? for Ray A

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

Here are some words of wisdom from Why Me, a person I consider an LDS moderate:

I have expressed the same concerns as Moksha on a separate thread. The board will need some moderating as the tempo of posters picks up. Hard to find a balance between critic and LDS but I do know that most LDS will not hang around a board that shows disrepect to the LDS church. However, it is fortunate about the choice of venue between the celestial, terrestial and telestial. Without such differentation, this board would collaspe into a reformed RFM board. And there are some critics who do seem to have a RFM 'hangover'...but still indulge in a sip now and then on this board.


I would say it's more than a "sip".
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

Some of you don't like Mak, probably because he's a TBM, but does anyone really listen to what he, a TBM poster, is saying?:

I was browsing the threads here last week and couldn't help but wonder why there are so few faithful LDS people frequenting this board. We have a small handful of LDS posters who continue to post here, and a few posters in the middle who appear to honestly be objective about things, but for the most part the threads are self-congratulatory and self-indulgent anti-Mormon accusation and speculation. I admit that some of the issues are ones that I've wondered about myself, but upon further inspection the threads often fail to produce anything in the way of progress. Much of what is presented here is reactionary whining. We get it. Can we discuss something important?


(My emphasis)

The art of listening, and changing tone and style if necessary, can go a long way.
_richardMdBorn
_Emeritus
Posts: 1639
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 3:05 am

Post by _richardMdBorn »

On MAD there is moderation, and I feel "safer" there because at least I know the controls enable more profitable discussions.
Your experience is different from mine. I haven't posted that much on MAD, but I had the dubious experience of having Juliann accuse me of doctoring a quote (something I was not guilty of) and having a favored non-LDS smear me. I don't feel "safe" on MAD when the moderators can attack non-LDS posters with impunity.
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

First, I agree with Richard. People form opinions about boards based on how they were treated there. When you post on MAD, you normally are supportive of the LDS viewpoint, with some exceptions. You are adamant in your witness of the divinity of the Book of Mormon, and you just can’t be viewed as the outright “enemy” with this stance. You cannot experience MAD in the same way that Richard or I, or any other outright critic, experience it. On the very first thread I participated on, Juliann repeatedly called me a liar and a plagiarist, without the slightest justification. Later, another mod cleaned up her posts by deleting the name-calling, but no action was taken against her. Ever since we first began interacting on Z, her behavior has been consistent –rude, and dismissive in an often completely unwarranted fashion. I am certainly not the only critic to be subjected to this behavior. When it first happened at Z, I asked another believer who knew Juliann well but was far more mellow in her interactions, what was going on, more or less. Her response led me to believe that this is a deliberate choice on Juliann’s part, that somehow she is exposing the true nature of critics. This has nothing to do with Mormonism in general, although I think it does in Juliann’s eyes. It has to do with the internet personality Juliann has constructed. I mentioned this on the previous thread as well. And yes, after experiencing such frustration, critics do vent about her.

What I wanted to know was how you connected venting about specific LDS personalities to real life potential to violence against Mormons. I still don’t quite understand. In your response, you said:

My comments were not specifically meant to imply only possible violence against Juliann or Dan, but Mormons in general.


Then you cited examples of threats of violence against Mormons that have nothing to do with people ranting about their experience with Dan or Juliann. But then you say this:

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.


Now you do seem to be saying that there could be a direct connection between the rants of certain critics about DCP and Juliann to actual violence in the flesh. What are you saying exactly? Are you saying unstable exmormons who rant about DCP or Juliann are then going to attack real life Mormons? Or are unstable exmormons who read the rants about DCP or Juliann going to attack real life Mormons? Not DCP or Juliann in particular, just Mormons in general.

I think this is a wildly unwarranted speculative leap in logic. The equivalent would be me insisting that due to the fact that many Mormon posters often make comments that link apostates to Satan is an omen that one day some unstable Mormon will act upon those comments, and attack an apostate in real life.

