Another question for Mr. Bachman...Tal

Post by **_Roger Morrison** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 9:46 am

Hi Tal, thanks for your well thought through & expressed story. Originally from the Toronto area--pre 70's--the name Randy Keyes, and the Keyes family sounds familiar??

"Irrelevant" really. As you say, "we're all different." But i can picture the scene of the Primary kids et al, and understanding/accepting the childish babble as nothing more-nor-less than that. As seemingly P. Keyes did.

It's like attending any children's concert or recital: Cute to see & hear, unless it drags on. Such performances are simply baby-steps in one of the 'goods' of LDSism: Overcoming stage-fright, and developing confidence as a child/youth to generally out-do kids/adults on such occasions who did not have those 'stand-up' opportunities. What is said on those occasions does not have to be true it simply is best enjoyed when well presented. I think you might agree with the last sentence?? :-)

I think the "fraud" question can, and should be, asked of Judeo-Christianism in total. Surely today the bits and pieces of "fraud"--however that might be interpreted by 'different' folks--are obvious, and cannot be denied. BUT, does that realization nullify the "non-frauds" found within the mix? I think not.

It's like panning for gold in a way, in which i have a tad of experience, but not the patience to strike it rich. I think what makes the gagging point is if/when one finds themselves at either end of the bell curve of 'their' particular group. Presently, and for the past possibly twenty years, i've been discomforted by those who represent Mormon (and other) Bible/LDS-quad literalists.

As expressed in your missive, the idea of it being a good family thing is somewhat valid, to a point. IF one doesn't swallow the whole can of worms. Suppose that depends on individual wisdom or naïveté? Like, there's a kid's soccer-time that passes and might advance to music-time, a parent goes with the flow with no need of feeling guilty. "Feeling guilty" about a lot of things is one of LDS' bads, IMSCO.

Sounds like Pres Keyes was cracking open the door to a more enlightened presentation, and acceptance of Mormonism: "It ain't all true, but it ain't tooo bad neither, eh!" What the future holds?? WARm regards, Roger

Post by **_John Larsen** » Thu May 01, 2008 10:58 pm

Since a lot of people are looking at this tread today, I thought I would say: "Hello World!"

(I am assuming everyone would want both sides of the story. )

Post by **_Dale** » Fri May 02, 2008 4:39 am

Tal on the FAIR blog President Randy Keyes has responded to some of your statements. Why don't you join in on the blog to stand up for yourself?

Post by **_Bond...James Bond** » Fri May 02, 2008 4:42 am

Dale wrote:Tal on the FAIR blog President Randy Keyes has responded to some of your statements. Why don't you join in on the blog to stand up for yourself?

Why doesn't Randy Keyes (or Allen Wyatt) come here, the place where this stuff originally was raised?

(Not to mention that you're dealing with the same folks who ran/run? MAD...not exactly the people I'd trust with my words. Tal is just as likely to be censored there as he would on FAIR/MAD).

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Fri May 02, 2008 4:49 am

Dale wrote:Tal on the FAIR blog President Randy Keyes has responded to some of your statements. Why don't you join in on the blog to stand up for yourself?

I'd like to know what sense you think it makes for Tal to entertain a response on the "FAIR blog"? Why didn't those who wrote on the "FAIR blog" choose to respond on this board where the comments originated? Your comments here seem intended to provoke. If they made rational sense, perhaps your failed attempt would have been successful.

Post by **_bcspace** » Fri May 02, 2008 4:53 am

I can't wrap my head around why someone who admits they don't believe it continues to prove otherwise by their actions.

Me neither. Especially is a Stake President case with all the time and energy they put in. That's why I believe Tal and most all the other exmos here are lying to assuage their guilt and provide a 'noble' excuse for their actions.

Post by **_Coggins7** » Fri May 02, 2008 5:53 am

bcspace wrote:
I can't wrap my head around why someone who admits they don't believe it continues to prove otherwise by their actions.

Me neither. Especially in a Stake President case with all the time and energy they put in. That's why I believe Tal and most all the other exmos here are lying to assuage their guilt and provide a 'noble' excuse for their actions.

Expressing such a perception is like kicking a fire ant mound and then lying down face first in the boiling torrent of crawling ferocity that pours forth from the chambers below.

Its like telling Hugh Hefner his behavior is immoral, or telling Ward Churchill he has no business being a tenured professor. You don't pull the mask off of the Lone Ranger and you don't mess around with the motives and reasoning of ex-Mormons. Only they get to do that to TBMs. That's just the way it is.

Post by **_Roger Morrison** » Fri May 02, 2008 10:59 am

Coggins7 wrote:
bcspace wrote:
I can't wrap my head around why someone who admits they don't believe it continues to prove otherwise by their actions.

Me neither. Especially in a Stake President case with all the time and energy they put in. That's why I believe Tal and most all the other exmos here are lying to assuage their guilt and provide a 'noble' excuse for their actions.

Expressing such a perception is like kicking a fire ant mound and then lying down face first in the boiling torrent of crawling ferocity that pours forth from the chambers below.

Its like telling Hugh Hefner his behavior is immoral, or telling Ward Churchill he has no business being a tenured professor. You don't pull the mask off of the Lone Ranger and you don't mess around with the motives and reasoning of ex-Mormons. Only they get to do that to TBMs. That's just the way it is.

Love Jim Croche! Do we have something in common? :-) You, or anyone, can motive-mess with this recanting-Mormon any time. And, "that's the way it is" Bro. Warm regards, Roger

Post by **_Canucklehead** » Fri May 02, 2008 1:56 pm

bcspace wrote:Especially is a Stake President case with all the time and energy they put in. That's why I believe Tal and most all the other exmos here are lying to assuage their guilt and provide a 'noble' excuse for their actions.

1. What do you suppose that "most exmos here" are lying about?

2. What do you suppose that "most exmos here" feel guilty about?

Post by **_antishock8** » Fri May 02, 2008 2:11 pm

Canucklehead wrote:
bcspace wrote:Especially is a Stake President case with all the time and energy they put in. That's why I believe Tal and most all the other exmos here are lying to assuage their guilt and provide a 'noble' excuse for their actions.

1. What do you suppose that "most exmos here" are lying about?

2. What do you suppose that "most exmos here" feel guilty about?

Well. I for one lie about Mormons lying because that helps me assuage my guilt for wanting to drink, lie, have sex, masturbate, and watch the NFL on Sundays. Makes perfect sense!