? for Ray A

[_Mephitus]

Who needs to find quotes when the current structure speaks for itself. The only GA in history that wasent white was dismissed.

[_Ray A]

You are so right. There are quite a few people critical of Mormonism who say nice things about the Good Professor, and yet he never acknowledges any of it,....

Yeah, say "good things" to balance your backstabbing.

...nor does he ever seem to have anything nice to say about any critics. (Wait, check that---I do remember DCP saying that he thought Tal Bachman was "intelligent.") Basically, it seems that this antipathy that he keys in on and archives is like a kind of emotional "binkie" for him. He needs this negative energy in order to function and justify his activities to himself. Or something like that.

(My emphasis)

Talk about the pot calling the kettle "black"!

[_Ray A]

The only GA in history that wasent white was dismissed.

And who might that be, SH? Can you enlighten me?

[_Mephitus]

or so i hear.

so sue me for being too lazy to double check history.

[_Ray A]

or so I hear.

so sue me for being too lazy to double check history.

That's the core of the problem. Those who criticise Mormonism often know so little about it, or view it with skewed eyes. In your case "because a couple of black fellas beat ya up" doesn't mean all black fellas are bad. "Black fella", by the way, is often used as an affectionate term in Oz.

But there you are, making an unfounded statement based on your ignorance of Mormonism. Par for the course with many on this board. You are at home with the piranha.

[_Mephitus]

ok, then let me turn the tables on you. name a non-anglo GA.

[_Ray A]

ok, then let me turn the tables on you. name a non-anglo GA.

Have you examined the circumstances surrounding the excommunication of George P. Lee? Lee is a Navajo, and one of the youngest GAs ever called. I read all of his conference talks and felt he was becoming a bit vain in his demand that "the Lamanites" should run the Church, eventually. A spirit of pride was, unfortunately, manifest in many of his talks. Eventually, perhaps because he was on the wrong side of the Brethren, he fell into sin and became sexually involved with an underage girl who respected his position of authority (now please, let's not blame ALL of the brethren for his distorted views). He was lucky to escape life imprisonment. Yet here you are, blaming the Church for this!! Lee eventually became bitter, and wrote an expose of the Brethren. I read this expose in the original hand-written letter back in the 80s. The leaders tried everything they could to "reclaim" Lee, but I really think it was his personal belief about the Lamanites which spilled over into pride that was his downfall. He was, by the way, a great mission president, according to the accounts of missionaries who served under him.

Helvecio Martins:




was the first black GA. He joined the church when the black ban was in force, and may have had a significant influence on President Kimball's petitions for change. So how is change brought about? Not by the bitter sentiments of twisted apostates.
One person can do so much good, and one person can do so much evil. Martins was totally convinced that Joseph Smith was a prophet, and he went to his grave with his testimony. Do we ever see anything about Helvecio Martins here? No. Why? Because it would spoil the credibility of the likes of Scratch's hate-blog.

[_beastie]

Ray,

It's odd you bring up MMM. Do you maintain that BY has blood on his hands due to his rhetoric?

by the way, engaging in delusions of grandeur by dredging up the unfortunate Nazi comparison is not unique. Recently in the US a high profile republican did the same thing.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/03/2 ... -grandeur/

Tonight as our fourth story on the Countdown, this brief Special Comment.

The quote with the context sucked out from around it is astonishing.

In a new book, former Republican leader of the House Tom DeLay writes "liberals have finally joined the ranks of scoundrels like Hitler."

But, restore the context, as with anything else, and you change the meaning of any quote.

In this case, you make it worse.

Mr. DeLay is comparing how he's been treated, to how the world was treated, by Hitler and the Nazis.

The book is called "No Retreat, No Surrender: One American's Fight."

It has been officially out for nearly two weeks and it has not cracked the New York Times Top 30…

So the fact of this one quotation, first noted, only last week, by "The Jewish Daily Forward," could have easily slipped through the cracks.

