Coggins7 wrote:
As to the Jews, come on now. Its not the lawsuit that's the point, but the hysterical, anti-intellectual bigotry behind it, and the willingess to scrap the constitution in the name of a witch hunt against mythical ideological enemies with whome one disagrees on a personal level.
The idea that the life a missionary leads in the field has anything to do with what this individual did is so pathetic that Scratch or anyone else to harbors it for even a fraction of a second should be ashamed to call himself a grown up, thinking adult with an independent mind. The idea that the leadership of the church can somehow be held responsible for the behavior of this one individual, or that the rules and lifestyle a missionary must follow in the field can produce such behavior, ranks right alongside the idea that the Jews run all the world's banks and control the media, or that the CIA, Richard Nixon, and the American Military assassinated JFK to bring the U.S. into the Vietnam war. Intellectually stable, mature adults don't dabble with such thought processes. We grew out of the JFK assassination theories, UFOlogy, and the belief that Cubans are happy slaves when we became adults and began to seriously read serious books and think for ourselves.
Your red herring about CIA/UFO conspiracies aside, there's a simple legal principle at play here: an organization's liability for the actions of its representatives. If a UPS driver causes a fatal accident, UPS is liable for the damages. Yes, it's up to a judge and jury to decide the degree of liability, but it's not such a cut and dried issue. My younger brothers were killed in a car accident. They were hit by a lumber truck head on. The lumber company, recognizing its legal exposure, immediately began hiding its assets. But in the end, the lumber company was liable for the 3 deaths and 2 badly injured passengers. Why would you think that a missionary's actions expose the church to any less liability than the truck driver exposed his employers?
Vegas, in a sudden spurt of intellectual lucidity wrote:
What the F*** is wrong with you? Comparing the holocaust to my threads? You have no God damned F****** right to do that.
__
Coggins7 wrote:
No, but the entire point of the thread was, clearly to blame the church (to the point of contemplateing a lawsuit against it) for the behavior of this individual. This is the kind of thing that ultimately, taken to its logical conclusion, got six million Jews gassed in the early part of this century.
Then Fortigurn wrote:
Could you make any kind of attempt to explain this reasoning? I'm being very reasonable. I'm not even asking you to justify it, just explain it coherently. At present it is decidedly incoherent.
To both Vegas and guy:
Vegas wrote:
Romneys problem is with Mormonism and its problems waiting in the wings. Racism, the Fascist dictatorship of deseret, the polygamy and the galaxy of "peculiarness" (a.k.a. weirdness) precludes romneys run for a national office.
The negative attention Mormonism will recieve will throw it further into marginalization. I can't wait. And at the front will be romneys inability to distance himself from the asshats that ran the church in the beginning and even now.
reporter: "cantidate romney, do you see Brigham young as a role model?"
romney: "du...umm, he was a great man..um, its all a couplet...just a couplet!! yah!"
This will leave romney the option of also considering all the good things Hitler did.
This post was exactly the one that provoked my comparison of many of the attitudes espoused here (mindless, hateful bigotry against an entire people, xenophobic predjudice, defamation, and relentless suspicion of dark or malignant intent aimed at that people, its leaders, their culture and traditions; constant impugning and questioning of the personal intelligence and moral qualities (Scratch has clearly labeled myself and others here as little more than sub-human) of that people etc.) to the very same kinds of bigotry and anti-intellectual predjudice that eventually produced the anti-semitism in Europe in the thirties and which, by the way, has produced it again in Europe in the present. They are the same attitudes and mental sets.
The Saints suffered countless outrages at the hands of people in the Nineteenth Century who spoke and thought exactly like Vegas, PP, and some other people here to the point that the Constitution was removed from them as a legal document protecting their unalienable rights as citizens (something Scratch would clearly relish, if he had the unaccountable power to do so). The comparison is completely apropos, from a psychological point of view (as is comparing it to the KKKs view of Blacks, Jews, and Asians during the last two centuries).
