DiscussMormonism.com

Wow. The regulars have really turned on their own. Feeding frenzy! Been quite a crap show over on MDD this week watching the likes of Calm and Juliann go after the hardcore regular church defenders and apologists like smac etc. It's pretty bad when Calm and Juliann have to be the voice of reason and tell the MAD group to stop blaming the victim, and point out the obvious conclusion that Bishop is a bad a dude. Calm/Nemesis locking threads and kicking folks off...folks who could say not say a wrong word last week, and folks who have bullied many people off the board with Calm's blessing in the past. I guess a a prominent MTC President raping sister missionaries is what it takes for some people to finally wake up and realize the danger and damage and corruption many of us have been pointing out for years. Sad. But I'm glad to see a few of those MAD folks on the "right" side of history for a change.

Maybe they need to reinstate a few of us banned folks?

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70340-woman-accusing-joseph-bishop-to-file-suit-against-bishop-lds-church/

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70328-mormonleaks-former-mormon-mission-president-admitting-to-inappropriate-interactions-with-women/

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70346-there-was-a-second-woman-and-the-church-knew/

Here is just one classic example

Storm Rider wrote:Great, glad for you. How about you keep your opinion and I will do the same. There is nothing for us to discuss. You will be on ignore and I never have to see stupid comments again. Cheers

Nehor wrote:Your opinion is terrible but okay. Bye Bye. Iz goin miss you.

Another example

cdowis wrote:Let me restate (Calm) == these individuals do not represent the church when they are committing heinous sins. They represent the realm of Satan even when they have some piece of paper in their pocket.

I find it interesting that you were incapable of understanding that obvious point. You just want to argue.

I have no interest in spoon feeding you == figure it out for yourself, etc.

Calm/Nemesis wrote:poster removed

The hard core defend the church at all costs is not lying with the Bishop story over at the other board. There are real victims and TSCC was caught victim shaming and withholding information. The mods and many of long time TBMs over there are sick about this and they are not putting up with the typical apologetic spin this time.

It has been quite a show so far.

So, just to be sure I have this straight:

You're implying that all the hardcore regulars are saying that the woman is an ex-Mormon and therefore lying about Bishop, or maybe taking what he did out of context, etc., and Calm and Juliann are telling them to quit blaming the victim?

Good!

So can we talk about gaslighting there now?

One sentence Calm wrote was intriguing:

calm wrote:It can be hard to keep track of posts and not skip over. I miss a lot if I am ousting [Banning] while others are as well."

*** Only Shades and the super musical group Perfume are allowed to use the red typeface on this forum.

cwald wrote: It's pretty bad when Calm and Juliann have to be the voice of reason and tell the MAD group to stop blaming the victim, and point out the obvious conclusion that Bishop is a bad a dude.

Whenever any MD&D poster breaks out of bogus argument mode in defending the indefensible, a pre-Heaven War intelligence springs into being. Blessed be Calm and Juliann.

Maybe they need to reinstate a few of us banned folks?

It was nice to read how many of that board's posters miss the contributions of Consiglieri. Those posters realize he offered unique and valuable insights that would assist in understanding tough issues. Hope you can be readmitted too Cwald along with anyone else refused admission.

I enjoy bantering with my fellow LDS members but fear to tread where I am unwanted. It would require a huge load of forgiveness and tolerance on their part and I do not wish to deplete their resources.

Dr. Shades wrote:So, just to be sure I have this straight:

You're implying that all the hardcore regulars are saying that the woman is an ex-Mormon and therefore lying about Bishop, or maybe taking what he did out of context, etc., and Calm and Juliann are telling them to quit blaming the victim?

Yeah. That pretty well sums it up.

Why Me Wrote:

The old guy made a mistake by talking with his victim. He should have known she was recording it. If he would have continued to deny everything on the recording, nothing would have been done. Most likely, by meeting with her, he tried to make amends in some sort of way. I can only wonder what would compel him to do what he did at the MTC. What came over him? Strange to be sure. His family must be in a mess now. Quite the shock for his children. Pain all around. Sad.

moksha wrote:It was nice to read how many of that board's posters miss the contributions of Consiglieri. Those posters realize he offered unique and valuable insights that would assist in understanding tough issues.

The irony of Why Me's post here is unbelievable. Wow.

Consig was famous for his bullseye posts. However, now, he has changed to the other side. No more bullseye posts. Amazingly, for all the bullsye posts, a person can go over to the other side. But he still seems like a nice guy.

Hi cwald,

I'm having a hard time fathoming how anyone can justify or do apologetics for John Bishop's behavior, so will you please give us some examples of some of the apologetic explanations they've typed out on his behalf?