? for Ray A

[_beastie]

Ray,

On MAD you recently said that you predict actual physical violence will be the end result of all the verbal anger focused on certain LDS apologetics. You used Juliann as one example of someone who suffers so many horrible verbal attacks you predict violence would be the end result.

I have two questions for you.

1 - Can you give examples of the types of verbal attacks on Juliann that you believe are omens of future violence?

2 - Do you believe the consistent linking of Satan to apostates could also be an omen of future violence against apostates? In particular, if one believes the accounts of actions of Danites in the past, this seems to be not an unheard of result.

Ray's comments on DCP's "Recovery" thread which precipitated my questions:

expressed an opinion many "moons" ago on the old FAIRboard, that these negative sentiments could materialise in actual physical violence. I still believe that. I think Dan has put this in very tactful and balanced language, but I would prefer to speak my mind in more forceful language. We cannot always separate expression from actual intent. If the quotes from the OP, which are symptomatic of much of RFM, are any indication, then I am seriously concerned. Tonight I watched two teenaged girls bash up an older man because of a stupid comment he made. When they were finished ten minutes later, he was a mass of blood. These girls were no more than sixteen or seventeen, and with some quick and dismissive wit they could have left the man looking like a fool, but the vindictiveness of the physical attack shocked me. They were only words uttered by a silly old drunk man at the train station, yet it nearly cost his life. Fortunately the police arrived and arrested them. I hope they spend at least 12 months in a juvenile detention centre.

If some dork speaks about "killing Mormon missionaries", I do not care a fig if anyone else sees this as merely words. I take this very seriously. And to all the little minds who think this thread has no substance - THINK AGAIN! And to all of you who quote Jesus, remember that out of the mouth come blasphemies, threats, and bile, which reflect the intentions of the heart. This is a verbal hatred that could one day turn to physical violence. And the more you speak and publish your BILE, the more the sick minds will be encouraged.

And let me have a word with those who encourage this, either by Pilate-like silence, or "free speech", you will have blood on your hands if anyone is physically injured. I abhor and detest the sick sentiments expressed against Dan Peterson, Juliann, or Mormons in general. You have a choice. Speak up, and stop the trashing, or clap your hands in glee.

The point Dan has been trying to make in this thread is that evil bears the face of innocence. Mass murderers can be ordinary "family" men and women who smell flowers and pat their dog, and buy candy for their children. It is the "mass movements" of hate which encourage them to act beyond civility, and beyond their "natural affections".

Call me a prophet of doom if you like, but I have wiped my hands of this hatred, and if you can't see the hatred expressed on RFM, and among many on MDB, then you need an eye test.

Why has Dan brought this to attention in this thread? Because it needs to be brought to attention, so that good and honest people can discern between good and evil. And if you can't, then I leave you to discuss this problem with your Maker someday.

And remember, all you anti-Mormons now stirring hatred and bile against the Church - you will pay an awful price. Keep building your websites of hate, spread the word of hate, and as you sow, you will reap.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... 943&st=140

Note in particular from the page you cited later:

Some of the reasons why the Mormons are persecuted are because they are believed to be linked with Satan. Anti-Mormons believe that the Mormons are evil.

This can also be said about the LDS attitude towards apostates. Mormons believe apostates are linked with Satan and are evil. Does this predict future violence?

Ray's linked page:

http://modern-persecution.wikidot.com/Mormons

[_dartagnan]

I just started a thread discussing this topic as well. DCP's Nazi comparison. I should have attached it to this one but I didn't see it in time.

[_Runtu]

I just started a thread discussing this topic as well. DCP's Nazi comparison. I should have attached it to this one but I didn't see it in time.

I think it cuts both ways. I've seen some extreme statements from both sides, some of which have truly frightened me. The disregard for other human beings is not the exclusive property of exmormons.

Heh, I just noticed that "Dando" quoted me in that thread. Looks like you can ban me from MAD, but you can't get rid of me entirely. LOL

[_Dr. Shades]

And let me have a word with those who encourage this, either by Pilate-like silence, or "free speech", you will have blood on your hands if anyone is physically injured.

Ray A, if you're reading this, how do you feel about the Danites, Porter Rockwell, and Mountain Meadows?

And remember, all you anti-Mormons now stirring hatred and bile against the Church - you will pay an awful price. Keep building your websites of hate, spread the word of hate, and as you sow, you will reap.

