Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, John Dehlin, & Lou

[Guest]

-

[_RayAgostini]

I respect you, Ray. And I don't doubt that Daniel Peterson is capable of doing many good things.

I just believe that he, along with Louis Midgley and others, sometimes act like abusive and occasionally deceptive thugs in their role as apologists. And I have seen no reason to believe otherwise. Their arguments don't stand on their own, so they attempt to shoot the messenger. And I (for one) am not going to take it lying down.

The feeling of respect is mutual, John (I think you know that), and I can't change the way you feel about apologists. I've had my own moments of deep anger, and at times spewed it all out on message boards. I've subsequently felt it wasn't the wisest thing to do. I only hope some sort of resolution can come to all this, eventually, and we can all learn something from it, on both "sides".

[_mormonstories]

The feeling of respect is mutual, John (I think you know that), and I can't change the way you feel about apologists. I've had my own moments of deep anger, and at times spewed it all out on message boards. I've subsequently felt it wasn't the wisest thing to do. I only hope some sort of resolution can come to all this, eventually, and we can all learn something from it, on both "sides".

I regret any time I speak with venom or anger. I'll keep working to minimize that. I appreciate the reminder.

[_MrStakhanovite]

Oh how I long for the days when Leonard Arrington was king, and people wrote love pieces, not hit pieces.

[_Yahoo Bot]

stemelbow - I am talking about my own motives and rationale. I believe very strongly that the ad hominem hit pieces that have historically made by FARMS/FAIR/Maxwell Institute have harmed the church and others. In this instance, I was informed of the "hit piece" as THEY called it...not me....by people favorable to the M.I. . THEY told me that this was another one of those types of pieces. THEY were concerned and were fighting its publication. FROM THE INSIDE.

The approach I took with DCP and the GA's was due to what I perceive to be DCP's history of generally ignoring of my emails to him. I was told that time was of the essence (that publication was imminent), and so I felt like the stakes were high.

If you were in my shoes (oh person who only writes behind a pseudonym) I believe that you might have done likewise. Maybe. I don't know. But I totally stand behind what I did...and I still think it's odd that you seem to be arguing with decisions made by church leaders. Why don't you explain to me why they scuttled the piece? I can tell you. They told me that they felt like ad hominem attacks hurt everyone involved. Got it?

I feel like you are inclined to excuse the abusers in this situation...so you are losing credibility with me. Sorry to speak so harshly, but that's how I feel. Take care. Sleep well.

Your problem is that today you went from being an honest broker to being an attack dog bent on change. And, as I have pointed out where I post with my own name on the other board, your brand and its value have just been flushed down the toilet with your hand on the lever. Now you're just another Sunstone. A good Mormon often won't read Sunstone just because of what it is.

I may be in the minority, but I don't give a flying fig that you went for protection from your General Authority pal. By all means, use it if you have it. You have as much a First Amendment right to do that as the evildoing apologists have to say bad things about you.

But to then put the good name of mormonstories in the public eye so that you can piss all over it, well, that's another matter isn't it. Was it Will who called it self-immolation? How true, how true. Like I said there, good luck in getting the likes of Richard Bushman or Terryl Givens to ever take you seriously again. All you're going to have to applaud you are the unhappy people who post here. You're going to be limited to digging up a counselor in a stake presidency who left 20 years ago. Oh wait, you did that one.

[_Yoda]

IF? C,mon, Liz. IF? Are you saying he was lying? That there was no article? That he was not a target? That there was no wrongdoing? If there was no wrongdoing, then there would not need to be a GA administering a slap (and yes, that was definitely a slap. We even heard it out here in the mission field). Hamblin admits there was an article; Dan backs him up. There is no IF.

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. I was not saying "if" in reference to the existence of the article.

Look, I have no idea what was said in the article since I didn't read it. All I have had is a conversation with Dan, who stands behind his thought that the article was not a hit piece, but rather simply a criticism of John's work. However, based on his respect for the GA who spoke with him, he pulled the article in spite of his thoughts on the matter. That is all I know. I like both John and Dan, so I am frankly trying to give both of them the benefit of the doubt. Shoot me!

[_CaliforniaKid]

All I have had is a conversation with Dan, who stands behind his thought that the article was not a hit piece, but rather simply a criticism of John's work.

I like Dan too, but I think past experience has shown pretty clearly that he has a very different concept of what constitutes a "hit piece" than most people.

[_mormonstories]

But to then put the good name of mormonstories in the public eye so that you can piss all over it, well, that's another matter isn't it. Was it Will who called it self-immolation? How true, how true. Like I said there, good luck in getting the likes of Richard Bushman or Terryl Givens to ever take you seriously again. All you're going to have to applaud you are the unhappy people who post here. You're going to be limited to digging up a counselor in a stake presidency who left 20 years ago. Oh wait, you did that one.

We shall see, Yahoo Bot. We shall see.

[_Yoda]

First of all, John, I want you to know that I applaud the work that you have done, and continue to do. During a very serious trial of my faith, you were instrumental in helping me find peace in my NOMness.

