Congratulations DCP

[_Rollo Tomasi]

For the same reason, I like the invention of masks. It makes it easier and safer to rob banks.

And, evidently, easier to publish troublesome revelations (i.e., the off-the-wall pseudonyms for Church leaders and places in several early D&C revelations).

[_Yong Xi]

If that's the spirit that comes from being LDS, I want nothing of it.

You aren't seriously suggesting, and I'm confident that you don't believe, that Mormonism encourages non-swearers to take up swearing, or that there is anything in Mormon doctrine that teaches swearing, or that Mormons are exceptionally prone to profanity (or, even, that there is a positive correlation between profanity and one's level of commitment to Mormonism and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints).

So -- seriously -- what is the point of that remark?

We'll, I have to say that as an active, committed, non-swearing Mormon, once I found out that Joseph Smith fabricated the Book of Abraham, I yelled out a long string of obscenities.

So, yes, Mormonism encourages swearing.

[_rcrocket]

For the same reason, I like the invention of masks. It makes it easier and safer to rob banks.

And, evidently, easier to publish troublesome revelations (I.e., the off-the-wall pseudonyms for Church leaders and places in several early D&C revelations).

I'll take you seriously when you drop your anonymity. Use of pseudonyms in published revelations is one thing; reading any Russian novel or historical piece, one can see that pseudonyms are common. They are not the same thing as being anonymous. [For instance, as much as I dislike Dr. Guy Sajer's inability to form coherent thoughts using the King's English, at least he lets us know his real name.] But, using the name Rollo Tomasi to attack living people and vilify them and their reputations is quite another. It is despicable. You and your conjoined twin, Mr. Scratch, have no place among persons with integrity.

And, for Beastie to make the argument that I am naïve about this issue when it comes to the internet is merely justification for evil. Merely because the film industry exists doesn't justify watching or participating in child porn. Merely because the U.S. Constitution encourages and permits anonymous speech against popular and unpopular institutions doesn't justify the evil of malicious anonymous publication.

Again, and let me restate. Those of you who think that being anonymous is a justification for spitting forth vile statements about living persons are just plain wrong by any right thinking person's notion. The laws of libel and defamation have a long long history in English common law, and you simply can't say what you are saying and being fair and equitable and legal about it. You simply avoid the consequences of your actions by anonymity; just like the graffiti artist who does his vile deed at night.

And, then, those who post attacks against the Church and its doctrine anonymously pose an additional issue of wrongness and hypocrisy when they maintain their good church position in the real lives. What rank hypocrisy. Show some courage and live your private and public lives the same.

I don't want to be a one-note Johnny on this issue, but for Beastie to accuse Ray A of hypocrisy for using cuss words is the height of hypocrisy. YShe and you are not persons of integrity. That's why I like being here.

rcrocket

[_Yoda]

That's why I like being here.

You like being here because you find that you're morally superior to everyone else here because you post using your real name, or you like being here because, in the long run, you're just as "evil" as you imply the rest of us are?

;)

And, then, those who post attacks against the Church and its doctrine anonymously pose an additional issue of wrongness and hypocrisy when they maintain their good church position in the real lives. What rank hypocrisy. Show some courage and live your private and public lives the same.

What about those of us who DO express our views in real life the same way we do here?

Bob, you probably don't believe me, but I state the same views I express here with my real life counterparts.

The only reason I use a pseudonym is for safety...And, frankly, if you really tried hard enough, you could probably find out who I was, if you really wanted to. My anonymity is utilized more to appease my husband than anything else because of a stalking issue that happened several years ago.

I actually feel quite "safe" on a board like this, but I'm still cautious.

So, I suppose I'm just an anomaly, and don't fit in with your blanket stereotype of this board's posters?

Just curious...

[_Daniel Peterson]

I don't find the mere idea of board anonymity or pseudonymity problematic.

What I do find morally dubious is hiding behind a pseudonym while repeatedly leveling grave charges of ethical misconduct, etc., against specific, publicly-named individuals.

And, as I happen to know from abundant personal experience, there's a lot of that on this board.

[_dartagnan]

Dan you're just upset because you cannot get away with using a pseudonymn, and you know it. You were using a pseudonym when you first attacked me and you tried using pseudonymns on several forums, but, in your own admission, you could never get away with it because your style makes it too obvious who you are.

Don't be upset just because others are able to do what you couldn't.

[_Trinity]

If that's the spirit that comes from being LDS, I want nothing of it. It's as bad as the protesters LDS like to complain about.

That's just a cop out. You know you wouldn't be LDS for a million other reasons. By the way, when I was a practising LDS - I didn't swear. So your argument falls on its head. If swearing offends you so much - then don't associate with exmos on exmo boards.

Agree?

Who are you anyway?! I'd like to state the obvious, Ray. You've been straddling this believing/nonbelieving Mormon fence for long and so tenaciously that you have split your pants. We can see your exposed parts, particularly when you go off like you do.

I have a suggestion. Get off the fence. Choose a side! You'll be ever so much better off by doing so. If you are a believer, act consistently with those Mormon beliefs. If you are not a believer, act consistently with whatever belief you have chosen to replace Mormonism.. And then please get a seamstress so your verbal diarrhea, should it ever again recur, will be confined to being a mess inside your pants and the rest of us don't have to be exposed to it.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Kevin Graham is misrepresenting me.

I would say that he knows he is, but, sadly, I suspect that he really doesn't.

What an unpleasant place this is!

And Beastie wonders why I haven't selected it as the focus of my intellectual life . . .

[_Yoda]

And Beastie wonders why I haven't selected it as the focus of my intellectual life . . .

Frankly, I would seriously wonder if you DID select our forum, or any forum, MAD included, as the focus of your intellectual life.

LOL

[_rcrocket]

That's why I like being here.

You like being here because you find that you're morally superior to everyone else here because you post using your real name, or you like being here because, in the long run, you're just as "evil" as you imply the rest of us are?


What about those of us who DO express our views in real life the same way we do here?

Bob, you probably don't believe me, but I state the same views I express here with my real life counterparts.

Your posts are intellectually weak. One does not justify evil cowardice by pointing to nice things said elsewhere. My post is not directed to your nice consistency, as you think it is. Rational people are not persuaded by that particular argument.

As far as my "moral superiority," and my personal "evil," let me point out that this Board is a big fat target for criticism, isn't it? Why shouldn't I use my willingness to put my name on my posts as a higher moral basis upon which to challenge the posts of those unwilling to do so as they defame and libel?



rcrocket