Anyone reading the FairWiki?

[_The Dude]

Where's Godwin when you need im?

I assume you are talking about "suicide bombing"?

You get it, though, don't you?

Evangelical christians who bravely attack Mormonism with science and DNA are glibly hypocritical. They don't fare any better if they apply the same standards to themselves. If they did, they would be sacrificing their own faith for the sake of attacking what the percieve as Mormon beliefs.

I don't have a problem with the term.

[_Mister Scratch]

There was a presentation at the Ex-Mormon conference in 2005 where Duwayne Anderson was talking about suicide rates in Utah. Critics have said that Utah's suicide rates are the highest in the nation. Apologists respond that the Mormons in Utah actually have a lower suicide rate than the rest of the US. Anderson pointed out that that means the non-Mormons in Utah must have a really high suicide rate. Why are all the non-Mormons in Utah killing themselves? What is it about Utah that causes non-Mormons to jump off bridges in droves?

That page (suicide and Mormons) is under construction on the WikiFair CK. I'm sure they'll soon have up some hairbrained argument about the evils of non-Mormons making Utah look bad.

This reminds me of that thread on the fittingly named MADboard a few months back that examined the fact that places in Utah rank very high on google searches for porn. The funniest explanation was offered up by, I think, Charity, who said that the high number was the result of a combination of non-LDS looking up porn, and TBMs doing "research" in order to stop people from looking at it.

[_Mephitus]

yes, yes, im doing, *ahem* research. Yeah, that's what im doing. "so this is why people look at this, those silly gentiles! how can they view this (how does she get into that posistion? that can't be comfortable.) and get turned (oh wow! those are huge!) on by (sing a song, sing a song, sing a song, *don't like this evil!*) this? how can i force, erm, i mean, persuade people not to look up (oh my god! what is that woman doing to that horse!?!) or watch this (awesome) disgusting stuff!?!"

[_Bond...James Bond]

Regardless of what you claim to be intermarriage, I tend to believe that jews basically married other jews. I do believe that there wasn't much diversity outside the jewish tradition. And basically they had the same roots in the faith, tradition, and race. This is what I was referring to. But you could be right. I am no expert.

Jews most definitely didn't just marry other jews. The whole point of the word "Jew" is to distinguish the religious belief (and culture), as opposed to the original Hebrew/Israelite semitic group who brought the belief system out of the desert. As I said before, If Jews only married Jews the group would still be primarily semitic.

When you say diversity, what do you mean? Do you mean spiritual/belief diversity (like Christianity contains Catholicism, Protestantism, Mormonism, and the various different groups there in) or do you mean cultural and ethnic diversity?

The suicide bombing remark is to be taking fuguritively and literally. Critics who use the DNA issue, attempt to use it to full extent in an attempt to lure people out of the faith.

The suicide remark is used to take the argument to the far extreme and to liken the critics to killers. The apologist who used the word could have used a more moderate word, but instead used "suicide bomber" in an attempt to discredit the argument by attacking the critic.

[_The Dude]

The suicide remark is used to take the argument to the far extreme and to liken the critics to killers. The apologist who used the word could have used a more moderate word, but instead used "suicide bomber" in an attempt to discredit the argument by attacking the critic.

Then let's call them "idiot-hypocrite bombers".

Unless the critics take a very liberal view of the Bible or reject it all together, they are idiot-hypocrites when they attack the Book of Mormon from a scientific basis.

Or Bond, do you have an even "more moderate word" that accurately depicts what's wrong with EV critics who use DNA against the Book of Mormon?

[Anonymous]

The suicide remark is used to take the argument to the far extreme and to liken the critics to killers. The apologist who used the word could have used a more moderate word, but instead used "suicide bomber" in an attempt to discredit the argument by attacking the critic.

Then let's call them "idiot-hypocrite bombers".

Unless the critics take a very liberal view of the Bible or reject it all together, they are idiot-hypocrites when they attack the Book of Mormon from a scientific basis.

Or Bond, do you have an even "more moderate word" that accurately depicts what's wrong with EV critics who use DNA against the Book of Mormon?

I think something like "Christian critics are illogical for attacking the Book of Mormon with science because at the same time they bring up the issue which refutes much of the Bible" would be better for the article.

