Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologetics

[_Darth J]

I've shared my view on this here already. Rest assured, you are off on my take regarding this matter.

How's that? You want to zero in on someone. Have at it, hodge-podge of hostility. Although for your sakes, I hope you reconsider.

God, you're such a one note idiot. It's not even worth the effort to creatively insult you anymore.

Did you notice, Molok, how the attempt to sound literate and rational has been abandoned because he can't support his assertions, so we're right back to the hillbilly shtick?

[_Molok]

Did you notice, Molok, how the attempt to sound literate and rational has been abandoned because he can't support his assertions, so we're right back to the hillbilly shtick?

Why yes I did! At this point, Stem showing up in a thread and calling you mean / typing like an idiot has become synonymous with waving a white flag in my mind. Really, he might as well just say "Ok, I have nothing (got nuttin') left, I'll just annoy the piss out of you all until you drop it."

[_stemelbow]

God, you're such a one note dip****. It's not even worth the effort to creatively insult you anymore.

Why would you ever want to insult someone anyway, Molok?

Its time to let go of your anger and move on.

as per one note. I can't help that you guys are angry. I just want the best for you.

[_Darth J]

[_MrStakhanovite]

I'd like to get this thread to page 42 before Friday night. Stem, you are gonna have to clock some overtime, but I think you can do it.

[_stemelbow]

Let me guess, DJ. Your thought are along these lines I can't drop this. I'm intent on making this equivalent of the most atrocious sounding offense in the history of mankind, so me and my buds and allude to it again and again as we discuss in the coming years how much we can't stand certain LDS folks

Close?

Stemelbow, please do the following:

1. show me the language from the license agreement that says a bishop can use the Church's confidential data for whatever he wants, as long as it is not for business or political reasons;

No thanks. You've now missed the spirit of my comments, focusing instead of the letter of them.

2. tell me the legal basis for reading the unambiguous terms of a revocable license agreement according to ad hoc, self-serving assertions instead of the plain language of the documents. I bet the Second Restatement of Contracts or Corbin on Contracts would be great places to start!

Legal basis? What's your predilictions about now? Just kidding. I know. You're upset. Time to let go, bro.

if the bishop violated the agreement, it's on him. I'm past it, bro. I've got more living to do. You should to.

[_stemelbow]

I'd like to get this thread to page 42 before Friday night. Stem, you are gonna have to clock some overtime, but I think you can do it.

Well, fo course I can. I probably won't. But I can. Don't challenge me.

I might need DJ's relentless efforts though. He ain't droppin' nuttin'. (now watch as he complains that I have gone back to my hillbilly speak as if switching it up means something--adorable fellow though).

[_stemelbow]

Did you notice, Molok, how the attempt to sound literate and rational has been abandoned because he can't support his assertions, so we're right back to the hillbilly shtick?

pep pep. I know'd it was coming.

[_Darth J]

[_Darth J]

Did I mention that we're not a cult?