Will you please point us out some websites of hate and name some exmormons who spread words of hate?

[_beastie]

Yes, dart, I saw your thread, too. I suspect your question was rhetorical about why DCP could get away with "violating" Godwin's Law??? You know the answer already. ;)

Aside from that, given the history of Mormonism, obviously there is the potential for violence on both sides of the fence. As I already demonstrated on the previous LDS bigotry thread, attributing evil and flawed characteristics to apostates is so deeply embedded within LDS teachings that Ray does not believe it can change. (and contrary to what some claim on MAD, when the church leaders refer to apostates, they are referring to Mormons who reject their former faith, not to a small extra angry subset, which was clear from the quotes I shared)

Certainly LDS can engage in acts of violence towards apostates and gentiles. That cannot be denied, given history. Certainly exLDS can engage in acts violence against LDS as well.

This hyperbole has been going on a long, long time, with only occasional acts of violence. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, so I think it's a safe prediction that the hyperbole will continue with only occasional acts of violence on both sides. But Ray seems to foresee some serious escalation of violence, in particular on the exmormon side, and connected with the internet attacks on certain LDS apologists.

I suppose I can imagine more easily acts of violence being engaged in by people who picket and yell at Mormons going in to the temple (I've never witnessed it but it happens regularly according to LDS), but this is not the same group of people who are commenting on Juliann. So I'm curious as to how Ray is making this particular connection, and if he also believes the same potential for violence exists in Mormons who clearly believe apostates are Satan's minions.

[_Ray A]

Ray,

On MAD you recently said that you predict actual physical violence will be the end result of all the verbal anger focused on certain LDS apologetics. You used Juliann as one example of someone who suffers so many horrible verbal attacks you predict violence would be the end result.

I have two questions for you.

1 - Can you give examples of the types of verbal attacks on Juliann that you believe are omens of future violence?

2 - Do you believe the consistent linking of Satan to apostates could also be an omen of future violence against apostates? In particular, if one believes the accounts of actions of Danites in the past, this seems to be not an unheard of result.

Beastie, I don't have a great deal of time as I'm in the midst of my working week, but I'll do what I can (I'm working two jobs, as I recently re-started working as a part-time researcher again.)

My comments were not specifically meant to imply only possible violence against Juliann or Dan, but Mormons in general. Though, that is not out of the question in regard to some nutty and fanatical ex-Mormons. My understanding is that President Kimball received deaths threats because of the church's stand on blacks. I had deaths threats on my mission, once I was threatened by a man who said he was going to get a gun, but we quickly left. Another time a man, who lived at 13 Taurus Crescent (I still remember the address, though I forget the suburb at the moment, because I have never forgotten this), looked me and my companion in the eye and said, "if you do not leave now I will kill both of you". What was our offence? We knocked on his door. No, he was not drunk, he was cold sober and dead serious. Another time I bore my testimony of Joseph Smith before we left a house, after a debate about the origins of Mormonism, and I was smashed in the face with one solid blow. I did not report this to the police, as at the time I felt I should do the right "Christian thing" and "turn the other cheek" (but I didn't give him that opportunity). I can give a chronicle of egg-pelting, obstacle pelting, and harassment from motorists while we were on our bikes. What was our offence, we were white shirted, suit-clad Mormons who were "different".

Dan has already given many examples of the language of hate directed at both himself and the church. I do not see this kind of hatred and bile expressed by Mormons on the Internet. Juliann has been the subject of slander and defamatory comments for a long time, psychoanalysis, and below the belt cheap shots. What I am saying is that the continuation of this obsessiveness can lead unstable minds to hate a person, and that in turn can lead to violent behaviour "in the flesh", by unstable people. When I read the hate expressed on some of these sites, it concerns me, and revolts me. Have a disagreement with a person, but why go below the belt with this obsession? Words indicate a person's intent. Sure there are Mormons who have expressed similar words, but they are in a much smaller minority than what I've seen coming from exmos.

Keep this thread going, and when I have time I will give more detailed replies after Monday my time.

The Danites were largely a reply to violence, and threats of violence against Mormons. Porter Rockwell was Joseph's bodyguard. He was also a response to violence and threats of violence against Joseph and the Saints. Can this violence happen again? Of course it can. Like when Joseph was tarred and feathered and eventually murdered by a mob. It was apostates who thirsted after his blood, and he mentioned this many times.

