So its happening: The Mormon moment is now?

[_Darth J]

In this clip, we see Ray reacting to someone implying that the LDS Church might not be true:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TT9pmIKH ... creen&NR=1

[_Doctor Scratch]

I've noticed that Ray has been on a rather continuous decline. Now he is stooping to tactics that, not very long ago, he would have sharply condemned. Whereas a couple of months ago he would have harped repeatedly on the value of a "balanced" view of Mormonism, here he is attempting to use intimidation tactics as a means of shutting people up.

[_LDSToronto]

[MODERATOR NOTE: Ray, did Mercury post a link that video here at an earlier date?]

Whoever doesn't know who Mercury is by now - is dense. His RL identity was revealed here years ago, when he appeared on Mormon Expression.

Come on, Shades, stop your witch-hunting.

According to a google search of mormondiscussions.com, Mercury has never posted his in real life identity on this discussion board.

H.

[_just me]

According to a google search of mormondiscussions.com, Mercury has never posted his in real life identity on this discussion board.

H.

I humbly bow to the google ninja master.

[_Dr. Shades]

You can't protect what is public knowledge.

So even if I "worked out", on my own, who "Mercury" is, I should be punished for that? I didn't put the information on the Internet, nor give very copious clues. It's dunce mathematics, really.

That's fine in theory, but that's not what the rules are here. Universal Rule #7 states:

Do not reveal personal or "in real life" information about any poster on this site that he or she has not explicitly revealed here. This includes avoiding mention of his/her actual first or last name, even if he or she has made it available on some other website.

In the future, please don't **EVER** link a registered user's real name to his or her screen name, unless that registered user has done so him- or herself. Thanks in advance.

[_CYenom]

We are currently enduring yet another instance where the Mormons are in the spotlight. Remember the Smoot hearings? They did not end well when it came to the court of public opinion.

This sickens me. The Smoot Hearings in 1904 and now the Romney presidential campaign in 2012. Why can't the Mormons just leave the public alone? Twice in ~100 years? That's outrageous. I've not seen any other religious group in the media spotlight in at least 257 years. Truly, this is the church of Satan.

On the other hand a faceless corporation has transferred large wealth into the next generation of second annointed Mormon families to fiscally hold the dependent corporations aloft. Money laundering is not easy when you are tasked with converting a mall into new money while sustaining the old, so I am predicting that the Mormon moment will focus on money.

Faceless indeed! The Mormons sit in their churches and homes, hiding from the public light. Reed Smoot and Mitt Romney might as well be hermits! Any respectable religion would come out in the open: they'd send missionaries; they'd hold biannual televised conferences. Not the Mormons.

Life for me has been affected by this corporation. I want to see the LDS church bankrupt and held in receivership. I want to see the various chairs on company boards stripped of Property Reserve Inc lackeys from company after company due to the hemorrhage of stock and money needed to buoy up a collapsing worldview. No more stock majority shares, no more seats. Just a bunch of retreating families fighting over what stock will go to whom when finally Intellectual Reserve Inc becomes insolvent.

I say damn capitalism! Nothing was ever accomplished by making and spending currency!


All sarcasm aside: I don't understand your anger, but I do validate it. It's okay to be angry.

[_Mercury]

I've noticed that Ray has been on a rather continuous decline. Now he is stooping to tactics that, not very long ago, he would have sharply condemned. Whereas a couple of months ago he would have harped repeatedly on the value of a "balanced" view of Mormonism, here he is attempting to use intimidation tactics as a means of shutting people up.

Maybe he is out of smack addicted junkies and he is going through withdrawals. Never underestimate the destructive nature of an unstable individual.

[_moksha]

Mercury's OP was very inflammatory. It got Ray's dander up.

Private ownership runs too deep in this country and no one is going to take any assets away from the Church. The Church's business entanglements may be alarming to some, but not to those with burning bosoms.

[_RayAgostini]

That's fine in theory, but that's not what the rules are here. Universal Rule #7 states:

Do not reveal personal or "in real life" information about any poster on this site that he or she has not explicitly revealed here. This includes avoiding mention of his/her actual first or last name, even if he or she has made it available on some other website.

In the future, please don't **EVER** link a registered user's real name to his or her screen name, unless that registered user has done so him- or herself. Thanks in advance.

Does this pass the test?

viewtopic.php?p=282744#p282744

[_harmony]

All sarcasm aside: I don't understand your anger, but I do validate it. It's okay to be angry.

Welcome, CYenom.

Okay to be angry about what? The Brethren not following the mandate to build the Kingdom of God? Ignoring the 4 fold mission of the church in their haste to make money? Not publishing an annual report of donations and what they were used for? And the newest: ignoring the donor's request for how the money is spent?

Anger? Surely not.