FAIR, McCue, and the Law

[_Alter Idem]

are you actually saying the posts cited by mccue SUPPORT the assertion he abused his wife???

I doubt A.I. thinks that, but I could be wrong. What is clear, having read the document, is that the FAIR article was, at best, a calculated personal attack, unrelated to any apologetic issues McCue has raised. At worst, well, it's libelous.

That no one in an oversight position at FAIR had the moral certitude to deep-six the article, and that the authors wrote and posted it, shows that "FAIR" manifestly doesn't care to be.

As McCue is an SP, I suppose he's fair game.

Oh, wait, that's a Scientology distinction. Is that the direction FAIR is moving?

I have virtually zero respect for that organization at this point.

The obvious lack of integrity, one is tempted to think, may be endemic to the organization. How on earth could this article have gotten past any sort of legitimate oversight? That FAIR yanked the article so quickly and has been mum since leads one to believe that it takes outsiders to call their shenanigans. The folks in charge of administrating FAIRmormon.org may be crucially lacking the moral compass necessary to prevent this sort of abject ad hominem attack in the name of "defending" the faith from sullying its own web pages.

Meanwhile McCue, an atheist, has posted graciously about the motives and personality of the article's primary author.

CKS

As I clarified to Beastie, from what I read my opinion is that he was describing emotionally abusive and controlling behavior. Just my humble opinion...and I'm only commenting on what I read.

That said, I agree with you CK, I think it was despicable to publish such an article on McCue--based on message board posts! I think it was in effect, heaping more abuse on his wife to dredge up those posts and analyze them in order to attack him. I really don't know what the editors were thinking by allowing something like that to be associated with their website.

[_Jersey Girl]

For Skippythedead, Blixa and anyone else interested in my feelings after reading the article;

That article was extremely disturbing--best that it was pulled and hopefully the RFM posts are no longer available.

For starters, I could not believe that Bob McCue would violate his wife's privacy by posting his marital difficulties on a public message board! What could he have possibly been thinking?!!!!.

As for the actual article, I'm extremely disturbed that someone at FAIR thought it was a good idea to violate McCue's wife's privacy further by posting that article. It was an extremely unprofessional way to engage a critic--to justify it because he is a critic of the church and he set himself up for it by posting such intimate information--is still inexcusable. No doubt that is why it was pulled.

As for Bob McCue trying to sue someone--how does he possibly have a leg to stand on? The fool set himself up by posting all that information on a public board!!!!

He handed the ammunition to his opponents on a silver platter..and then cried "No fAIR!" when they loaded their guns and shot him with it.

I hate to play devil's advocate (really, I don't hate it at all) but, how do you know that he violated his wife's privacy?

Are you suggesting that he was posting with her approval?

There is no reason to assume she was aware of them, in fact, the most likely assumption is that she did not.

Because of this, my assumption is that she did not know he was discussing their marital problems on a message board.

I'm not suggesting anything. I'm stating clearly and directly that you don't know if she was or was not aware of his online postings and that it is wrong to assume anything.

[_charity]

Charity, let's say he's not blameless. Let's say he had it comin' to him. Let's say, just for argument's sake, that FAIR is just following the commandment: an eye for an eye. Let's say that manifestly personal attacks against critics and their family relationships is justified.

Supposing all that, FAIR was completely in the right.

The Christianity of it all is bleeding out my eyes. Because Christianity is all about getting what one deserves. That's the "good news."

Have you even read the article? I have. Surely, they're not keeping it from you.

I haven't read the article. I suppose I could if I chose. I haven't asked to.

I have a feeling you'll respond, if you even choose to do so, with some version of "Well, he deserved it." I'll file such a response away in my file cabinet labeled "Why Mormonism Really Just Isn't Christianity."

CKS

Deserve what? What I have seen happen is that his name has been raked over the coals in the name of outrage by his "friends." I don't think he deserved such treatement in the house of his friends. No. In their quest to discredit FAIR, they sacrificed their friend. FAIR pulled the article when it had only a few hits. But then it was published on other boards, and the accusations, true or not, were given a large circulation by wide eyed hypocrits. Any friends would not have repeated the stories, especially only to satisfy their own agendas. No, he did not deserve that.

His wife certainly did not deserve him bringing their personal matters onto the internet. And anyone who had any sympathy for her would not have repeated them on the message boards, especially when their only purpose was to discredit FAIR. The kind and Christian thing to do would have been to refuse to pass along the stories.

[_harmony]

Deserve what? What I have seen happen is that his name has been raked over the coals in the name of outrage by his "friends." I don't think he deserved such treatement in the house of his friends. No. In their quest to discredit FAIR, they sacrificed their friend. FAIR pulled the article when it had only a few hits. But then it was published on other boards, and the accusations, true or not, were given a large circulation by wide eyed hypocrits. Any friends would not have repeated the stories, especially only to satisfy their own agendas. No, he did not deserve that.

His wife certainly did not deserve him bringing their personal matters onto the internet. And anyone who had any sympathy for her would not have repeated them on the message boards, especially when their only purpose was to discredit FAIR. The kind and Christian thing to do would have been to refuse to pass along the stories.

It was not posted here. No one has repeated the "stories". So I guess that makes us kind and Christian.

[_charity]

It was not posted here. No one has repeated the "stories". So I guess that makes us kind and Christian.

The whole thing wasn't posted, but the stories are still out there. Did you read alter idem's post? Here it is. I will bold the parts of his post that I learned here and not anywhere else prevously.

