I guess I don't get it.

[_Shulem]

I don't condemn Paul O for who he is, and I'm glad he's found his happiness in life. Likewise, I accord "religious people" the right to believe as they see fit, and even to denounce what they think is harmful to society in the long term.

I love you, Ray. Thanks.

I'm headed out to the club across the street to do a little drinking and check out the hot guys. I guess that means I can't post for 24 hours because Shades doesn't let me post and drink at the same time. It's a rule but I break it all the time when he doesn't notice it.

Have a great night!

Love you too, Kishy!

Paul O

[_RayAgostini]

You know, Ray, that's just great. I'm glad to find he could go on Dehlin's podcast and say the gay issue is complicated. That certainly is true. But in a history of exchanges between two people there is a certain give and take that exists to allow room for comment. I am not calling Daniel a bigot. I am saying that he is stingy in that give and take. A cool guy will say, "you know, I may have been wrong about that," and then others around him say, "no problem, you're just human like the rest of us." I've opened up to Daniel and there is very little reciprocity in that. So I comment that he might not want to leave that essay up that was written by a guy who later turned out to be a virulent antisemite. No judgment. It just doesn't look good. Anyone can see that. And now what do I see? Daniel mining my statements for a little venting that he can take out of context, and stick on a blog where I can't respond. I would say that's pretty petty. I wasn't slamming the LDS Church. I wasn't talking about him personally. I am not a public figure talking about Mormonism. I guess I don't get it.

I guess this reaffirms to me that message boards aren't a very good medium for "assessing people". I've been "sucked" into them as much as you have, and have posted some ridiculous things here, which I now regret. I saw DCP's human side when he paid a visit to me, in 2006, in my humble abode in an obscure suburb south of Sydney. I'm not suggesting he did this purely out of "guileless charity". Obviously, he was motivated by his Mormon beliefs, and apparently a belief that I could be "reclaimed", which he sincerely believed was the best thing on earth he could do for me, being a 100-percenter true-blue believing Mormon. He acted on motives which were sacred and important to him, which he felt would also be to my benefit. I've often mused on the thought that while my local ward went about their activities and worship, I had entertained in my cheap bach-flat, unknown to them, perhaps the most famous (some would say, "infamous") and influential "Mormon apologist" alive today. I still don't understand this, and why DCP felt that I was even worth a visit, but the gesture touched me deeply at the time, and yet I later betrayed him on this very board, which is something that still stings my conscience to this day. Why? Because I know the "real DCP", and he's very much as you'll see in his Mormon Stories interview with Dan Wotherspoon. Why was he willing to answer so many personal questions posed to him by Dan W.? Because he wasn't in "enemy territory" with Dan W. Though I have a great admiration for John Dehlin, I don't believe he could have handled this interview as well as Dan W. did.

I rejoined the Church in 1995 because of Daniel Peterson, and his riveting and absorbing editorials in the FRB, which, at the time, "set me on spiritual fire". Upon further examination, I decided that I still couldn't be a "true believer", and the rest is pretty much downhill, from our confrontations on ZLMB and onwards and upwards to my banning from MDDB. One thing I have learned in all of this is that, though it be a mystery to me, he totally believes in Mormonism, and while I can't say the same, I respect and admire his conviction, and I'm totally opposed to the way he has literally been persecuted and victimised, and run off this board. No matter what he says, it will be misconstrued, and he's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't. The "wolves" here are waiting with salivated tongues to devour him, and make him an "offender for a word". Their "addiction" is to hate Dan Peterson, and they can't let go of it. Like schools of piranha, they wait to devour the prey without mercy. I fear that you may have, by participating here, "caught" some of that "spirit", led by Dr. Scratch.

I think you are capable of much better, higher and more balanced thoughts.

[_Kishkumen]

I think you are capable of much better, higher and more balanced thoughts.

Thanks, Ray. I do, however, find it confusing that you use this opportunity of Daniel quoting me on his blog mockingly to call on me to behave better. What am I doing to prompt you to admonish me? Why is Daniel being depicted as the victim here? If he behaves aggressively, is it the time to talk about how persecuted he is?

The guy writes to admonish me to edit my posts on the rare ocasion at I talk about him here, and I comply with his requests. Now he is quoting me for sport on his blog. It's just bizarre, frankly.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Ray,

You've admitted at times that you've felt manipulated by DCP.