Scott Gordon speaks out about events involving Mormonthink

[_zeezrom]

...the larger problem.

This.

I don't believe Scott is a liar.

[_Cylon]

My advice about faith, which I give to everyone, would be to make your choice and move on. Maybe that would allow for some healing.

So, when people who have made their choice discuss difficult issues it's a failure to "move on" and impedes "healing." Okay, got it. What the hell are you doing with FAIR, then, Mr. Gordon?

[_RayAgostini]

Notice the Scott "the liar" Gordon, does not provide one bit of evidence that Twede was hoping to lead people out of the Church.

By Scott "the liar" Gordon standards I am an apostate and so is one of the clerks in my ward. We have talked about corporate America making Home Teaching more about numbers, we talked about Joseph Smother polygamy and him shooting three people, and we talked about people can not ask questions in Church or ask other members with some Gawddammed asshole like Gordon coming along with his witch hunt.

Gordon is a documented speaker of falsehood and has no credibility.

Can you point to any section on Mormon Think that tries to balance this:

Personal Stories & LDS Heretics

With faith-promoting stories? As one example, take the return of Don Bradley.

Where on Mormon Think can I find something like this?

[_Sethbag]

I'm not sure I can agree that there was any reason Brother Gordon should have reached out to and spoken with Brother Twede.

Gordon is involved with FAIR, for God's sake. He knows these issues. He knows how piss-poor the answers are that FAIR and the other mopologists have to offer. He knows that Brother Twede has issues with church beliefs that FAIR and the church cannot ever effectively counter, because there is no really effective counter argument for them. So what exactly would "reaching out" to Brother Twede accomplish?

For that matter, what would really be accomplished by Scott Gordon "reaching out" to almost any of us?

From the church's point of view, if Twede was talking about this kind of problematic LDS history with others in his ward, then he was definitely "guilty" of something that warrants throwing him out of the church. They are right to do this, from their point of view. And I can't argue with that, really.

You guys may argue with me about whether exing Twede is the "right" thing to do, but the bottom line is, the whole raison d'être of the church is to keep existing, not to tell the truth. If telling the truth threatens the church's continued existence, then one who tells the truth is almost by definition a threat.

[_3sheets2thewind]

Can you point to any section on Mormon Think that tries to balance this:

Personal Stories & LDS Heretics

With faith-promoting stories? As one example, take the return of Don Bradley.

Where on Mormon Think can I find something like this?

Ray, Gordon admits only that Twede was talking to other people. I talked with someone last Sunday about issues, according to Gordon I need to be reported for simply talking about issues.

[_quaker]

I just read a few threads on this whole thing and from Twede's quotes alone, without hardly any context, it seems quite obvious that his intentions while at church are not innocent and without calculation. His simple 'talking' to others to subtly undermine a person's faith is a tactic commonly discussed even on this board so it should come as no surprise that people recognize the motive.


I do not see why it is a surprise to anyone that word got around regarding this man flaunting his seemingly devious plan. Gordon and many others are interested in what is online about Mormonism. Is that a surprise? Most of you have no current affiliation with the church and yet it is obvious that you devote hours a day discussing or bashing it online. Why is it a surprise that Gordon, or anyone else, reads Twede's blog?

I'm on no committees and presently I have no calling at any of the branches I attend. But even I find myself wasting time reading these forums and following links that lead me to places like MormonThink and random LDS related blogs.

It seems like many of you are in denial about how connected everyone is through the internet. You run calling Gordon a snitch and a hundred other things for 'ratting' out Twede while simultaneously mocking the most obscure LDS or Utah related blogs, videos, or comments from all around the internet. Good luck hunting out all the 'snitches'. You might as well get the membership list from SLC and go round them all up. You could literally find thousands of plausible pathways to connect Twede's blog to his Stake President. And this is only one small incident of snitching. Maybe you could make a business out of hunting LDS snitches that dare mention apostate activities to authorities. You could do paid work sniffing for the Obama campaign like Helen Radkey sniffs around for Jewish sounding names.

