DiscussMormonism.com

Dr. Shades wrote:

honorentheos wrote:I wondered why this thread was moved given it had a reasonable claim to tie into Mormonism and the question of belief in the dubious was being explored.

Mormonism needs to be the focus, not the tie-in.

You were letting a Nazi propogandist carry on for quite some time on pretense his points were tangentially about Mormonism. We had to argue they were NSFW to get them moved to the telestial forum.

So, please just don't with this. It ought to be moved back to terrestrial where it belongs.

ETA: I think you moved it because you a) share the views of the person in question and b) don't get that the discussion very much had to do with Mormonism because your own conspiracy theory sympathies lead you to view it as based on something other than a shared psychology.

Man up, Shades. You should be exposed to the ride that thread would take you on if you moved it back where it belongs.

When I was following ex-Scientology boards I noticed some ex-Scns were also into transparently kooky theories of various kinds. Some people can get out of a cult but not get the cult out of themselves.

A big part of it seemed to me to be that they needed the excitement of being one of the righteous few, whose righteousness consisted in having the correct beliefs.

Physics Guy wrote:When I was following ex-Scientology boards I noticed some ex-Scns were also into transparently kooky theories of various kinds. Some people can get out of a cult but not get the cult out of themselves.

A big part of it seemed to me to be that they needed the excitement of being one of the righteous few, whose righteousness consisted in having the correct beliefs.

Oddly, I first became interested in this board after seeing references to it on an ex-scientology board some years ago ... (nope, I was never a scientologist).

Dr. Shades wrote:

honorentheos wrote:I wondered why this thread was moved given it had a reasonable claim to tie into Mormonism and the question of belief in the dubious was being explored.

Mormonism needs to be the focus, not the tie-in.

I cannot count the number of threads on this board that are UNITED STATES or UTAH related but not directly related to Mormonism.

Dr. Shades wrote:

Not to imply that conspiracy theories are true, BUT. . . If something offers you nothing but despair, does that magically make it false?

Serious question, by the way.

Dr Shades, can you please move this thread back to where I posted it. Conspiracy theories are a major concern for moderates on both sides of the political spectrum. Mormons and exmormons are clearly very susceptible to them. You are sounding like a case in point.

Dr. Shades wrote:

honorentheos wrote:I wondered why this thread was moved given it had a reasonable claim to tie into Mormonism and the question of belief in the dubious was being explored.

Mormonism needs to be the focus, not the tie-in.

honorentheos wrote: You were letting a Nazi propogandist carry on for quite some time on pretense his points were tangentially about Mormonism. We had to argue they were NSFW to get them moved to the telestial forum.

So, please just don't with this. It ought to be moved back to terrestrial where it belongs.

Exactly. How did you decide Mormonism was “the focus” when the topics were holocaust denial and an argument that Jews are a lesser people ?

ETA: I think you moved it because you a) share the views of the person in question and b) don't get that the discussion very much had to do with Mormonism because your own conspiracy theory sympathies lead you to view it as based on something other than a shared psychology.

Man up, Shades. You should be exposed to the ride that thread would take you on if you moved it back where it belongs.

Seconded.

Chap wrote:OK Shades. Have the guts to come straight out and say what you mean here.

Okay.

Do you believe that Obama is gay and Michelle is a transvestite, . . .

No, 'cause last time I checked, a male-to-female transsexual isn't able to have children.

. . . and that Joan Rivers was murdered to conceal that this is the case?

No, 'cause there's no use concealing a case that doesn't exist.

If you aren't sure, what likelihood do you assign to those propositions being true?

0% and 0%.

And if the answers are 'No' and '0%', what the heck do you mean by the word 'conveniently'?

It makes it much, much easier for conspiracy theorists to draw conclusions.

honorentheos wrote:You were letting a Nazi propogandist carry on for quite some time on pretense his points were tangentially about Mormonism.

Notice how he didn't reveal himself as a Nazi propagandist when he first posted?

We had to argue they were NSFW to get them moved to the telestial forum.

And notice how they were indeed moved?

ETA: I think you moved it because you a) share the views of the person in question and b) don't get that the discussion very much had to do with Mormonism because your own conspiracy theory sympathies lead you to view it as based on something other than a shared psychology.

In that case, A) you're wrong, and B) you're wrong.

Man up, Shades. You should be exposed to the ride that thread would take you on if you moved it back where it belongs.

I can take a ride just as easily here as I can there, can I not?

Simon Southerton wrote:I cannot count the number of threads on this board that are UNITED STATES or UTAH related but not directly related to Mormonism.

Notice how the ones about the United States are quickly shuttled off to the Spirit Paradise forum?

Lemmie wrote:Exactly. How did you decide Mormonism was “the focus” when the topics were holocaust denial and an argument that Jews are a lesser people?

Mormonism was never a focus of holocaust denial. Recall that that discussion came much, much later.

Regarding the former, Mormonism was the focus because it is obsessed with the gathering of the Twelve Tribes, with lineage, and with birthrights. If its teachings about birthright is fundamentally invalid, then that strikes a MAJOR blow to its legitimacy.

Thank you.

I follow “Q” myself, albeit with healthy skepticism. I do so because it’s evident that he has inside information. He will cryptically post coming events that only an insider would know - long before the media has any knowledge of such events. The media keeps an eye on him too now, yet they are quick to discredit him as a conspiracy theory LARP of Trump’s. But they know he’s leaking advance knowledge of situations and coming events. “Q” stands for high level security clearance, and it’s believed to be a military operation.

“Q” has been wrong before. “Q” has said something will come to pass that never did, or did much later than expected. Sometimes he’s so cryptic, that one can never know what the heck he’s talking about. Nevertheless, I find the posts interesting and worth watching - again - with healthy skepticism.

The person who signs off as “Q+” is believed to be Trump himself.

You can judge for yourself at:

https://qmap.pub/

Gameover,

Give us some examples, because I’m not seeing what you’re seeing.

- Doc

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:Gameover,

Give us some examples, because I’m not seeing what you’re seeing.

- Doc

I think you are asking me to go back through THOUSANDS of posts to find examples for you. Quite frankly, I don’t have the time or desire to do that.

You can read through them yourself. An easier website format which has all of the posts is listed below:

https://qposts.online/