Daniel Peterson issues a challenge.....

[_Fence Sitter]

Thank God we have all that empirical evidence supporting the Bible!!

[_palerobber]

YahooBot, are you really equating someone being seen once holding hands with someone to having "made a public announcement" about ones sexual orientation?

i wish you wouldn't reinforce the stereotype that Mormons don't understand and respect personal boundaries. i'm willing to take your word for it that there was already gossip going around about Quinn before DCP began to engage in same, but what kind of defense is that for a christian to make? (1 Timothy 5:13)

No I am not. He told those there that he was coming out. He chose a public Mormon forum as the place where he wanted to come out, where his friends all were.

i find this confusing, YB.

Mormon Stories #285, at 1:16:31
Dehlin: And you came out as gay when?
Quinn: I didn't come out as gay until three years later.
Dehlin: '96?
Quinn: [nods yes] Mm-hm, when I published the same sex book.

how do you explain the contradiction between your memory and Quinn's?

[_Servant]

Thank God we have all that empirical evidence supporting the Bible!!

Yeah, well it seems to work when you can find Jerusalem but not Zarahemla!

[_Fence Sitter]

Thank God we have all that empirical evidence supporting the Bible!!

Yeah, well it seems to work when you can find Jerusalem but not Zarahemla!

One can find Rome also, so Jupiter and Juno must be real.

[_Yahoo Bot]

I would say that DCPs treatment of Eric was cruel. That message that was posted recently on the board that DCP sent another board member out of the blue just to gossip cruelly against Eric.

Cruel.

I think the fact that DCP sent an email to Eric's stepfather alerting him as to the fact that Eric was mocking him on the board was cruel, intrusive, and showed a remarkable disregard for boundaries.

On ZLMB, DCP had an established habit of hinting that he knew private and damning information about individuals. I thought that was even more harmful than outright gossiping, because people's imagination would run rampant.

Yer one to talk. You have no basis to lecture the rest of us on board civility.

[Guest]

42

[_moksha]

I like all the question markes and exclamation points.

The truth is that Dr. Peterson was reporting on what was already publicly known about Dr. Quinn, who had "outed" himself before Dr. Peterson commented upon it to a stake president. Dr. Quinn had, as far as I could tell (because I was there) outed himself at an MHA conference.

YB

Excellent point. Dr. Peterson was merely crossing the T's and dotting the I's. It was his duty as hall monitor and any subsequent forcing of the issue, so as not to look like opposition to accurate but unhelpful Church history, was purely coincidental.

[Guest]

********

[_Bazooka]

I'm sure Dan, being the stand up guy that he is, will now publicly acknowledge that he has behaved badly and that there is evidence and substance behind the claims of his mean-spiritedness.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

How could you possibly have read them? You've been claiming here that the posts cannot be found on a bb that no longer exists. Caught in your own lie. Typical morgbot.

i read the ones you linked to idiot..............they don't support your claims at all

I was referring to DCP's many individual posts, not the synopsis (with quote snippets) by Dr. Shades (which is what I linked).

The actual Carla Ogden fax a.k.a. "second Watson letter" was published, douche bag. That letter showed DCP and his minions had for years been lying about it.

you areent understanding what i am asking..........small mind symptom i guess

lets try again.....

why did you not take dcps word for the content of the second letter before it was published??? after all......according to you......all you have to do is make a claim without backing it up and it must be true!!!!!!

I didn't take DCP's word on the second letter because, according to him, its contents directly contradicted the first letter. And it turns out I was right to suspect Dan's claim -- once the second letter was posted online, it was very apparent he had been lying about its contents.

As you must surely know, being a "fat" LDS member is no big deal -- being a gay LDS member, on the other hand ... well, you get the picture.

o, i see.....so its okay to mock someone for a medical condition as much as you want......but heaven forbid someone say anything about being gay!!!!!!

Are you claiming DCP's obesity is a "medical condition"? You must be a close friend to know that.

again rollo.............you just go ahead and let me know when you can actually back up any of your idiotic claims

I have over and over; you are just too stupid to see the obvious. I was an eye witness to DCP's writings at the time they were made; you, presumably, were not. Ergo, you lose, bud. Oh, and please get some typing lessons.