[_Drifting]

It seems to me Scott Gordon had a number of choices once he learned of David's actions which he considered 'anti':

1. Do nothing.
2. Speak with David.
3. Pass the matter to the proper Church authorities.
4. Draw the attention of his friends to David's actions and MormonThink.

It seems to me that the proper, professional, considered, appropriate course of action (Scott clearly felt strongly enough that action was needed) would be to first attempt contact and dialogue with David himself. Then, if that left the matter still uncomfortable enough for Scott, he should have contacted the appropriate Church authorities (and I'm not sure who that would have been but Scott would be in a position to know).

Now assuming Scott is telling the truth about what he did or didn't do - Scott has exacerbated the issue by 'gossiping' about it on e mail with his pals.
It was Scotts uncorrelated, ill considered, approach to the problem that gave the media fuel to investigate further.

If David was indeed seeking to manipulate a media storm, Scott certainly played the part David wanted him too.

[_quaker]

I just read Twede's entire blog.

He literally almost pinpoints his location and makes it clear who he is to anyone who was in that ward or who was visiting the ward. It is hard to tell what is fictionalized but his blog entry hardly gives the impression of a low-key day at church.

Any interested church member in this dude's stake could track this to him. The fact that he portrays himself as a sort of sexual icon seeking sex would probably be reason enough for any Florida church member to figure out what ward he attended that Sunday.

All that said, if you want to hate on Scott Gordon why bother trying to conjure all the possible scenarios? From your last post it's obvious that whether he did anything or not he is still to blame for not acting appropriately in your eyes. So just let the bile roll forward. Scratch is different because he has a long history of accompanying all his smears with stories. That's his anonymous character's thing.

But you are like me, Drifting. We do not have character guidelines to follow nor avatars to live up to. We can just ramble on and hate on people at will, without justification, like this bedsheet guy who posted before.

[_Kishkumen]

It seems like many of you are in denial about how connected everyone is through the internet. You run calling Gordon a snitch and a hundred other things for 'ratting' out Twede while simultaneously mocking the most obscure LDS or Utah related blogs, videos, or comments from all around the internet. Good luck hunting out all the 'snitches'. You might as well get the membership list from Salt Lake City and go round them all up. You could literally find thousands of plausible pathways to connect Twede's blog to his Stake President. And this is only one small incident of snitching. Maybe you could make a business out of hunting LDS snitches that dare mention apostate activities to authorities. You could do paid work sniffing for the Obama campaign like Helen Radkey sniffs around for Jewish sounding names.

Uh, the crucial difference here is that Gordon allegedly forwarded materials regarding Twede to SLC with the specific purpose of initiating church disciplinary action against him. I don't recall that any of us have played police detective and snitch in that way. So, fine. But then to deny it? OK, we understand that the apologists want to police the internet on behalf of the LDS Church, but they should at least own up to their online Danitism when they are put on the record admitting to it.

[_Mary]

Scott said:

MormonThink is an anti-Mormon website that claims to be balanced.

I got put off reading anything else Scott said after reading this. Although I have been inactive for about 20 years now I well remember that 'anti-mormon' is a cue to active members for 'Satanic' and 'don't even go there'.

I honestly don't find that helpful and I wish Scott could get through that. Dan P once argued that 'anti-mormon' is a specific term that is used in a scholarly way, and that is fine. But that's not how the average member interprets the term and I think Scott would know that. It's not helpful.

Isn't there anyway to get above this? Bart Ehrman is not anti-christian because he takes a more nuanced view of christian origins. James Tabor isn't anti-christian because he is willing to go where the evidence leads on the original church and the family of Jesus.

Ray, I do agree that it would be good to have balance by including the re-conversion of Don Bradley. I'm pretty sure that the Mormon Think Team are open to suggestions. Why don't you email them?

Quaker said:

The fact that he portrays himself as a sort of sexual icon seeking sex would probably be reason enough for any Florida church member to figure out what ward he attended that Sunday.

I just read his entire blog too. I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about here. Is this a joke, or an attempt to demonize the man?