I don't know about the actual being of Satan, but for me Satan personifies evil, and evil in people. I cannot say I have ever encountered such a spirit being, but for me the metaphor is perfect. It describes evil behaviour, and in particular that gnawing hatred some have for Mormonism and things Mormon which leads them to become obsessive in trying to constantly deride and destroy Mormonism, or put it in it's place. I don't know if some of you ever stand back and look at the threads on this board. You know what it looks like to me - a bunch of people with too much time on their hands to take every opportunity to belittle Mormons and Mormonism. The celestial forum has some redeeming features, particularly the thread on Dan Vogel's view of the Spalding Theory. But every where else all I see is pathetic posts and threads from what looks to me like insecure people who have to constantly justify themselves and their leaving the church.

Of course there is a Mormon mindset I don't like, because some of the attitudes towards apostates is also unhealthy. I do not like extremes, and I've stated before that Jean Borde's forum in Trinidad turned me off more extreme TBM attitudes, and I washed my hands of that too, and to an extent it turned me off posting on FAIR for a while, because I felt I could not support this fundamentalist TBM thinking. I've also been critical of some TBM posts on FAIR/MAD, particularly when it was being suggested that adultery should again be criminalised, with jail penalties. To me this was madness, and I strenuously objected on MAD. But this kind of thinking, for me, is no where near the obsession madness I see on exmos boards.

In short, I see bad things on both sides, but for me the obsession and vile hate language I see on exmos boards comes no where near whatever venial sins Mormons may have.

In turn, I have a question for you. In your bigotry thread you stated:

I'm not trying to change Mormonism or anyone, Ray. I gave that up long ago, and I never wanted to change Mormonism, I wanted to help Mormons see that good, decent, and honest people can lose faith in the LDS church for legitimate reasons. I gave up on that "mission", because it became apparent that anyone who was capable of understanding that had understood it long ago. Those who don't recognize it never will, no matter who talks to them about it, other than the prophet himself.

But later on the same page you wrote:

I do disagree with you, however, on whether or not the LDS church could change this. They've changed other teachings that were just as fundamental, in the past. It may be hard to visualize what changes would have to take place for this to happen, but I don't think it is impossible. Unlikely in our lifetimes, but I'd guess likely in the lifetimes of our children.

What is your position? Do you want change? I think everyone on this board wants change. I do not forsee change from a realistic POV. I do not foresee Dan Peterson giving up his view on the historicity of the Book of Mormon either, but I'm quite fine with Dan believing this, and sticking to his guns, for which I actually admire him, though I have a different view. I respect their right to believe in the fundamentals, and don't feel any obsessive urge to prove them wrong. I have stated my views at length, without becoming personal, and then left it at that. I don't feel the obsessive need to carp on and on and then comment on the lack of intelligence of any Mormon because they believe differently. The real problem is that most exmos have forgotten why Mormons really believe.

[_moksha]

Ray, is there an intervention that can be offered to Juliann before she snaps and we witness any needless violence? Perhaps Wade could lend his assistance in this effort.

[_cksalmon]

Hey...Can I still hang out here if I happen to like Juliann (or, her online personality)?

Call me crazy, but there's something endearing about her odd self.

I dunno.

Best.

CKS

[_Ray A]

Will you please point us out some websites of hate and name some exmormons who spread words of hate?

First, to define hate:

Hatred is an emotion of intense revulsion, distaste, enmity, or antipathy for a person, thing, or phenomenon, generally attributed to a desire to avoid, restrict, remove, or destroy the hated object. Hatred is also among the most common emotions that humans experience. It can be based on fear of an object or past negative consequences of dealing with that object. Hatred is often described as the opposite of love or friendship; others, such as Elie Wiesel, consider the opposite of love to be indifference. People may feel conflicting and complicated emotions or thoughts involving hate, as in a love-hate relationship.

Often the verb "to hate" is used casually to describe things one merely dislikes, such as a particular style of architecture, a certain climate, one's job, some particular food, or people who claim to hate something when they in fact merely dislike it.

"Hatred" is also used to describe feelings of prejudice, bigotry or condemnation (see shunning) against a person, or a group of people, such as racism, and intense religious or political prejudice. The term hate crime is used to designate crimes committed out of hatred in this sense.

