Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologetics

[_Ceeboo]

Why is it so hard just to admit that, in retrospect, Dan probably made a mistake in judgment?

After 36 pages of thread, over 750 individual posts and almost 10,000 reads, we finally have a....










WINNER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Stay tuned!

[Guest]

I answered it 10 pages ago. It is just that no one liked my answer.

viewtopic.php?p=697643#p697643

But Liz, if they accept an answer, they can't keep the thread alive.

(Rats, I've kept the thread alive. :redface: )

Alter,

You have yet to explain why general membership records are confidential - these records contain personal identifing information (PII); but in your bat crap craziness the PII in the CDOL is not confidential.....

Will you attempt to explain the difference. I will note that your bat crap crazy reasoning is glaring evidence that you haven't a minutia of a clue what the CDOL is, or what it contains.

[_3sheets2thewind]

Also we can not accept liz's reason(s) because if we did we are left only with the conclusion that either Dan or Liz is lying.

Dan already admitting what the reason was.

Liz has created her own story that directly contradicts Dan's reasoning.

[_MrKnowitsome]

Why is it so hard just to admit that, in retrospect, Dan probably made a mistake in judgment?

After 36 pages of thread, over 750 individual posts and almost 10,000 reads, we finally have a....


WINNER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Stay tuned!

Which would explain why mddb deletes post that raise the discussion, evidence of the deletions will not be forthcoming.

[_3sheets2thewind]

In summary, the official church business that is within the scope of being the bishop over a ward, for which this anonymous bishop allegedly accessed a confidential church database to cross-reference it with names from a third-party commercial entity, was ______________________________.

I answered it 10 pages ago. It is just that no one liked my answer.

http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/vie ... 43#p697643

For crap sake.

Are you now lying for your lord?

Dan himself, via you as proxy, stated the purpose for the search was only to know if a Bishop was the tour.

So either Dan told his Bishop friend he just wanted to know for swing and round-a-bouts.

OR

Dan knowing swings and round abouts wasn't a valid reason, he told a different reason to the Bishop.

Either you are lying or Dan is lying.....are you going to sacrifice your integrity on the alter of DCP?[/quote][/quote]

[_Yoda]

Either you are lying or Dan is lying.....are you going to sacrifice your integrity on the alter of DCP?

Why must either one of us be lying?

You don't think that Dan told his friend what was going on here? My point and Alter's point is that Dan's friend, as a bishop, made a valid judgment call based on the information Dan gave him.

I wasn't privy to that exact conversation, were you?

However, unless proven otherwise, I am willing to give Dan's friend the benefit of the doubt that he acted in accordance with the rules.

I understand that you and your friends here don't want to do that. That's fine. Let's just say that we are going to agree to disagree and call it a day.

I am sick to death of being raked over the coals and being told I'm stupid simply because I took one side of an argument.

All I wanted to do was put my side out there. You guys have refuted it. Fine.

Is it possible to do so without attacking Stem, Alter, and me personally?

3Sheets, I am not specifically calling you out on my last question. It is actually directed more at Darth, Lulu, and several others here. They know who they are.

[_sock puppet]

I for one would like to see this thread hit 50 pages, 1000 posts. Thanks to all for keeping it going. Much appreciated.

[_Darth J]

Either you are lying or Dan is lying.....are you going to sacrifice your integrity on the alter of DCP?

Why must either one of us be lying?

You don't think that Dan told his friend what was going on here? My point and Alter's point is that Dan's friend, as a bishop, made a valid judgment call based on the information Dan gave him.

I wasn't privy to that exact conversation, were you?

However, unless proven otherwise, I am willing to give Dan's friend the benefit of the doubt that he acted in accordance with the rules.

I understand that you and your friends here don't want to do that. That's fine. Let's just say that we are going to agree to disagree and call it a day.

I am sick to death of being raked over the coals and being told I'm stupid simply because I took one side of an argument.

All I wanted to do was put my side out there. You guys have refuted it. Fine.

Is it possible to do so without attacking Stem, Alter, and me personally?

3Sheets, I am not specifically calling you out on my last question. It is actually directed more at Darth, Lulu, and several others here. They know who they are.

The reason no rational person would accept that particular one of your many and varied stories is that like all of your evolving excuses, it is ludicrous on its face.

There is nothing in LDS Church policy that gives the bishop over a given ward authority to police total strangers who claim to be bishops, over whom the bishop has no ecclesiastical authority whatsoever, because the bishop feels that this stranger is somehow acting outside of conformity with how a bishop should act. This particular apologia of yours would have it that bishops are watching over the world at large on the Church's behalf.

Not only do LDS policy and doctrine (e.g., that book abbreviated as "D&C") not support this assertion, it would mean that LDS bishops decide for themselves what is or is not within the scope of their role as bishop over a given ward. That would make the revocable license agreement---which is a legal document, not a religious document---totally meaningless.

[_Yoda]

Darth, I am not going to argue with you. You have consistently been disrespectful to me, and I am not going to waste my time dealing with you.

And yes, I am aware that you are going to say that I am bowing out because I can't compete with your supposed greatness. And if that is what you choose to believe, more power to you.

I have said what I have to say and it has fallen on deaf ears. I'm done.

[_Darth J]

Darth, I am not going to argue with you. You have consistently been disrespectful to me, and I am not going to waste my time dealing with you.

And yes, I am aware that you are going to say that I am bowing out because I can't compete with your supposed greatness. And if that is what you choose to believe, more power to you.

I have said what I have to say and it has fallen on deaf ears. I'm done.

That's right, Liz. When you come in with guns blazing making all kinds of ridiculous, self-contradictory stories that cannot be reconciled with the plain language of the Church's license agreement, you can always try to re-frame the issue as interpersonal emotional drama.