The Mockingboard.

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Mercury
_Emeritus
Posts: 5545
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 2:14 pm

Post by _Mercury »

Ray A wrote:
VegasRefugee wrote:I am no longer involved with Mormonism. THis alone justifies my anger. By removing me from its mind prison the anger I extend towards Mormonism has MUCH worth.

Anger precipitates action.


It may be of worth to you, but I don't think it helps anyone else on the board. Do you?


Yah, lots of people. Comedic or otherwise.
And crawling on the planet's face
Some insects called the human race
Lost in time
And lost in space...and meaning
_Mercury
_Emeritus
Posts: 5545
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 2:14 pm

Post by _Mercury »

beastie wrote:
"Tolerating somebody else's beliefs is not failing to criticize them. It's not persecuting them for having those beliefs. That is absolutely important. You should not persecute people for their beliefs. It doesn't mean you can't criticize their beliefs."

--Colin McGinn


From his interview with Bill Moyer


i LOVED his philosophy discussions Barnes and Noble put out. good stuff.
And crawling on the planet's face
Some insects called the human race
Lost in time
And lost in space...and meaning
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

i LOVED his philosophy discussions Barnes and Noble put out. good stuff.



I've never read anything by him, but after hearing that interview, I will remedy that.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Post by _Jersey Girl »

truth dancer wrote:Hi Jersey Girl...
Lets discuss "male privilege" (a term we often discuss in group therapy for abusers), for a sec...

Men having rights, privileges, opportunities, and power, not afforded to women.


Do men in the LDS Church have rights, privileges, opportunites and power that are not afforded to LDS women? I think they do. I think you are offended by the implication that LDS men are abusers. When you saw this post did you question truthdancer to see if she intended to make that connection? From what context was this post born?


There was no intention to equate LDS men with abusers.

My point was that, in the therapeutic community there is a specific term for organizations, men, or groups that do not allow women similar privileges. opportunity, and power as men... the term is "male privilege."

The LDS church is one such organization.

I in no way was suggesting all LDS men are abusers or that the church teaches abuse or any such thing.

Hope that clarifies. :-)

~dancer~


Whew! Thanks for clarifying your comments, TD! I wanted to note too, that wade has not confirmed that the posts I used as examples are the specific posts he wanted to use. He gave me links to threads and I chose the opening post of each.

Thanks again!

Jersey Girl
_keene
_Emeritus
Posts: 10098
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 7:05 pm

Re: The Mockingboard.

Post by _keene »

Plutarch wrote:This board exists primarily to mock Mormons principally and the religious faith of Christians secondarily.

Would you feel good about participating anonymously on a board to mock the Jews in your town -- their personalities, their professions, their practices?

Would you feel good about anonymously mocking the liturgy of the Methodist Episcopal Church?

God will not be mocked.

P



Whoa whoa whoa!

This board exists primarily for people to talk. Don't blame the board for what the people do with it.

As for the rest, Yes I would feel good abut mocking Jews. Just as I mock christians, buddhists, shintoists, etc. I take the stance of south park -- there's nothing too sacred to mock. Everyone needs a good ribbing, keeps 'em humble.

As for the methodst episcopal church -- I mock them all the time. Usually while I'm participating in their Mass.

God will be mocked, god will mock, and god will join hands with us and have a jolly good time. After all, pride is a deady sin, and what gets hurt from mocking, other than pride? Remove your pride, and suddenly the mocking is all in good fun. I don't see God as someone who'd get all uppity over someone cracking a few jokes. I would think the man who said "God willl not be mocked" was just too prideful himself, and felt silly in those wierd robes they wear all the time.

Mocking is a fun word, too. Mock mock mock.
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Post by _wenglund »

beastie wrote:Does mocking certain behaviors, statements, or beliefs automatically mean one is a bigot or prejudiced toward the individual who demonstrate the behavior, statement, or belief?


No.

I don't think so. This seems to demand that all behaviors, statements, or beliefs be automatically granted a baseline of respect. In practice, this demand is normally made in our society in regards to behaviors, statements, or beliefs associated with religion.


I haven't seen this myself.

Some behaviors, statements, or beliefs do not merit respect, and demanding respect for them nonetheless seems to provide a back-door approach to putting behaviors, statements, or beliefs in a sacrosanct "black box" that protects them from the criticism of others.


There are certain behaviors, statements, and beliefs (secular or religious) that are not deserving of respect-bigotted behaviors, statements, and beliefs for example.

I don't think any human or human-related thing should be above criticism. But most are due reasonable and respectful criticism.

Certainly one does not have to mock to criticize. But often adherents of the model being criticized seem not to have the ability to distinguish between the two. TD's comments, for example, were obviously criticism and not mockery.


That wasn't a failure to distinguish between mockery and criticsm, but a incorrect link. I actually had in mind Polygamy Porters comments that immediately preceeded TD's. See: HERE

Vegas' comments included a significant amount of mockery. I agree that if one's intent is to have a genuine dialogue between believers and nonbelievers, it is counterproductive to mock. However, I remain unconvinced that mockery, in and of itself, constitutes evidence of bigotry and prejudice.

Are church leaders bigoted against apostates when the engage in regular, serious, criticism of apostates and associate their behavior with Satanic inspiration?


No.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

I asked:

Are church leaders bigoted against apostates when they engage in regular, serious, criticism of apostates and associate their behavior with Satanic inspiration?


To which Wade replied: No.

Oh, please. If an EV critic regularly associated Mormonism with satan you'd be screaming "bigot" at the top of your lungs.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Post by _wenglund »

beastie wrote: Some statements, or beliefs are patently ridiculous, even if they appear reasonable to the source. And being asked to show "respect" to patently ridiculous things results in the desire to mock those same things. If one lives in a society in which a significant number of people, including those with whom you want to maintain functioning relationships for some reason, openly embrace the ridiculous behavior, statement, or belief, then you are probably going to mock it in private or anonymously. I don't mock the ridiculous EV belief in hellfire openly in front of EVs. I see no reason to do so. It would only create hostile feelings (although why they think they can proudly advertise this belief and NOT engender hostile feelings in others is another subject). But damn straight I'm going to privately mock those beliefs with my family members who also believe it to be ridiculous. Damn straight I'm going to laugh my arse off at the EV televangelist who almost seems to be excited at the idea of scoffers having their flesh peeled off for all eternity.


There are anti-Semites who believe just like you, and think it perfectly appropriate to mock, in private, what they view as pattently ridiculous behaviors, statements, or beliefs of Jews (particularly ultra-orthodox Jews). I personally have heard private ridicule of the male peyos (the side locks of hair), the fur hat and black coats, and kosher food, not dancing with the opposite sex in public, the role of women in the Church, etc., and I find such childish mocking to be distatesful, and I have expressed my distates when appropriate. I try to do the same with stereotyping mockery of non-religious groups.

Really. If I'm supposed to pretend that all beliefs demand respect for no reason other than they're clothed in the police uniform of religion, then that is also patently ridiculous and deserving of mockery.

Obviously if you mock something you don't expect or intend to have genuine dialogue with those who adhere to the belief or demonstrate the behavior. I don't want or intend to have "genuine dialogue" with the people in my neighborhood who think I'm going to hell for not going to church and accepting Jesus. There is no point. But living in a society where one is forced to hear and see this nonsense on a regular basis is like living with a bunch of cartmans who actually DO have influence and sometimes power. Cartman is begging to be mocked, and so are some patently ridiculous beliefs.

Are people who mock Cartman bigots? Am I a bigot because I mock the EVs who prance around on stage delighting in the idea of nonbelievers or believers in the 'wrong' thing burning in hell for eternity?


I don't know anything about the "Cartman", but I think your mocking the EV's may very well qualify as bigotry.

I don't live in an area surrounded by LDS in power. But if I did, I may be more tempted to engage in some mockery of certain beliefs which are, frankly, ridiculous. I don't care if you attach the word "religious" in front of it or not.


Of course you would mock. It would be right in line with your transperantly significant disdain for religion in general and your former faith in particular. It would be your way of helping you to feel better about yourself. And, no doubt you would rationalize it as non-bigotted, but merely "criticism" of something you deem "pattently ridiculous"--and this even given the unmistakable obstinance and intollerance you have towards your own opinions and prejudices (this is the dictionary definition of bigotry, not mine). Classic!

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Last edited by Gadianton on Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Post by _wenglund »

beastie wrote:I asked:

Are church leaders bigoted against apostates when they engage in regular, serious, criticism of apostates and associate their behavior with Satanic inspiration?


To which Wade replied: No.

Oh, please. If an EV critic regularly associated Mormonism with satan you'd be screaming "bigot" at the top of your lungs.


No I wouldn't...and I defy you to demonstrate otherwise. I may suggest that when EV's converse with me and other members of the CoJCoLDS, there is little value in making those associations. But, I wouldn't consider it bigotry--let alone "scream" it at the top of my longs or otherwise. I don't even scream when I detect actual bigotry.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Post by _wenglund »

VegasRefugee wrote:
Ray A wrote:
Bryan Inks wrote:So. . . you don't think Catholicism is a fraud and you don't think Mormonism is a fraud.

Vegas does and he knows that he can't say anything to convince you of that so he "plays" with you.

. . .

What's your point Ray?


If I have any "point" it is that his anger towards Mormonism accomplishes nothing. I think it's even counterproductive. I'm not trying to un-convince him of anything, so I don't know why he thinks, or seems to think, he needs to convince me Mormonism is a fraud. He's obviously trying to convince a minority of other posters here of that, because I would say the vast majority here thinks like he does.


I am no longer involved with Mormonism. THis alone justifies my anger. By removing me from its mind prison the anger I extend towards Mormonism has MUCH worth. Anger precipitates action.


The question is, is the anger and precipitated action, bigotted. I believe it is.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Post Reply