According to evolutionary psychologists, hate is a rational reaction to people whose interests consistently conflict with one's own. Hate is an emotion, hence it serves the protective mode of a person. People whose behavior threatens one's own survival interests are to be hated, while people whose behavior enhances one's survival prospects are to be liked or even loved (as in the case of offspring and other genetic kin).

The passions of hate arise from several features of our thinking process. These include wanting to assign blame to others for our misfortune, protecting our self-esteem, a desire to strengthen our community, alleviating our fears (by destroying the evil others), and several types of errors in reasoning, including cognitive cognitive bias. The ability to quickly separate friend from foe is essential to self-defense and safety and provides the origins of hate [1].

Do I have to repeat how many obsessive hate threads and posts we have seen here against Juliann and Dan Peterson? Does that answer your questions Shades? This may be a free speech board, but it is not free of hatred. The celestial forum is probably redemptive to some extent. How can we gauge the overall "tone" of the board? How many Mormons post here? How many have come, and left? Why? Coggins, Gaz, Wade and others must like punishment, that's all I can say. Even the irascible Plu seems to have given up.

Again, this is no reflection on you personally. I admire your desire to have a free speech board. I have always said that. I think you try to be fair, and to your credit you can disagree with Dan Peterson without getting nasty, as they often do on RFM, and with some here. Dan has even spoke well of you at times. Overall I think you try to present balance (though not always, and I'll come to that when I answer your other question later). But you have little control once you open up a free board. You have said that the board will go in the direction its posters want, and it has. For the most part it has become an obsessive Mormon-bashing board. I had great hopes with the new board earlier on, but as I saw it develop it got worse and worse, so I posted less and less. Now I think it's descended to just another anti-Mormon site. Just about every thread denigrates Mormonism or Mormons. Have a look yourself, Shades. It's a pit. The thread on Dan Vogel is very impressive, as are others in the CF. So there are some redemptive features. On MAD there is moderation, and I feel "safer" there because at least I know the controls enable more profitable discussions. I'm really dubious that an open board discussing Mormonism, which is such an emotional subject for many, can function orderly. You're constantly having to rake up offensive posts, so you're like a kid trying to surf a tidal wave. I feel turned off posting because almost every thread seems to be a cheap and unbalanced whine against Mormonism. It's a pity, and maybe it's because so few TBMs are posting, and they will not post, or post less and less, as the board becomes overrun with anti-Mormon sentiment, or just vulgar expressions against Mormonism, and finding every petty opportunity to make Mormons look bad, in the wrong all the time. They cannot win, can they? No matter what they do. That's because there's no moderation of substance, by your choice because it's a free board, and that's the pitfall of a free board. Why do you want to talk obsessively about what Mormons did in the 1860s? Critique is fine. But Mormons like Dan and Juliann think this is a cesspool, which is why they don't post here. Why should they post in an environment like this? Why do you think we don't see quality ex-Mormon posters like Don Bradley? Why does Dan Vogel stick to the CF? Why does he seldom bother with RFM, and when he does it does not last? Why does Uncle Dale restrict to the CF too? Think about why so many quality posters avoid this place, yet will post on MAD, with all the moderation.

Some posts are funny. I did have a laugh at some of Bond's blog where he does mock news reports, and I think even TBMs can laugh at some of this. But overall, I think there is a big problem. But if some people can't live a day without a whine against Mormons or Mormonism, I guess that's how they get their "daily hit". You can't stop it. Some just love to hate, and it's like an addiction. If you want to provide space for them to have their daily hits, that's fine by me, but I have little interest in joining the fray. Ironically, if it was the other way around, and Mormons dominated, I might be more critical of some aspects of Mormonism, but not while there's this tidal wave of bias against Mormonism. In the end MDB is really a tamer RFM. But you got your wish, the board has gone in the direction the posters wanted.

[_Ray A]

Here is a fine specimen from an RFM poster bringing some of her "wisdom" over from RFM:

And as for the pompous pricks in Salt Lake City, "The Brethren", they don't respect women. They're misogynistic assholes.

The quality of discourse just gets better and better, and this in the Terrestrial Forum. See what I mean you're being over run, and out of control?

It would take me all day to make up a list of these.

Is it possible to understand why Mormons would find this not only offensive, but fruitless to even bother responding when most here agree? And it's not moderated? It's pointless.