Mormon Dialouge - Moderation Undefined

[_Themis]

The next time you see God will be the first time.

LOL Yup

I laugh at tobin. Here is a guy who keeps telling people after he can't deal with the evidence to go seek god and they will see God. This incorrectly assumes we haven't. Whats worse is he never has seen God after seeking him. His expereince he claims came while being an evil apostate. Now he is suggesting he wont see God again until the second coming or judgement day. Entertaining

[_Analytics]

I disagreed with the assumption that Same Sex marriage would be added to the LDS Theology any more than any other non-standard sexual ideology would.

What got you banned from the thread was flagarantly breaking rule #1: Be respectful. "lostinmd" had said,

I believe it is only a matter of a decade or so before those leading GLBT lifestyles will be given full access to Church rights. I am excited at the idea.

To this, you replied:

Yes, then we can allow even more non-standard sexual lifestyles access just because someone wants it. Pedophilia, Incest... I mean, they can't CONTROL it, so the Church should just stop making it a sin!

Alcoholism too. That's just not fair. They can't CONTROL their alchoholism, so the Word of Wisdom makes them feel bad and unloved. Time to ditch it..

JMS

Your post was disrespectful, irrelevant, immature, unsophisticated, and a general embarrassment to your own cause. The moderators are on a “be respectful” kick right now, but more than that, they are on a “don’t embarrass the church” kick. That’s the real reason you got banned.

[_Buffalo]

How about LSD? Have you tried that?

I've had enough LDS to last two-lifetimes.

I think we can all understand now exactly where your vision came from. Thanks!

[_Buffalo]

The moderation there is defined about as well as Church doctrine.

I dunno, Church doctrine is defined rather well. It's just that, like this board, some of them have pet theories that are in conflict with doctrine and so they must by definition reject the Church's systematic doctrine in order to survive.

Church doctrine is now defined as what the Holy Spirit ratifies in the hearts of the Saints. Get with the program or be left behind.

[_MsJack]

It always surprises me when people come over here to complain about getting banned for doing such-and-such at MDDB.

Some of us were banned when we weren't even posting there. If the forum will kick people out when they aren't even posting there (and therefore, not breaking any of the rules in any form whatsoever), what makes you think they won't ban you for capricious reasons while you're posting there?

Post there at your own risk.

[_Buffalo]

That seems unfair, seeing as how Wade basically called all gay people pedophiles.

That actual figure, If I recall correctly, is that 30-35% of pedo crimes are homosexual.

Actually, 100% of all pedo crimes are pedo. Homosexuals are not attracted to children, any more than heterosexuals are.

[_Buffalo]

I disagreed with the assumption that Same Sex marriage would be added to the LDS Theology any more than any other non-standard sexual ideology would.

What got you banned from the thread was flagarantly breaking rule #1: Be respectful. "lostinmd" had said,

I believe it is only a matter of a decade or so before those leading GLBT lifestyles will be given full access to Church rights. I am excited at the idea.

To this, you replied:

Yes, then we can allow even more non-standard sexual lifestyles access just because someone wants it. Pedophilia, Incest... I mean, they can't CONTROL it, so the Church should just stop making it a sin!

Alcoholism too. That's just not fair. They can't CONTROL their alchoholism, so the Word of Wisdom makes them feel bad and unloved. Time to ditch it..

JMS

Your post was disrespectful, irrelevant, immature, unsophisticated, and a general embarrassment to your own cause. The moderators are on a “be respectful” kick right now, but more than that, they are on a “don’t embarrass the church” kick. That’s the real reason you got banned.

I didn't see that. Definitely worth a ban. But Wade should have been doubly banned for directly comparing the two.

[_Analytics]

The rest of the conversation sheds more light on the real reason jskains got booted.

"David T" replied to him saying,

Equating sexual assault of children with homosexuality = FAIL

Wade replied with that,

Comparing sexually defiling of children with sexually defying of homosexuals = Success

To which the moderators replied with,

Wade is out of the thread.

LeSellers replied with,

There's a difference between saying that all homosexuals are pedophiles and saying that the sin of homosexuality (the action of homosex) and the sin of pedophilia are both reprehensible.

It is, however, interesting that homosexual pedophiles are a disproportionately large proportion of all pedophiles....

To which the moderators replied with,

Lehi has left the thread.
The moderator Minos then said:

Any further discussion of criminal acts is off-topic and will result in thread banning or suspension. If BYU holds a panel with respectful dialogue we expect the same here.

Moderators are conferring about potential board bannings. It should be clear by now that we are in agreement that this board will not allow itself to be used to spread bigotry of any kind. That includes demeaning, degrading or insulting comments about any group of people. If anyone wants to pick nits about that they are invited to leave before they are escorted out.

Selek then said,

The available evidence indicates that this BYU panel was set up to foster understanding and exposure to new ideas- not to foster perversity or "normalize" deviancy.

As such, I have no problem with the panel or the discussion.

When, however, posters on this board move beyond that prurpose and attempt to advance their pet projects of either homosexual activism or simply, bigoted, anti-Mormonism, they have left behind the purpose and principle of the panel.

Likewise, if the moderators become enablers and protectors of such efforts, they have abdicated their responsibiliies as moderators and become partisans.

I am all for a reasonable, self-disciplined, cordial discussion.

I am NOT for a one-sided hatefest where political correctness and anti-Mormon bigotry are the rule of the day.

To which the moderators told him,
Take a break.

I for one applaud the MADD moderators for taking this stand for maturity and decency.

[_jskains]

That's a load Analytics. You've just always had a grudge against me for whatever reason, and mostly because I called you creepy recently. And I still find you creepy.

As for my comments, what was exactly wrong with it? I challenged the premise that homosexuality must be accepted by the Church because they can't control their attraction. Instead of acting like a 2 year old, why not actually address that? Oh you can't. It's more fun to demonize me and go kissing Nemesis's butt.

JMS

[_Buffalo]

I for one applaud the MADD moderators for taking this stand for maturity and decency.

I can't argue there. It's about time they started standing up to anti-gay bigotry. If someone were to compare Mormons to pedophiles or say Mormons are perverts, they'd get the entire mob down on them.