Plutarch wrote:Mister Scratch wrote:I don't consider myself learned enough to be an apologist and I am not an apologist.
Then how do you explain your article, which was published in FROB---the chief LDS apologetic publication?
I was invited to publish an article in an area of my personal expertise -- history of legal proceedings in territorial Utah. That subject, nor the Mountain Meadows Massacre, has not really surfaced here on this board. I am truly a lay observer and not an intellectual nor an apologist.
"Not an intellectual"? Well, thanks for settling that for us. Anyways, you *are* an apologist, my friend. You were invited, and you accepted the invitation. If you wanted to avoid the label of "apologist"---as many do, including DCP---then you should have turned down the invitation.
I have a hard time believing that you don't know who juliann is.
I can gather who she is from the bad things said about her on this board. From what you say about her she is an ignorant fool and I have no evidence or experience to counter that. But I don't perversely follow her every written word and then comment upon it.
No one else follows her "every word" either. Beastie and I have been following her misuse of scholarly materials for a while now, but I rather think that *her* manipulation of those sources is what's genuinely perverse.
Also, don't you think that, in order to elide charges of hypocrisy against yourself, that you ought to condemn anonymity over at MAD and ZLMB, too?
I'm not familiar with the word "elide". I condemn hypocritical anonymity here and on any other board. The Internet is not a license to defame and injure living persons. You think you can get away with it by being anonymous. The vile and nasty things said here on this board about Pres. Hinckley, Dr. Peterson, and Dr. Hamblin are good examples.
"Elide" means to suppress. It only takes a couple of seconds to pick up a dictionary, P. And who is being "defamed"? What "vile and nasty things" have I ever said about Profs. Peterson or Hamblin? I criticized Hamblin for losing a critical piece of evidence, and I have been critical of DCP's handling of the so-called "peer review" process at FROB, but I don't know what "vile and nasty" stuff you could possibly be referring to. You seem to think these people are demi-gods who ought to go scot-free when it comes to criticism.
The bottomline is that you want to know everybody's in real life identities so you can berate them, or turn them over to the SCMC. You want to be able to attack people personally.
There is no evidence of that. If you will check my prior posts with Bob McCue and Tal Bachman, whom I know are real persons, the worst I get is call McCue a "moron" for his blathering posts. But I respect their willingness to use their real names.
I challenge you to use your real name when you post against the Church. I challenge you to do so so that you, as well as I do today, will know that my words can be used against me in the future and thus I must use them wisely and not recklessly.
I have no idea whether "Bob Crockett" is your real name or not. Do you want to post your address as well? The name of your SP? And anyways, any of our words here can be used against us. Or are you wanting to engage in more ad hominem attacks?
I can't help but think that this is your means of grumping over getting exposed on your MMM letter distortion. You hemmed and hawed for weeks, trying to avoid being held accountable for that. Once you finally caved in and posted the text---lo, and behold!---it turned out you omitted key details. Look: we can understand your embarrassment over that, but there's no need to point the dirty end of the stick and everyone because of it. Just get over it, man.
Discussions of substance are what we should be having here, whether it be a letter involving the MMM or theology or history. But have the courage, man, to put your name behind your statements.
P
I don't see how such a thing constitutes genuine "courage."