I have spoken with Dan briefly about this incident. Although I will not reveal specifics due to confidentiality issues, I can say that Dan, having read the article, did not view it as a "hit piece", but merely as a piece critical of your work.

However, when he was advised not to publish the article, he complied.

That really appears to be the end of this story. I really don't understand why it is being blown up into some huge federal case.

Since you, John, have not read the article, you are only guessing as to what was actually written.

And, the bottom line is, this article, which it appears, has never been published, and no one has read, will not be published.

What more do you hope to accomplish?

Liz - All I can say is the following:

1) MI/FAIR/FARMS has a history of nasty ad hominem attacks (see the Simon Southerton adultery accusations), so I think I have good cause to be worried/concerned/fearful

2) This came to me leaked from people within the Maxwell Institute who objected to the piece and found it to be distasteful, so I think this warrants additional cause for concern, no?

3) If you could have been at that UVU conference to hear Lou Midgley verbally assault me, threaten me, try to tie me to the death of an elder on my mission, and attempt to tie me to Grant Palmer in 1992....then you would have been concerned too. It was chilling.

4) My goal is to do whatever I can to get folks like the Maxwell Institute and FAIR to stop these tactics...to stop blaming the victim....or to face the public consequences for defaming and deceiving people. That is why I have raised these issues ultimately. I honestly, deeply, sincerely believe that these types of tactics hurt EVERYONE involved. They make the church look bad. They give apologetics a bad name. They punish those who feel like they needed to leave the church. And they mislead people who stay in the church. EVERYONE LOSES, in my opinion.

So I won't stop until these stupid ad hominem attacks stop. And until the apologetic deception stops. Those are my goals in this regard. I'm sorry to speak so plainly, but this is something near and dear to my heart. I'll end, again, with just a few of the HUNDREDS of responses we received in our survey on why people are leaving the church, for additional data points:

From respondent 2108: “The biggest factor was the professional apologists. I watched FARMS and FAIR apologists treat people horribly. For example, Professor Daniel C. Peterson used to lurk on the Recovery from Mormonism site so that he could snatch up quotes from the people posting there, in order to humiliate them. This, coupled with the way apologists tend to treat critics (i.e., with ad hominem attack), was the lynchpin.// I would encourage him/them to do something about the apologists. I think they are the worst aspect of the current Church.”

From respondent 1746: “On honesty, stop leaving it to the apologetics. They are terrible and are doing more damage than good to people’s testimonies with their poor answers. For example....Book of Abraham.”

From respondent 1865: “Please stop the ridiculous apologetics. Their circular reasoning and logical fallacies do more harm than good.”

From respondent 2122: “Please stop with the apologetic as well. Fair and the Maxwell Institute contributed to my leaving the church.”

From respondent 2844: “As I studied Church history and uncovered many controversial historical evidence, I would frequent LDS apologetic sites for answers (e.g. FARMS (now the Maxwell Institute), Shields, FAIR). I soon discovered those sites rarely dealt with the controversial evidences but rather often skirted or obfuscated the issue and frequently resorted to personal attacks on the individuals who were publishing historical information.”

John, thanks for your response.

As I said, I am not privy to all of the information surrounding this. I am only going by the information I have read, and in my brief correspondence with Dan.

Yes, I can see why you would be concerned. I certainly would not want to see you or your family maligned in any way. Based on the dealings you had with Lou at the UVU presentation, and the fact that friends of yours who had read the article and were members of MI were concerned, I can certainly understand your alarm.

Although I have never personally been mistreated by Dan in any way, I have been the victim of being called out as an apostate when I was a new member of the MAD (then FAIR) message board, and simply seeking answers. It is a horrible feeling when you are being earnest, and just trying to do what you have always been taught (i.e. "Faith without works is dead"....You feel like you are being emotionally flogged simply for trying to do "works" to find answers.)

Since Dan has always been kind to me, and has, as you have, been very helpful in answering questions for me, I am simply trying to see both sides here.

I honestly hope that things continue to go well for you, and for your Mormonstories project.

That is really all I have left to say on this topic.

[_mormonstories]

Your problem is that today you went from being an honest broker to being an attack dog bent on change. And, as I have pointed out where I post with my own name on the other board, your brand and its value have just been flushed down the toilet with your hand on the lever. Now you're just another Sunstone. A good Mormon often won't read Sunstone just because of what it is.

I may be in the minority, but I don't give a flying fig that you went for protection from your General Authority pal. By all means, use it if you have it. You have as much a First Amendment right to do that as the evildoing apologists have to say bad things about you.

But to then put the good name of mormonstories in the public eye so that you can piss all over it, well, that's another matter isn't it. Was it Will who called it self-immolation? How true, how true. Like I said there, good luck in getting the likes of Richard Bushman or Terryl Givens to ever take you seriously again. All you're going to have to applaud you are the unhappy people who post here. You're going to be limited to digging up a counselor in a stake presidency who left 20 years ago. Oh wait, you did that one.

P.S. Forgive me if it's a tad bit hard to take seriously your claim of concern for Mormon Stories' good name. Hard to take you seriously.