But even though nobody seems to be reeding his book, Mr. DeLay is nonetheless referring to what he calls a lie — the accusation that he violated campaign-finance laws in Texas, for which he was indicted.

And on page 156 he writes:

"I believe it was Adolf Hitler who first acknowledged that the big lie…"

Look, stop right there, Mr. DeLay.

If you're going to throw around Hitler's name, research the reference, huh?

As suggested on the Huffington Post, we have many useful Internet search engines now.

If you type in "Big Lie, Hitler" into the one called "Google," you get 1,320,000 results.

I believe it was Adolf Hitler who first acknowledged that the big lie is more effective than the little lie, because the big lie is so audacious, such an astonishing immorality, that people have a hard time believing anyone would say it if it wasn't true.

You know, the big lie — like the Holocaust never happened or dark-skinned people are less intelligent than light-skinned people. Well, by charging this big lie about money laundering, liberals have finally joined the ranks of scoundrels like Hitler."

OK, where do we start here?

Let's try the gentlest interpretation.

Mr. DeLay believes that the accusation that he violated Texas campaign finance laws is on some kind of par with claims that light-skinned people are more intelligent than dark-skinned people.

Now that's the gentlest one. The somewhat less kind interpretation?

He's equating anybody, charging him — just him – with anything, even if it were a lie, with the Nazis.

Just by going after Tom DeLay, you are like that old "scoundrel" Hitler.

So Tom DeLay is as important as — what? — Democracy in 1930's Germany?

Poland in 1939?

The Jewish people?

So Mr. DeLay, go back to your Google and type in the name "Tom DeLay" and the phrase "Delusions of Grandeur"…

And you get 11,500 results.

The grandiosity of comparing personal criticism and attacks against one person, even if those criticisms and attacks are completely unjustified, to the Jewish holocaust is breathtaking. Really, DCP did start it, Ray is just running with it. I don't remember ever making a statement that personally attacked DCP other than to state I think he's a mediocre apologist who doesn't merit all this attention. But now I will personally attack him and say that he is suffering from the same delusions of grandeur as Tom DeLay, and both DCP and Tom DeLay are surrounded by enough acolytes to feel justified in making such an inane comparison. I wonder who Tom DeLay thinks is headed to the gas chamber? Republicans?

by the way, Ray, you know the one group of people MOST Americans say they would never elect as president? No, not Mormons. Atheists. Atheists, Ray. Yes, that is indicative of prejudice and ignorance to a certain degree. It's also indicative of the fact that these people believe it's important to believe in God to be president. I happen to disagree, but that belief alone is not indicative of evil thinking. But I don't point to the criticism of, say, Richard Dawkins and claim that this is a sign of an oncoming atheist holocaust of some sort, or that the people who criticize Richard will have blood on their hands when atheists become the victims of violence. I wouldn't make that comparison because I have a sense of balance and history, Ray, which is what you and DCP seem to have lost.

When I did participate on RFM I did object to certain stereotypes, such as saying TBMs are "stupid" or "brainwashed". I objected when John Clark was being made fun of. I have objected to plenty of statements I believe are indicative of nothing more than mean-spiritedness on RFM. But I certainly don't view it as my job to form some sort of exmormon coast guard and cruise RFM regularly in order to object to personal attacks on DCP (by the way, I do know from occasional lurking that usually someone does object), and I think that to imagine that RFMers making fun of DCP will be to blame for some mass violence against Mormons is a sign of distorted thinking.

[_Mephitus]

I had not specificaly known about GPL. Was never told about him. But it does show lack of inspiration that someone would be appointed with such deep issues. doesn't exactly help your argument. Admitedly doesn't help mine either. but are there any others?

[_Mephitus]

I always love quoting the US study which found that .02% of prison inmates are Atheist to people who are biased against em. Its funny to watch em sputter to make some excuse as to why that is.

When it comes down to Mormons, theres more atheists in the USA than there are Mormons, yet there are more Mormons in jail than there are atheists.

Other than reasons given by evangelicals, i don't understand the logic behind why people don't trust atheists.