When you talk about how much better behaved LDS are, I have two reactions. One is that you wouldn’t be saying that if you had ever served as a moderator on Z like I did. Even the LDS moderators admitted that LDS misbehaved just as much as, and sometimes more than, the critics. They felt this was due to the fact that LDS feel personally attacked when their religion is attacked, which is true. The second is connected to what I said earlier – you’re not an outright critic, and never have been. As long as you remain firm in your testimony of the Book of Mormon, and even the truth of the LDS church, just stating that it is your CHOICE not to engage in it, although you recognize, to a certain extent, its truthfulness, you will never have the experience of a critic on one of these boards. You are just not going to notice the repeated slurs and insults. You aren’t going to “feel”, for example, the repeated insult that critics who were surprised and upset to learn certain aspects of LDS history were just lazy, and that’s why they never knew it before. You aren’t going to “feel”, for another example, the repeated statements that people who leave the church were lazy, probably never believed, or wanted to leave (the new variation being “belief is a choice” so obviously we CHOSE to stop believing for some evil or lazy reason). After hearing, one’s entire LDS life, the institutionalized bigotry in the LDS leadership and teachings about apostasy, to be so treated by apologists is added insult to injury. So people vent. But to suggest that this venting will somehow lead to outright violence against Mormons in general is unwarranted. But the fact that you believe, and make, such statements is exactly why you will never find out just how frustrating it is to be a complete critic and try to interact on a board like FAIR or MAD.

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.


While the Danites may have originated as a reply to violence, it later became a group that engaged in preemptive violence, and, according to many, engaged in acts of blood atonement. I’m not an expert on the Danites, but do know enough to view your statement as leaving out a lot of significant history. Moreover, the episode of MMM is another testament to the possibility of Mormon violence. Mormons are a mixed bag of humanity, just like exmormons.

You asked about whether or not I “want” change. I stated that:

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.


and later said:

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.


I am not emotionally invested in Mormonism enough to actively “want” this to happen in some way. I do not live in an LDS dominated community and my family are liberal LDS, and after some readjustments, my apostasy does not generally affect my relationship with them. I “want” change to happen in a generic fashion, like “wanting” people in the Mid-East to work on their very similar familial issues. But I am realistic about both situations. I think the world would be better off if we all could divest ourselves of some of this tribal division, but am not certain if it is possible. I can’t invest emotional energy longing for some change I don’t even know is possible. I have a real life to deal with, quite separate from these issues. Participating on this board is a diversionary activity for me, not my real life.

I respect their right to believe in the fundamentals, and don't feel any obsessive urge to prove them wrong.


Nor do I, which is why I refuse to participate there anymore. It’s not worth that much time or effort. But here is what I think you and I share, we just come at it from different histories which colors our perspective – I don’t like seeing people treated unfairly or outright erroneous statements being made about people. That is why I protest when I read statements such as yours, creating some sort of direct link between the venting on a board like this and real life violence which has been enacted against Mormons in real life. I don’t think that was a fair, or substantiated comment, and it encourages the very bigotry we talked about earlier. Your statements about the “evil spirit” reflects that same seed of engrained bigotry against those who have left the faith. You have stated, in the past, that you are forced to deal with a lot of crooks and liars in real life. Those are real problems, real aggravations. Are you really going to insist that people who vent about Juliann’s internet behavior have an “evil spirit” when, in real life, you have to deal with what could reasonably be called evil behavior? It just doesn’t make sense to me.

I used to participate on an atheist board. Of course believers couldn’t stay away from it, including LDS from time to time. Believers weren’t automatically kicked off, like on RFM, but since this was a board specifically for atheists, there were a lot of atheists who would “jump” on the believers who came to the board to challenge and or convert us. Some ugly statements were made, on both sides. Did that mean that any of us were going to engage in acts of violence in real life on the “other”? Of course not. People who engage in acts of violence are psychologically disturbed individuals who were likely going to engage in such acts regardless of the particular specifics of their background. They may use the specifics of their background to create the particular tableau on which they enact their passion play, but it would have happened regardless of the particular details of their lives. I view internet boards much as I do video games. Human beings have the natural urge to engage the “other”, to tribalize, and even to defend their own with violent acts. It’s a controlled and fairly harmless way to indulge in those natural instincts. In cultures where open executions are conducted in front of citizens, those executions were sometimes a form of entertainment. It’s the same instinct that makes people want to play violent video games. If I had to choose between people attending and enjoying real executions and video games, I’d choose the video games every time. If I had to choose between people getting angry with and wanting to debate the real Mormons in their lives, their friends and families, and arguing with apologists on the internet, I’ll choose the internet every time. Both allow release of the same instinct, but one causes less real life damage.
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
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

richardMdBorn wrote:
On MAD there is moderation, and I feel "safer" there because at least I know the controls enable more profitable discussions.
Your experience is different from mine. I haven't posted that much on MAD, but I had the dubious experience of having Juliann accuse me of doctoring a quote (something I was not guilty of) and having a favored non-LDS smear me. I don't feel "safe" on MAD when the moderators can attack non-LDS posters with impunity.