For starters, I could not believe that Bob McCue would violate his wife's privacy by posting his marital difficulties on a public message board! What could he have possibly been thinking?!!!!.

As for the actual article, I'm extremely disturbed that someone at FAIR thought it was a good idea to violate McCue's wife's privacy further by posting that article. It was an extremely unprofessional way to engage a critic--to justify it because he is a critic of the church and he set himself up for it by posting such intimate information--is still inexcusable. No doubt that is why it was pulled.

As for Bob McCue trying to sue someone--how does he possibly have a leg to stand on? The fool set himself up by posting all that information on a public board!!!!

He handed the ammunition to his opponents on a silver platter..and then cried "No fAIR!" when they loaded their guns and shot him with it.

I am shocked and horrified that any man or woman would post anything about marital difficulties on a message board! Aren't you? Don't you think that Bob McCue has been held up to scorn for his actions? And I learned about it here. On this message board. Squeakey clean? I don't think so.

[_cksalmon]

Charity, let's say he's not blameless. Let's say he had it comin' to him. Let's say, just for argument's sake, that FAIR is just following the commandment: an eye for an eye. Let's say that manifestly personal attacks against critics and their family relationships is justified.

Supposing all that, FAIR was completely in the right.

The Christianity of it all is bleeding out my eyes. Because Christianity is all about getting what one deserves. That's the "good news."

Have you even read the article? I have. Surely, they're not keeping it from you.

I haven't read the article. I suppose I could if I chose. I haven't asked to.

I have a feeling you'll respond, if you even choose to do so, with some version of "Well, he deserved it." I'll file such a response away in my file cabinet labeled "Why Mormonism Really Just Isn't Christianity."

CKS

Deserve what? What I have seen happen is that his name has been raked over the coals in the name of outrage by his "friends." I don't think he deserved such treatement in the house of his friends. No. In their quest to discredit FAIR, they sacrificed their friend. FAIR pulled the article when it had only a few hits. But then it was published on other boards, and the accusations, true or not, were given a large circulation by wide eyed hypocrits. Any friends would not have repeated the stories, especially only to satisfy their own agendas. No, he did not deserve that.

His wife certainly did not deserve him bringing their personal matters onto the internet. And anyone who had any sympathy for her would not have repeated them on the message boards, especially when their only purpose was to discredit FAIR. The kind and Christian thing to do would have been to refuse to pass along the stories.

First: Bob McCue is no friend of mine. Second: FAIR's antics are inexcusable. Did he deserve the personal attention, Charity? Stop projecting.

The kind and Christian thing to do would have been to refuse to pass along the stories.

Wow, you get it! Exactly. FAIR was neither "kind" nor "Christian."

FAIR had no problem whatsoever with passing along the stories. Thus, I suppose, it goes without saying that FAIR is neither kind nor Christian. Or, does FAIR get a pass because it yanked the article at the first mention of a lawsuit and has been deafeningly quiet ever since?

CKS

[_the road to hana]

It was not posted here. No one has repeated the "stories". So I guess that makes us kind and Christian.

The whole thing wasn't posted, but the stories are still out there. Did you read alter idem's post? Here it is. I will bold the parts of his post that I learned here and not anywhere else prevously.

For starters, I could not believe that Bob McCue would violate his wife's privacy by posting his marital difficulties on a public message board! What could he have possibly been thinking?!!!!.

As for the actual article, I'm extremely disturbed that someone at FAIR thought it was a good idea to violate McCue's wife's privacy further by posting that article. It was an extremely unprofessional way to engage a critic--to justify it because he is a critic of the church and he set himself up for it by posting such intimate information--is still inexcusable. No doubt that is why it was pulled.

As for Bob McCue trying to sue someone--how does he possibly have a leg to stand on? The fool set himself up by posting all that information on a public board!!!!

He handed the ammunition to his opponents on a silver platter..and then cried "No fAIR!" when they loaded their guns and shot him with it.

I am shocked and horrified that any man or woman would post anything about marital difficulties on a message board! Aren't you? Don't you think that Bob McCue has been held up to scorn for his actions? And I learned about it here. On this message board. Squeakey clean? I don't think so.

Sounds like you're arguing for people protecting their privacy and posting anonymously.

[_harmony]

Alter's post qualifies as "stories"?

Boy, you sure have a different definition than I do.

[_Jersey Girl]

What intimate information?

[_cksalmon]

I am shocked and horrified that any man or woman would post anything about marital difficulties on a message board! Aren't you? Don't you think that Bob McCue has been held up to scorn for his actions? And I learned about it here. On this message board. Squeakey clean? I don't think so.

Yeah, well, I posted a thread on MADB-FAIR and it was, expectedly, shut down quite early on. (If you heard about it, I would expect it to come from anywhere other than a FAIR-ite MB. Those sorts of MB's apparently don't want to have the matter examined.) But not before I was accused by Orpheus of potential libel. Oh, and Charity's child suggested that I was fairly liberal with my use of the word "libel," so I had it comin'.

Wasn't you who said that truth is the best defense against charges of libel?

Man, I wonder why FAIR yanked the article so quickly and hasn't uttered a peep about it since.

Charity, let's discuss it on MADB. You start the new thread. Mine was summarily closed. Where else would FAIR's egregiously-despicable behavior be discussed other than on a non-pro-Mormon MB?

And I learned about it here.

And? Are you going to go to a pro-LDS board to learn about the despicable behavior of FAIRmormon.org? Good luck with your search. Such things don't exist--at least not for long--on MADB. It's better if we all keep quiet.

CKS