RockSlider wrote:All over a damn witch hunt, of which she had no clue (trusting in someones lies of smoking gun evidence).
Now let's take the war on the wolf in sheep's clothing. Both Dan and Pahoran have clearly made known their colors in this war.
Sorry Liz, I've never understood your desire to want to maintain friendships with those that support a groupthink that has gone after the likes of LOAP and David B among their own ranks, let-a-lone their declared war on the large number of everyday people, going to their wards and trying to work out their Mormonism.
I could not help to wonder over time, what motivated them to want to maintain friendships with their declared enemy. I could not help wonder if your being a mod here and on your own boards had something to do with it.
I think, that in this situation, one or more of your friends screwed you.
Somehow the hunt for Scratch tends to result in people doing things they otherwise would not generally do. In this case, though, I am not certain we know enough about what happened to be this harsh on liz. I am with you as far as her Taiwan comment. There she crossed the line. When it comes to her friendship with Daniel, I can see why she is there. Outside of this particular obsession, Daniel is very personable. When it comes to his war against critics, however, he is just not a very nice person.
One sees the personable side and wonders why we can't all just be friends. Well, sometimes circumstances force people who would otherwise get along into different warring camps.
What Liz may or may not realize is that, on some level, Daniel Peterson will always look down on her for not having the kind of faith he respects, which is essentially his kind of faith. Personally, I don't want the kind of faith that places dogma, authority, and ego before other people, but so be it.
Daniel aggressively attacks NOMs, doubters, and critics. They are all objects of his aggression, because he sees his duty to be the protection of those who have not doubted or criticized. He views doubting and criticism as the enemies of faith, because the faith he appears to put his trust in is brittle and unworthy of devotion. It is one he implicitly admits cannot withstand either doubt or criticism. I happen to think he is dead wrong about that.
Most of all, however, he attacks those who criticize him and disagree with what he is doing. It is true that this is not necessarily an overtly personal thing, but it is also nothing that he will lose any sleep over when he steps over the line, as he did in publicly accusing Chino Blanco of being a "malevolent stalker."
I don't know about you, but in my view calling someone a malevolent stalker is much, much worse than criticizing some crappy articles in a third-rate journal.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist