We have been rebuked for our inequities

[_Dr. Shades]

On a different note, going back to check that "suicide thread", I see a couple of my posts have **** in some places - is that a mod blanking out some text or is it a little glitch in a program somewhere?

It's a glitch or something:

some normal words that start with "sh" get blocked (which is really weird to see someone who uses clean language with a bunch of *** in their posts).

For example (real word beside)

s*** s h u t

s*** s h o o t

The problem has been fixed. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

[_moksha]

I wonder if Juliann was anticipating the Suicide thread being moved to the Telestial Kingdom forum? That would be prophylactically prophetic.

[_beastie]

Oh, she's just doing what several posters over there have a history of doing. It's well established in Mormon history - paint your critics as being horrific human beings, prostitutes even, to discourage other believers from taking them seriously. It doesn't matter whether or not the accusations are reality-based.

[_Fortigurn]

The only place I am looking at now is the Terrestial place...and it is disgusting.

Reminds me of the classic line from Shanghai Knights, when Luke O'Bannon self-righteously says to the porn merchant 'I read your dirty books, and they disgusted me!'.

The humour, of course, is found in the fact that he knew what they were and still read them. It appears juliann struggles with a similar problem.

[_beastie]

Reminds me of the classic line from Shanghai Knights, when Luke O'Bannon self-righteously says to the porn merchant 'I read your dirty books, and they disgusted me!'.

The humour, of course, is found in the fact that he knew what they were and still read them. It appears juliann struggles with a similar problem.

Even worse, she apparently only reads the dirty bits. :O

Seriously, though, I think it doesn't have to do with private titillation (we aren't that nasty) and more to do with the phariseeic desire to remind oneself how much better one is than the "other".

"I thank thee, God, that I am not like them!"

What better way that to search only for dirty bits, exaggerate them, and then revel in them? See what you risk becoming if you lose faith in the church?? Or perhaps they are scaring themselves into remaining believers.

[_Jersey Girl]

This is what they're talking about. It begins with a post I made here, transferred and quoted by Juliann on MAD. A Dancing Banana to anyone who identifies a glaring irony in her post!

QUOTE
Juliann being scolded: Ah, give me a flippin' break will ya, girl? Try reading the thread instead of the thread titles. The thread is NOT about how the "horrors of the temple" result in suicide!

Juliann

One has to know how to redefine words to belong on that board. This is the beginning of the first post:

Juliann posts an OP excerpt from the suicide thread here on MDB bold is hers

My son started his life of depression after going to the temple for the first time in 1993. He was getting ready to go on his mission. He told me in February, 2007, that that day in 1993 was the worst day of his life. He had prepared himself for this amazing experience, the temple, by living an obedient, faithful, Mormon life. Since no one can talk about the temple outside of the temple, all one ever knows before one goes is that it is sacred and holy and wonderful....and a necessary step toward eternal progression. Instead, as was my experience too, it was a horror story. . .

Juliann again

Nope...nothing there saying that the temple is a horror and that it results in suicide. And the person relating the story never came to the same conclusion about what it was saying...I just didn't read it! It doesn't really say this!

Juliann....how may I help you? That the woman reported that her experience was a horror story, that her son happened to develop depression after his first visit to the temple and commited suicide several years down the road, does not equal that:

"the horrors of the temple result in suicide".

Had you read the entire opening post and the resulting comments, you'd know that. I love it when you refer to this board. Please keep it up!

Jersey Girl

[_beastie]

Don't waste your breath, Jersey Girl. Juliann has the worst reading comprehension of any person I've ever seen on an internet board. I don't know if this is due to the fact that she doesn't read carefully - she may just "skim" what critics say because she thinks she already knows what they are going to say (she doesn't), or whether it's a more serious problem than that. Whatever the root cause, it results in extreme frustration trying to communicate with her. So no matter how carefully or explicitly you tried to explain this to her, it won't work.

[Guest]

Okay - I don't want to dwell forever on this subject, but I can't help but make the following observations (in no particular order):

- Anybody else think that it's odd that this post has so far garnered 290 posts and almost 4500 views? It's by far the most popular subject on MAD in a good long while.

- The new angle seems to be that Peterson posts under his real name, while all the cowardly critics hide behind screen names, and somehow that makes a big difference (it's okay to insult and belittle and engage in immature playground spats if you use your real name, I guess?). Apparently unless you post using your real name, your points are irrelevant (particularly on that thread). Jumping on board with this argument is "charity" (I don't suppose that's her real name) and "juliann" (who quails at the thought that someone would publish her last name anywhere). Irony, much? Beyond that absurdity, who the hell cares whether someone uses a screen name? Using a "real life" name is not the norm in cyber space. Those who do use their real names on MAD tend to be those who publish on the subject (critics and apologists alike); for the rest of us, it matters little who we are, since one's screen name can be just as associated with an identity as an actual name (think "wonkette"), so I think that the distinction is an extremely fine and irrelevant one.

- Even if you do divulge your real name, unless you provide your occupation and where you work so that charity can email people in your field to ask them what they think of you, it's not enough to allow you to have a valid opinion.

- Peterson continues to hammer on the point that the particular thread (and others like it) is intended merely to protect his own reputation and to show "anti Mormons" how loathsome their conduct is. I think it is obvious that there is also a malicious aspect to it that he refuses to own up to, however.

- juliann really does have a bug up her bum.

- Peterson's best defense is to sarcastically agree with someone when they point out some observations about his behavior in the thread. Way to show 'em!

- Is juliann really threatening a libel suit? Quick - run!

- The best juliann could do in response to nightingale's thoughtful post is to pick out one little bit and compare it to offering to let nightingale run over her cat. Whaaaa?

- "They started it" is not an intelligent rejoinder.

Okay - so I've probably got some more built up. But really, it's just to wearying to try to keep up with this. Hopefully now that I've purged a bit, I can leave it alone now.

Cheers!

Edited to add (I just can't help myself, it seems):

- Oh my goodness - Did Selek just compare Peterson to Joseph Smith? Cool!

[_Yoda]

LOL! It's a wild ride, isn't it, Skippy?

;)

As Morpheus says in "The Matrix", "Welcome...to the real world."

[_Runtu]

LOL! It's a wild ride, isn't it, Skippy?

;)

As Morpheus says in "The Matrix", "Welcome...to the real world."

I peeked in there a few times. To quote Coggins, nothing to see. Move on.

Actually, I'm getting enough of a play by play here, so I'm not bothering going over there.