I reject the Bible and the Book of Mormon myself. Basically I think any fundamentalist religious person who completely believes archaic stories while rejecting the scientific evidence is either a fool, ignorant of (or ignoring) the evidence, or has had stuff drilled into their heads since birth.

Edit: I guess "suicide bomber" works because a believer in the Bible destroys his own argument for Biblical accuracy by attacking the Book of Mormon with science, since science obviously proves much of the Bible false (The Flood, Creation, etc). My disagreement with the term is more along the lines of using "suicide bomber", which has taken on the most negative of meanings after 9/11 and the attacks in Iraq and elsewhere, and using it to describe a scientific argument or a person making an argument.

Edit 2: I don't know if I said it or not, but the article makes specific mention of Christians attacking with DNA. What about the atheists who use the same DNA evidence? Where's the mention of them Wikifair guys?

[_Notoriuswun]

Critics who use the DNA issue, attempt to use it to full extent in an attempt to lure people out of the faith.

Well except for the fact that Native Americans have a DNA link to asians...this is indisputable.

One of the current MORG explanations is that perhaps the "Jewish" DNA was effectively bred out. This is insane. Trace amounts of "Jewish" DNA would still distinguishable if this were the case - a fact which no apologetic dares to answer.

[_why me]

Critics who use the DNA issue, attempt to use it to full extent in an attempt to lure people out of the faith.

Well except for the fact that Native Americans have a DNA link to asians...this is indisputable.

One of the current MORG explanations is that perhaps the "Jewish" DNA was effectively bred out. This is insane. Trace amounts of "Jewish" DNA would still distinguishable if this were the case - a fact which no apologetic dares to answer.

I still consider the dna issue to be up in the air. It hasn't refuted the Book of Mormon and I wouldn't put all my eggs in the dna basket.

The critics still haven't explained the origins of the Book of Mormon to my satisfaction yet. In fact, I see alot of contradictions inside critic circles about its origins. If I were a critic, I would spend less time with dna and more time getting the story straight about the origins of Book of Mormon, with supported data and facts.

The dna will not do the trick since it is beyond the comprehension of most average people.

[Doctor Steuss]

One of the current MORG explanations is that perhaps the "Jewish" DNA was effectively bred out. This is insane. Trace amounts of "Jewish" DNA would still distinguishable if this were the case - a fact which no apologetic dares to answer.

Sorry Notoriuswun. Science is not on your side here.

1) If a tiny colony of Lehites entered a massive native population, their DNA would be bred out over 2,600 years. While that scenario has big problems as an interpretation of the Book of Mormon, it is perfectly square with science.

2) A Lehite DNA signature would [probably] not be distinguishable even if it were found. But this is a red herring, since the vast majority of DNA lineages are already accounted for in a way that rules out a recent Jewish component. The origin of Native Americans is indisputably Asian and very, very, ancient.

[_Notoriuswun]

The suicide remark is used to take the argument to the far extreme and to liken the critics to killers. The apologist who used the word could have used a more moderate word, but instead used "suicide bomber" in an attempt to discredit the argument by attacking the critic.

Then let's call them "idiot-hypocrite bombers".

Unless the critics take a very liberal view of the Bible or reject it all together, they are idiot-hypocrites when they attack the Book of Mormon from a scientific basis.

Or Bond, do you have an even "more moderate word" that accurately depicts what's wrong with EV critics who use DNA against the Book of Mormon?

I slightly disapprove of this type of generalization. The Bible - at least certain parts - has been proven historically...that is, alot of the events actually occurred, and science has proven this. It also invokes a slippery slope, as not all Fundamentalists necessarily believe in ALL of the things spouted by their leaders. They have slightly more freedom when it comes to interpretation than your average TBM does. ie One Fundie pastor says that dinosaurs and man lived together, which the pastor down the road says is bogus.

I think however, at the very least, it is cherry picking of scientific data to suit their own needs. Science hasn't (and probably won't) ever prove that the Flood occurred...The fundies have their own scientific Achilles heal to deal with...it just happens to be in archaeological science, rather than DNA science. While the Mormons have both areas to refute.

Interesting to note that not one event given in the Book of Mormon has been independently verified...while the Bible is full of them.