M&G Lays Some Serious Smack Down on Why Me

[_stemelbow]

I think that she is safe on this board. When a poster begins to write about the cosmos and being insignificant, all is well here on this board. Nothing wrong in that. I only find it amazing that she can lecture the apologists to have higher standards and not take the people who are critics to task when they do not show mercy and grace to the defenders.

That is what got me going.

Perhaps because she sees the defenders more on her side and she wants that cleared up first. Oh wait...she doesn't see sides. I don't know.

[_Kishkumen]

M&G is a big girl. I'll wait for her to tell me if I have misunderstood her.

I never said she wasn't. It is a free board, and I am free to comment on what I see.

She gives her heartfelt declaration of belief. I give mine, which is not far from hers but differs somewhat.

Call that 'contradicting' if you like. In a context like this, I'd call it 'sharing'.

I think this is one of those cases where a bystander may see less of the game.

OK. I suppose it is possible and I have no reason not to take your word for it.

[_RockSlider]

I think that she is safe on this board. When a poster begins to write about the cosmos and being insignificant, all is well here on this board.

Gee and DCP is not even the center of that cosmos!

It always amazes me when you guys feed on your own.

[_consiglieri]

I only find it amazing that she can lecture the apologists to have higher standards and not take the people who are critics to task when they do not show mercy and grace to the defenders.

Have you ever read the New Testament, Why Me?

On what legitimate basis could a Mormon "take the people who are critics to task" for not acting the way the Mormon thinks they should?

To try to make this clear, I will ask the opposite:

On what legitimate basis could a Mormon take a Mormon to task for not acting the way a Mormon should?

This is an important point, Why Me.

If you can answer these two questions, you will understand the mystery and begin your ascent to the Pleroma.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_RockSlider]

Ray,
It seems MD can ebb and flow. I agree it would be nice to see it ebb some more (or is that flow). Seems everyone, including you can get stuck in a rut of negativity over one thing or another.

Seems to me Kish has been trying very hard to be the old softy we all know lurks in side, of late in all threads.

Who knows, maybe m&g could be a catalyst for all of us, inviting a bit more tolerance and respect.

If the board continues to be a place of negative energy, it's our own fault.

[_Buffalo]

Also, she doesn't seem to walk the walk.

You mean because she won't attack the people you want her to attack?

This is rich coming from an inactive creep who ejaculates on women through light cotton and has deep connections in the porn industry.

[_why me]

Perhaps because she sees the defenders more on her side and she wants that cleared up first. Oh wait...she doesn't see sides. I don't know.

I don't think so. I have seen the 'higher standard' routine quite often these days. Apologists and defenders are not allowed to challenge or debate critics. And if they do so, they must wear cotton candy gloves. But the critics can use any means necessary to mock or bash the defenders and the LDS church. And get no response from poster like Mercyngrace. I think that there is more to her than meets the eye.

I only call for her to treat critics and defenders to the same standard.

[_why me]

You mean because she won't attack the people you want her to attack?

This is rich coming from an inactive creep who ejaculates on women through light cotton and has deep connections in the porn industry.

Mercyngrace can you please tell buffalo about mercy and grace toward posters? Now you can see what bashing is.

[_mercyngrace]

Mercyngrace can you please tell buffalo about mercy and grace toward posters? Now you can see what bashing is.

Why Me,

I think people can see clearly what bashing is in the now locked thread on MDDB.

You set a standard for another apologist (the responsibility to defend Dan Peterson), I posted my personal standard in the form of a quote you didn't recognize, then you accused me of doing exactly what you did - setting standards for other apologists.

In the midst of which, you made public declarations about monitoring my online behavior.

Buffalo,

Please play nice. Why Me's clothing choices and sexual proclivities are not the subject of this thread, his double standard is.

Thanks,
MnG

[_Chap]

Hello M&G:

Are you OK with my response above? I hope it did not seem unfriendly or aggressive?