
Gee wrote:theory, theory, theory, theory, theory, theory, theory, theory, theory, theory
Put up or shut up, Gee.
Accept the offer extended to you from Radio Free Mormon and meet your destiny!
Surely, you know, you're doomed!
You will be destroyed.


Gee wrote:theory, theory, theory, theory, theory, theory, theory, theory, theory, theory
First, note the fact that DCP calls Hauglid a "teacher" rather than a "professor." But the key detail is the bit in parentheses: "Many of us." Yeah, of course: the "inner circle." So, they were just talking crap about Hauglid behind his back? Was Midgley assembling a "creepy dossier"? Whatever the case may be, at minimum they were gossiping with each other about this. But this sounds precisely like the kind of cabal that would rat somebody out to their bishop. Did the same "Many of us" know about the contact with the bishop? Or was that just Midgley going rogue?DCP wrote:A teacher at BYU retired and, within days, came out of the closet as an unbeliever. (Many of us had been aware of his unbelief for several years.)
The answer is obvious, Dr. Scratch. Yet, our hero and his compatriots won't admit it, won't be true to their religious selves. Anyone who has been on a mission knows that the church teaches that the good missionary rats out the rule breaking missionary. And those who don't will be punished if caught, as an example. So, with that ethos in mind, is it really too much of a stretch to think that Dr. P, arch-defender of the faith, would turn in Dr. Hauglid once he knew of the change in faith, especially since Dr. Hauglid was one of those Maxwellites? Of course he would! His idol, Packer, would demand this.But this sounds precisely like the kind of cabal that would rat somebody out to their bishop. Did the same "Many of us" know about the contact with the bishop? Or was that just Midgley going rogue?
Do you believe him, Dr. Moore? And it seems to me that the more salient point here is not whether or not DCP himself contacted the bishop, but, instead, the *role* that DCP has played in facilitating and/or encouraging such behavior.
Dude, you throw around the "R" word WAAAAAY too liberally. You have NO PROOF that John Gee is a racist. It was Joseph Smith who labeled Anubis a slave, not John Gee.Shulem" wrote:I’ll bet my bottom dollar John Gee is racist and doesn’t like blacks. No wonder he’s all too happy with keeping Anubis a slave. You’re a racist, John Gee! You’re a traitor to Egyptology and a shame. Your name will be dragged through the mud. You think Budge is the butt of jokes. No! The name Gee will forever be ranked as traitorous and racist against blacks and ancient Egypt.
Black lives matter! You go to hell, Gee, you racist hypocrite! Your name is dirt.
Why not take him at his word and ask him to condemn Gee for calling on Dr Hauglid's local church authorities and employer to act to censure him?Doctor Scratch wrote: ↑Thu Jul 09, 2020 5:15 amDo you believe him, Dr. Moore? And it seems to me that the more salient point here is not whether or not DCP himself contacted the bishop, but, instead, the *role* that DCP has played in facilitating and/or encouraging such behavior.
“Inner circle,” no?
He works at BYU in a permanently funded position. He has a cadre of apologetic friends and a family. Why should he be miserable?