Lance Starr Defends Ad Hominem Attacks

[_Doctor Scratch]

stemelbow,

How do you explain/justify the following remarks?:

you too seem to struggle with acting polite and being civil in adult society. I suppose you can

in your head and amongst your buds, think you can behave like the ass that you are

you are doing nothing much more than deceiving yourself.

Does the Good Reverend's criticism suddenly become valid in your mind if, like you, he says that he's doing it in the hope that the Mopologists will improve? As for me, I'm asking you this because I'm genuinely concerned about you. I worry that you are lying and trolling and that this is having a profoundly deleterious effect on your spiritual well-being. We all need a kick in the seat of the pants from time to time, and so I just hope you'll take this in stride!

(Should i have deliberately put in typos too so that what i said is somehow more sinsere?)

[_stemelbow]

Does the Good Reverend's criticism suddenly become valid in your mind if, like you, he says that he's doing it in the hope that the Mopologists will improve?

I don't get why you think I think his criticism is invalid at all. It's hypocritical. That's all. he knows it.

As for me, I'm asking you this because I'm genuinely concerned about you. I worry that you are lying and trolling and that this is having a profoundly deleterious effect on your spiritual well-being. We all need a kick in the seat of the pants from time to time, and so I just hope you'll take this in stride!

(Should i have deliberately put in typos too so that what i said is somehow more sinsere?)

At least you don't hide your disdain, Scratch. Have fun in your games.

[_Doctor Scratch]

I don't get why you think I think his criticism is invalid at all. It's hypocritical. That's all. he knows it.

Why are you avoiding my question, stemelbow? I asked you how/why you feel justified in saying the items I quoted in my last post. Is there some reason--some "caring" reason--why you skipped over that stuff?

At least you don't hide your disdain, Scratch. Have fun in your games.

Why do you say that? Is that what you do? And are you therefore assuming that, since this is what *you* do, that others are doing it, too?

[_Ludd]

Mr. Elbow:

Do you like carrying on a conversation with a man and his sockpuppet? Or is that a sockpuppet and his man? It's hard to tell when you're dealing with Doctor Scratchkumen.

[_Kishkumen]

I chuckle at your words because you too struggle to act polite and civil in adult society as seen right here on these pages.

And what do you do, stem? I don't find your incessant pestering to be polite or civil. Indeed, I don't think you are struggling to be polite at all. You simply aren't polite. It is highly questionable whether this should be considered civil on your part. I say no.

That you wish to take another to task for that is your choice. It doesn't stop me from pointing out your effort to do so sounds hypocritical, and blatantly so. I'm not trying to be mean to you. It just so happens, you need a bit of a kick in the caboose, i think. I've tried to clarify this with you time and again and yet you still get all worked up over it. One of these days, I think it'll sink in though--hopefully sooner rather than later.

No, stem. I am not taking anyone to task for doing something I have done. I have not attacked people in print publication with the intent of marginalizing them in the eyes of others in that community, or even getting them kicked out. No equivalency. No hypocrisy.

The simple fact is that you are wrong, and you have no argument to make.

NOw you're just plain putting words in my mouth. If on occasion some LDS guy goes uncivil, then so be it. He should not. And, if you on occasion get impolite and uncivil, then so be it. You should not. But to go after LDS folks for that which you do is hypocritical. The bias is heavy in your heart. I hope better for you and for all involved in Mormon Discussions.

This is not just about being uncivil, stem. It is about questioning someone's faithfulness and marginalizing them from their faith community.

Better luck next time.

[_Kishkumen]

Mr. Elbow:

Do you like carrying on a conversation with a man and his sockpuppet? Or is that a sockpuppet and his man? It's hard to tell when you're dealing with Doctor Scratchkumen.

Nothing like the ease of dealing with Will Schryver and all of his numerous sock puppet supporters and fake identities.

[_stemelbow]

This is not just about being uncivil, stem. It is about questioning someone's faithfulness and marginalizing them from their faith community.

Better luck next time.

You shouldn't have made it about being uncivil then and thus caused me to chuckle. You have to admit, coming from you, that would cause anyone to chuckle—well anyone who’s not drinking the MDB kool-aid.

Here’s what you said, for a reminder, “I really don't understand what is so hard to understand about the usefulness, nay, importance, of being polite and acting civil in adult society. It is so basic a principle, inculcated in all faiths and even in public schooling, that one would think it should go without saying. How these gentlemen can sit around pontificating about the usefulness and necessity of being an asshole to others shows exactly how bankrupt their thinking is.”

See? You complained that they don’t get the importance of being polite and civil. Now, you have a defense that doesn’t quite match up, somehow exonerating you of your uncivil and impolite behavior. Whateves. I got a chuckle and rightly pointed out the hypocrisy. Now you’re just trying to nuance your critique of them in hopes to exonerate yourself in the eyes of your biased MDB buddies.

Have fun. I gave it another try with you. You can’t say I haven’t tried. I wish you the best.

[_Doctor Scratch]

So, stem:

Are you going to address my questions, or not? You know, in the interests of civility? Since you so clearly have a vested interest in teaching people how to be civil?

[_stemelbow]

So, stem:

Are you going to address my questions, or not? You know, in the interests of civility? Since you so clearly have a vested interest in teaching people how to be civil?

You have it wrong. Kishkumen is the guy from his mighty perch made the issue about civility. It just made me chuckle is all. I hope better for him.

In the context of our past conversations, are you saying my comments are uncivil?

[_Kishkumen]

You have it wrong. Kishkumen is the guy from his mighty perch made the issue about civility. It just made me chuckle is all. I hope better for him.

Well, then we clearly have something in common, because I hope for better from you.

First of all, I would like you to starting placing things in their proper context. In this case, the proper context was a discussion the apologists were having concerning the way they have engaged others in their publications. So, it seems to me that you have failed to understand that my comments were made in that context, whereas you have sought to apply them wherever you like to score your cheap shot.

My second hope for better from you is that you engage others honestly, rather than trolling us. You see, I have a hard time believing that your entire career here consists of one silly mistake after another, such as the one I have pointed out in this very post. You consistently get things wrong in ways that serve to muddy the waters, and I contend that this is entirely deliberate on your part.

So, we do have something in common, in that we both claim to hope for better from the other. The difference is that I am probably sincere, because I am tired of your trolling, whereas your crusade is the trolling I wish would end.