madeleine wrote:Should I believe this really happened?
I totally sympathize with your desire not to believe such a thing happened, but it did.
It's not that I don't want to believe. No doubt, I could see it happening, having been on the receiving end of back door Mormon deals. Just wondering what in a blog post would indicate it actually happened, and that it isn't just a blog author trying to one up someone with a blatant lie? Did something in real life actually happen to the dear bishop to indicate the mo-police are stalking him?
Being a Christian is not the result of an ethical choice or a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person, which gives life a new horizon and a decisive direction -Pope Benedict XVI
madeleine wrote:It's not that I don't want to believe. No doubt, I could see it happening, having been on the receiving end of back door Mormon deals. Just wondering what in a blog post would indicate it actually happened, and that it isn't just a blog author trying to one up someone with a blatant lie? Did something in real life actually happen to the dear bishop to indicate the mo-police are stalking him?
Well, since he has now admitted to it again in a second post that amounts to one of the most ridiculously stupid apologias I have ever read, I would say that pretty much settles the issue of whether it had, in fact, taken place.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
madeleine wrote:It's not that I don't want to believe. No doubt, I could see it happening, having been on the receiving end of back door Mormon deals. Just wondering what in a blog post would indicate it actually happened, and that it isn't just a blog author trying to one up someone with a blatant lie? Did something in real life actually happen to the dear bishop to indicate the mo-police are stalking him?
Well, since he has now admitted to it again in a second post that amounts to one of the most ridiculously stupid apologias I have ever read, I would say that pretty much settles the issue of whether it had, in fact, taken place.
Call me skeptical.
Being a Christian is not the result of an ethical choice or a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person, which gives life a new horizon and a decisive direction -Pope Benedict XVI
3sheets2thewind wrote:He admits it twice and you want to be called skeptical?
I too can understand why someone would not want to believe, but after admitting it twice.....?
A lie said twice doesn't make it truth.
At any rate, the lie or the actual deed, I don't have a positive view of either.
Being a Christian is not the result of an ethical choice or a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person, which gives life a new horizon and a decisive direction -Pope Benedict XVI
Aside from breaking church rules, it is always discomfiting to see church defenders so eager to uncover the real-life identities of anonymous internet posters. Of course, the church has a long and ignomious history of encourage spying and tattling.
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.
madeleine wrote:It's not that I don't want to believe. No doubt, I could see it happening, having been on the receiving end of back door Mormon deals. Just wondering what in a blog post would indicate it actually happened, and that it isn't just a blog author trying to one up someone with a blatant lie? Did something in real life actually happen to the dear bishop to indicate the mo-police are stalking him?
If he lied (and I hope he did), then I think Darth's comment rings true:
Darth J wrote:Yeah, lying about using church resources for your personal stalking pleasure, in order to scare an anonymous nobody on a message board, makes it so much more reasonable.
madeleine wrote:It's not that I don't want to believe. No doubt, I could see it happening, having been on the receiving end of back door Mormon deals. Just wondering what in a blog post would indicate it actually happened, and that it isn't just a blog author trying to one up someone with a blatant lie? Did something in real life actually happen to the dear bishop to indicate the mo-police are stalking him?
If he lied (and I hope he did), then I think Darth's comment rings true:
Darth J wrote:Yeah, lying about using church resources for your personal stalking pleasure, in order to scare an anonymous nobody on a message board, makes it so much more reasonable.
I agree with what the sarcasm is intended to convey.
Being a Christian is not the result of an ethical choice or a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person, which gives life a new horizon and a decisive direction -Pope Benedict XVI
MrStakhanovite wrote:The fact that Stem thinks a Non-Bishop asking a Bishop to run a list of names from a third party commerical resource through a confidential database for the sole purposes of trying to identify a messageboard poster is totally legit and totally within the realm of confidentiality is a slam dunk.
This is not fact. I did not say anything about running this list to identify a messageboard poster. I am saying DCP used Everybody Wang Chung's claims to his advantage. we all knew he was lying, even you. That's all he did. You have nothing but bias to make your claims. I go with what DCP claims about it. he did not claim to want to find out Everybody Wang Chung's identity. Even if a yes came back in response, he wouldn't know who it was, nor that a yes owuld yield Everybody Wang Chung at all.
This is exactly why this thread was created, to document this kind of stuff. I know stem thinks he is doing something clever here, but by being this stupid he is only highlighting the wrong done here.
You are the one who is trying to make claims for me. I simply have not claimed what you think I have.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.