A Kinder, Gentler Ray A Surfaces

[_antishock8]

I'm not sure why Ray A had such an issue with me, but I thought he was a decent poster. It looks like he's finally accepted the reality of Mormonism, and has accommodated it with some mental shifting. That's a step in the right direction.

[_why me]

Full disclosure means just that: full disclosure. Open up the vaults and move all the stuff to the museum. Rewrite the investigator lessons. Retrain the missionaries. Don't do it for the anti's. Do it for the members!

So what if it takes a year of lessons before baptism? That's the way the Catholics do it, and they've got just as many things to hide as we do, but they put it all out there for anyone to see. If it's true, it will be true after a year of study. If it's not, then somebody's got some 'splainin' to do.

Full disclosure is never full. There is always something more to add on to the list. There are a lot of countermos out there that are never satisified. The catholic RCIA program has nothing to do with full disclosure. It has more to do with dogma and doctrine. Full disclosure would require much more.

Yes lets open up the vaults and move the archive to a museum and certainly do what the countermos want. Now I will say some things need to be changed but full disclosure is non-sensical.

[_Mister Scratch]

Full disclosure means just that: full disclosure. Open up the vaults and move all the stuff to the museum. Rewrite the investigator lessons. Retrain the missionaries. Don't do it for the anti's. Do it for the members!

So what if it takes a year of lessons before baptism? That's the way the Catholics do it, and they've got just as many things to hide as we do, but they put it all out there for anyone to see. If it's true, it will be true after a year of study. If it's not, then somebody's got some 'splainin' to do.

Full disclosure is never full. There is always something more to add on to the list.

So what? There is always 'something more to add' in terms of you fulfilling your mission on this Earth, correct? There really is no legit excuse for the Church to keep all of this stuff under wraps.

[_why me]

So what? There is always 'something more to add' in terms of you fulfilling your mission on this Earth, correct? There really is no legit excuse for the Church to keep all of this stuff under wraps.

And what exactly is all this stuff? The idea is very broad and promises to never keep the countermos satisfied. There is always more to uncover in countermo logic. Now I can say that the LDS church can write a better history of the LDS church by putting in some controversies and disclosure. But full is not a tank of gas but an endless stream of critiques from guys like yourself. There is no such thing as full disclosure for countermos.

[_Mister Scratch]

So what? There is always 'something more to add' in terms of you fulfilling your mission on this Earth, correct? There really is no legit excuse for the Church to keep all of this stuff under wraps.

And what exactly is all this stuff? The idea is very broad and promises to never keep the countermos satisfied. There is always more to uncover in countermo logic. Now I can say that the LDS church can write a better history of the LDS church by putting in some controversies and disclosure. But full is not a tank of gas but an endless stream of critiques from guys like yourself. There is no such thing as full disclosure for countermos.

Come now, that just isn't true. If "full disclosure" were to take place, then that would eliminate the calls for "full disclosure." Of course, there may still be other arenas in which criticism is merited---for example, women and the priesthood. Or formal apology for MMM, etc. So, I guess you are right when you suggest that areas of critique are seemingly limitless. But, I think these would and could dwindle away if the Church were to act in a positive fashion. "Full disclosure" would be a great, trust-building place to start.

[_why me]

So what? There is always 'something more to add' in terms of you fulfilling your mission on this Earth, correct? There really is no legit excuse for the Church to keep all of this stuff under wraps.

And what exactly is all this stuff? The idea is very broad and promises to never keep the countermos satisfied. There is always more to uncover in countermo logic. Now I can say that the LDS church can write a better history of the LDS church by putting in some controversies and disclosure. But full is not a tank of gas but an endless stream of critiques from guys like yourself. There is no such thing as full disclosure for countermos.

Come now, that just isn't true. If "full disclosure" were to take place, then that would eliminate the calls for "full disclosure." Of course, there may still be other arenas in which criticism is merited---for example, women and the priesthood. Or formal apology for MMM, etc. So, I guess you are right when you suggest that areas of critique are seemingly limitless. But, I think these would and could dwindle away if the Church were to act in a positive fashion. "Full disclosure" would be a great, trust-building place to start.

Full disclosure is also about history and history is always open to interpretation. No matter the interpretation by the LDS church, a countermo can call foul. And this would happen, of course. And of course, 'positive fashion' is open to interpretation also. What is action in a postive fashion? Endless debate would ensure over such a term.

You see, Scratch, you have been in this business a long time and you know that many of the countermos are on a search and destroy mission. Nothing would satisfy them except the collaspe of the LDS church and until that happens, the critiques will come forth like rain during an endless thunderstorm.

[_Dr. Shades]

I would be happy if they simply opened up Vault F of the First Presidency's vault, installed a copy machine, and allowed qualified historians of any religious stripe to make copies.