rcrocket wrote:That's a pretty courageous thing for an anonymite to say, isn't it? Lead the way on the smear of living persons. Surely, Dr. Peterson should not have an opinion upon a theoretical belief system, should he? But, let's just libel and smear him at will!
rcrocket
I think his remarks go far, far beyond mere "opinion." Either that, or I reckon you will have to concede that the stuff on, say, RfM, is just "opinion," and does not constitute bigotry. He has really damned himself this time. I hope he issues a retraction.
That's a pretty courageous thing for an anonymite to say, isn't it? Lead the way on the smear of living persons. Surely, Dr. Peterson should not have an opinion upon a theoretical belief system, should he? But, let's just libel and smear him at will!
I'm typing a response in order to wake myself up. Whenever bob posts his predictable anon-rant, I doze off.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
rcrocket wrote:That's a pretty courageous thing for an anonymite to say, isn't it?
One-note wonder Bob strikes again!
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
cksalmon wrote:for other religious traditions pretty much beyond reasonable dispute." -- DCP
**********************
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough: I regard Calvinism as repulsive, its morality disgusting, and its teaching about God as blasphemous. -- DCP, 10/08/2007
I guess he meant Islam.
Just for anyone who's keeping score.
CKS
Wow, I have to say, I am rather blown away by this! I have long felt that there was something disingenuous and/or hypocritical about his "bigots!" cries, but, it turns out that he is quite the bigot himself. The above quote from him is quite disgusting. He ought to be ashamed of himself.
What really gets me is the fact that the reasons he rejects Calvinism are eminently present in Islam--and to a greater degree, to my mind.
I wonder if he finds Islam "repulsive, its morality disgusting, and its teaching about God as blasphemous." Somehow, I don't think he does: Muhammed: Prophet of God, anyone?
Mister Scratch wrote:Wow, I have to say, I am rather blown away by this! I have long felt that there was something disingenuous and/or hypocritical about his "bigots!" cries, but, it turns out that he is quite the bigot himself. The above quote from him is quite disgusting. He ought to be ashamed of himself.
What really gets me is the fact that the reasons he rejects Calvinism are eminently present in Islam--and to a greater degree, to my mind.
I wonder if he finds Islam "repulsive, its morality disgusting, and its teaching about God as blasphemous." Somehow, I don't think he does: Muhammed: Prophet of God, anyone?
Yup. You are so right, CK. DCP has at last slipped up and proven to everyone how much of a bigot he is. This will forever cast a shadow across his (now obviously hollow) cries against "anti-Mormon bigotry."
As that comment of his (to the best of my knowledge) is an anomaly, I tend to think the statement may have been brought about my emotions and isn’t necessarily representative of his overall views.
I may be wrong, but it seemed to be more-so retaliatory in nature than necessarily an espousal of his overall opinion.
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." ~Charles Bukowski
Doctor Steuss wrote:As that comment of his (to the best of my knowledge) is an anomaly, I tend to think the statement may have been brought about my emotions and isn’t necessarily representative of his overall views.
I may be wrong, but it seemed to be more-so retaliatory in nature than necessarily an espousal of his overall opinion.
How do you figure? He included this clarifying statement in his post:
Daniel Peterson wrote:Perhaps I wasn't clear enough: I regard Calvinism as repulsive, its morality disgusting, and its teaching about God as blasphemous.
(emphasis added)
Don't you wonder, Stuess, how Calvinists would feel at having their sacred beliefs described in this way? Prof. P. ought to issue a retraction. His behavior here, coupled with his uncouth remarks on that Jewish blog some time ago, really seem to reveal a very ugly side of the Good Professor. It seems that his "sympathy" for other belief systems is all just a ruse.
Last edited by Physics Guy on Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
[CKS] PS. Don't ever let 'em tell you that Daniel Peterson respects all other faith traditions. He don't [that was an intentional lapse, Grammar Nazi]. My own is, to him, "repulsive," "disgusting," and "blasphemous." I mean, I'd expect that of godless, Satan-inspired anti-Mormons, such as myself, but goodness, from an LDS apologist?
<saving to harddisk>
[Juliann] Well now that we have your definition of respect, I can only ask what adjective you apply to someone who creates an organization to fight a religion he doesn't seem to quite ever get a handle on. If you use a one line message board blurt against someone it says far more about you than anyone else. But that is what you do to Mormonism as well.
What could bring this sort of response to an older thread way on MADB's second page? Observation, folks. You're being watched.
Well now that we have your definition of respect, I can only ask what adjective you apply to someone who creates an organization to fight a religion he doesn't seem to quite ever get a handle on. If you use a one line message board blurt against someone it says far more about you than anyone else. But that is what you do to Mormonism as well.
Now that's funny, given Daniel's specialty of culling one liners from exmormon groups for various purposes, including writing so-called articles.*
*by the way, I'm using "so-called" in the manner meaning "is usually called". And anyone who thinks otherwise is disturbed.
tee hee
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
Doctor Steuss wrote:As that comment of his (to the best of my knowledge) is an anomaly, I tend to think the statement may have been brought about my emotions and isn’t necessarily representative of his overall views.
I may be wrong, but it seemed to be more-so retaliatory in nature than necessarily an espousal of his overall opinion.
How do you figure? He included this clarifying statement in his post:
Daniel Peterson wrote:Perhaps I wasn't clear enough: I regard Calvinism as repulsive, its morality disgusting, and its teaching about God as blasphemous.
(emphasis added)
Don't you wonder, Stuess, how Calvinists would feel at having their sacred beliefs described in this way? Prof. P. ought to issue a retraction.
I figure based on his later comments that the reason he said it was because of a comment that CKS said that DCP viewed as an "attack" (I believe that was the word he used... maybe it was "caricature" though) on/of Mormon belief.
And yes, I do wonder how they (mainly CKS) feel about such statements. I don't know if it's simply viewed as the person making the comment because they are compelled to make the statement beyond any will they have to not make the statement. I don't know if it's viewed as a heart-wrenching attack. I'm not real sure.
But, I certainly cringed at it, as I consider Chris to be a friend (although I admittedly am a wee bit of a coward and don’t stand up for him as often as I should). As to how a Calvinist views such statements, I'm not real sure as I don't know how far-reaching the belief in a lack of free will goes.
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." ~Charles Bukowski