Daniel Peterson wrote:I voted for Number 1.
So did I. We finally agree on something!
DCP and Quinn
-
_Rollo Tomasi
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 4085
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:27 pm
Re: DCP and Quinn
So did I. We finally agree on something!
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
-
_Black Moclips
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 596
- Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:46 am
Yeah, there needs to be a "BFD" option in the poll.
Otherwise I'm inclined to quote the late great Colonel Sanders:
"I'm too drunk to taste this chicken".
PS-I don't drink. But I did watch Taladega nights last night.
Otherwise I'm inclined to quote the late great Colonel Sanders:
"I'm too drunk to taste this chicken".
PS-I don't drink. But I did watch Taladega nights last night.
“A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take away everything that you have.”
-
_Yoda
-
_Mister Scratch
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 5604
- Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm
Daniel Peterson wrote:Mister Scratch wrote:The inclusion of the SP has to do with the sensitive nature of this particular gossip. You know, about how it involves matters of confidentiality and all that. E.g., if an attorney blabs about something a client told him, and you hear about it from your friend, it seems slightly worse that gossip you pass along about your next door neighbor. The SP's involvement in this adds the extra layer of violation of a social contract.
Except, of course, that, as I've pointed out 1387 times previously, the stake president had not met Mike Quinn at that point and, so, seems only to have been alluding to publicly available knowledge rather than divulging the confidential disclosures of a confessional situation (which would, indeed, have been a deeply unethical act).
Then what is the mysterious "sad incident" you've been alluding to all along? Was this "publicly available knowledge"? Or was Paul Hanks behaving unethically?
-
_Doctor Steuss
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 4597
- Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 6:57 pm
-
_Lucretia MacEvil
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1558
- Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 7:01 am
-
_Polygamy Porter
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:04 am
-
_DonBradley
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1118
- Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 6:58 am
-
_Lucretia MacEvil
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1558
- Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 7:01 am
DonBradley wrote:I wouldn't be too sure you got the last word. Didn't DCP say he would be out of town for a few days?
It seems like he responsed to several other posts after he said he was leaving, but not to mine. Maybe he'll come back to it when he returns and he's had a few days to think about it.
Meanwhile, it's hard for me to type when my arm is broken from patting myself on the back, so buenas noches.
-
_Mister Scratch
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 5604
- Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm
Lucretia MacEvil wrote:DonBradley wrote:I wouldn't be too sure you got the last word. Didn't DCP say he would be out of town for a few days?
It seems like he responsed to several other posts after he said he was leaving, but not to mine. Maybe he'll come back to it when he returns and he's had a few days to think about it.
Meanwhile, it's hard for me to type when my arm is broken from patting myself on the back, so buenas noches.
No doubt his "last word" would be yet another of his dumb jokes. He ought to just apologize and admit he was wrong, and thus put this matter to rest once and for all. People all claim to be sick of discussing it, and yet all but two people believe he gossiped. Thus: he should admit his wrongdoing.