moksha wrote:What is the significance of "The Doink" as a nickname for one of the apologists listed above? On Google, the word doink was associated with a wrestling clown, a large marijuana joint, and the act of sexual intercourse.
Moksha:
I can't say for sure what the "significance" is of Hancock's nickname, but I do know that it originated with the Hon. Rev. Kishkumen. Perhaps he'll be along to clarify at some point. Based on what you've listed here, I would guess that "wrestling clown" is probably the best analog, but I can't be sure about that.
I thought Steve Smoot trying to add a degree of religious sanity by separating a judgmental ear accessories fetish from meaningful Church doctrine was a good thing and as such should be encouraged. What he said could only be deemed apostasy in some anal-retentive version of the gospel.
Perhaps, though bear in mind that Smoot is also using his Mopologist pulpit to basically slam the "Sister in Parowan," as it were: his argument is that rank-and-file Latter-day Saints are stupid / foolish / "lemmings" / "sheeple" for following the General Authorities' rules. It's yet another case of the Mopologists' trying to re-write LDS doctrine as it is delivered to us by the Prophets. Are the prohibitions against things like long hair, two earrings, and colored shirts stupid? Of course they are. But the criticism needs to be directed at the origin of those "rules," and not at the Saints who believe they are doing good by following them.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14