Daniel Peterson wrote:People were killed over the Jyllandsposten cartoons. People were killed over Pope Benedict XVI's comments at Regensburg. People were killed over a false Newsweek story about guards flushing a Qur’an down the toilet at Camp Gitmo.
And Christopher then suggests gathering up whatever you folks can gather and sending it "to some group like C.A.I.R."?
TAK wrote:Parse all you want.. but apparently your acquiescence may get people killed.
What "parsing"? What "acquiescence"?
What are you talking about? Do you even have any idea at all?
If the church is doing proxy work for dead Muslims, they should stop.
Daniel Peterson wrote:In whatever games you folks ultimately decide to play with this new toy, I hope you'll remember that you could quite conceivably get some people killed.
Yes, we might get someone killed. We should curtail our freedom of speech so that Islamic psychopaths don't get offended, and then decide to kill someone. And if a Muslim kills someone then it's partially our fault... For... Get ready... Talking.
Daniel Peterson wrote:In whatever games you folks ultimately decide to play with this new toy, I hope you'll remember that you could quite conceivably get some people killed.
Yes, we might get someone killed. We should curtail our freedom of speech so that Islamic psychopaths don't get offended, and then decide to kill someone. And if a Muslim kills someone then it's partially our fault... For... Get ready... Talking.
Jesus.
Read the thread brainiac. Someone was suggesting contacting CAIR and giving them the names of those who submitted Muhammed. Let's not only publicize an emotive issue but let's also give any violent reactionaries actual targets.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
Daniel Peterson wrote:In whatever games you folks ultimately decide to play with this new toy, I hope you'll remember that you could quite conceivably get some people killed.
Yes, we might get someone killed. We should curtail our freedom of speech so that Islamic psychopaths don't get offended, and then decide to kill someone. And if a Muslim kills someone then it's partially our fault... For... Get ready... Talking.
Jesus.
Read the thread brainiac. Someone was suggesting contacting CAIR and giving them the names of those who submitted Muhammed. Let's not only publicize an emotive issue but let's also give any violent reactionaries actual targets.
I did read the thread Electroshock Boy. "People were killed over the Jyllandsposten cartoons. People were killed over Pope Benedict XVI's comments at Regensburg." In that context my comment was made. What's wrong with you?
antishock8 wrote:I did read the thread Electroshock Boy. "People were killed over the Jyllandsposten cartoons. People were killed over Pope Benedict XVI's comments at Regensburg." In that context my comment was made. What's wrong with you?
Obviously I'm either depressed or think you're worth responding to and thus need more electric shocks.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
The Nehor wrote:Read the thread brainiac. Someone was suggesting contacting CAIR and giving them the names of those who submitted Muhammed. Let's not only publicize an emotive issue but let's also give any violent reactionaries actual targets.
Maybe you need to read the thread--someone suggested contacting CAIR and telling them proxy work had been done for Muhammed. Nobody said anything about forwarding the names of those who submitted Muhammed and others. The only mention made of the suggesters was by me, and I was suggesting, probably in vain, that they be removed from familysearch.org.
The Nehor wrote:Read the thread brainiac. Someone was suggesting contacting CAIR and giving them the names of those who submitted Muhammed. Let's not only publicize an emotive issue but let's also give any violent reactionaries actual targets.
Maybe you need to read the thread--someone suggested contacting CAIR and telling them proxy work had been done for Muhammed. Nobody said anything about forwarding the names of those who submitted Muhammed and others. The only mention made of the suggesters was by me, and I was suggesting, probably in vain, that they be removed from familysearch.org.
Not forwarding specific names would be even more damaging, if you ask me. Then one can define targets with the simple description: "Young American males dressed in white shirts, ties, with a black name badge and a backpack, walking in pairs down an alley in Amsterdam."
antishock8:
Yes, we might get someone killed. We should curtail our freedom of speech so that Islamic psychopaths don't get offended, and then decide to kill someone. And if a Muslim kills someone then it's partially our fault... For... Get ready... Talking.
No doubt you are the kind of genius who, after too many shots of Cuervo, will inform the burly guy next to you at the bar that he's a stupid bastard, just to exercise your freedom of speech.
Brilliant.
Besides, what do you and your buddies here at the Scratchtang Ranch care about some 19-year-old Mormon hick from Brigham City getting targeted by some angry Muslim in Barcelona? After all, nits make lice, right?
... every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol ...
Hey Will, do you ever plan to respond to your critics?
Why do you feel it necessary to lie in your apologetics?
How many threads can you dodge?
“All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it...Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality." - Albert Einstein
Daniel Peterson wrote:In whatever games you folks ultimately decide to play with this new toy, I hope you'll remember that you could quite conceivably get some people killed.
Who could killed over this discussion?
Oh, I don't know. How about some unsuspecting 19-year-old from Brigham City walking down the sidewalk in Salman Rushdie's neighborhood?
Once again it is confirmed that the vast majority of those who reside here in The Great and Spacious Trailer Park™ are utterly incapable of three-dimensional thinking.
You took the bait. Way to go Will, you non-thinker you. At least you didn't bring up masturbation this time.
Furthermore, why should Muslims care whether LDS are baptized on their behalf? Isn't it a blessing for them? Certainly, you're not suggesting that Muslims are incapable of three dimensional thinking.
Sheesh, if you think baptism for the dead is that dangerous for LDS, perhaps, you should petition the church to refrain from performing such rites for Muslims. If God wants the work to stop, He will stop it.
Daniel Peterson wrote:If civil, substantive, non-demonizing discussion had been possible on this message board, I would have been happy to discuss this topic.
I see DCP's 'martyr complex' is starting to kick in -- how long before he picks up his bucket and stomps away from the sandbox (for the umpteenth time)?
Do you really lack self-awareness to such an extent that you can't see the reality here?
You attack and attack and attack. You demonize. You refuse to grant that those who disagree with you can do so in good faith. You mock. You stand by (at the very least) while others here ridicule your opponent's physical appearance, call him a liar, make fun of his alleged psychological defects. You probe and probe and probe, zealously trying to get your chosen target to say something that you can portray as self-contradictory or self-incriminating.
Then, when your target grows tired and exasperated with the game, you mock him for his alleged "martyr complex."
Do you wonder why so few believing Latter-day Saints come here for discussions? Why the conversations here are, on the whole, so one-sided? Why serious LDS scholars have no interest in the place?
Does this not bother you at least a little bit? Is this the kind of board you want?
I hope so, because it's the kind of board you have, and the kind of board you're likely to continue to have in perpetuity.
Dan, I agree with you to a large degree. I can see your point of view.
That said, your opposition to the nature of this board appears one of convenience rather than one of principle given your continued active participation on the MAD Board, which exhibits (arguably to even a greater degree) the exact same characteristics.
Do you, therefore, blame someone like me for expressing skepticism regarding the principled sincerity of your protestations?
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."