Yep, for a critic on MAD, I sometimes felt like a duck in a shooting gallery. You had to be on your absolute best behavior, but people could call you evil and nasty and attack your sinister motives, and the mods would echo it. The low point for me was when a mod shared information from a personal message to the forum in order to ridicule me. But, at least they have no profanity, right?
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_Seven
_Emeritus
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:52 pm

Post by _Seven »

beastie wrote:You are just not going to notice the repeated slurs and insults. You aren’t going to “feel”, for example, the repeated insult that critics who were surprised and upset to learn certain aspects of LDS history were just lazy, and that’s why they never knew it before. You aren’t going to “feel”, for another example, the repeated statements that people who leave the church were lazy, probably never believed, or wanted to leave (the new variation being “belief is a choice” so obviously we CHOSE to stop believing for some evil or lazy reason). After hearing, one’s entire LDS life, the institutionalized bigotry in the LDS leadership and teachings about apostasy, to be so treated by apologists is added insult to injury. So people vent. But to suggest that this venting will somehow lead to outright violence against Mormons in general is unwarranted. But the fact that you believe, and make, such statements is exactly why you will never find out just how frustrating it is to be a complete critic and try to interact on a board like FAIR or MAD.


Ray A,
This has always puzzled me about you. As somebody who is inactive, has issues with polygamy, etc., why are you unable to see the bigotry those of us who are upset by LDS history experience from apologists, or from LDS? Even though you don't experience it on MAD, you at minimum should be understanding of how it feels to be upset by doctrine and church history. (unless it never did bother you?) Posters like "WhyMe" have admitted that these issues never bother them, so I can understand why they don't get what doubters or critics have gone through.

Why are you unable to see that good faithful people leave the church for troubling issues and are having their characters slandered across places like MAD and by LDS?

I am inactive like you for similar issues and I haven't ever come to the conclusion the church is false. I love many of the Christian principled teachings of Mormonism. I disagree with many of the critics here on some issues. However, I will never defend the hatred and bigotry that flows through the veins of the most verbally abusive posters on MAD. I feel a connection to many of the critics here because they understand the pain of learning parts of history that made my world come crashing down. I haven't had an apologist or TBM "feel" what I went through and continue to battle or care.

I have never seen violent threats against TBMs on this board or RFM and if there are, it must be from a troll or a very select few angry exmos. RFM has a wide range of posters. This board also does. The topics on this board reflect troubling issues in the church and with God in general. There are posters here who are active LDS, and some struggling to overcome issues with testimonies. (like myself) MAD posters would place them in the "evil apostate, lazy, sinning etc." group they love to hate, for having trouble feeling warm and fuzzy about adultery, lies, editing of history, deception..... There is no room for understanding there or "feeling" what they go through. I would have thought this would be one area you could agree with the critics, yet you defend some of the most abusive apologists.
"Happiness is the object and design of our existence...
That which is wrong under one circumstance, may be, and often is, right under another." Joseph Smith
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

Seven wrote: I would have thought this would be one area you could agree with the critics, yet you defend some of the most abusive apologists.


And have you spoken out against abusive ex-Mormons? If so, where? Have you spoken out against the verbal hate campaign against Dan Peterson.

Or are you just another one-eyed anti-Mormon hack? Like most on in this cesspool?
_Seven
_Emeritus
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:52 pm

Post by _Seven »

Ray A wrote:
Seven wrote: I would have thought this would be one area you could agree with the critics, yet you defend some of the most abusive apologists.


And have you spoken out against abusive ex-Mormons? If so, where? Have you spoken out against the verbal hate campaign against Dan Peterson.

Or are you just another one-eyed anti-Mormon hack? Like most on in this cesspool?


Where are these abusive exMormons here? Let me know and I will speak out against hate filled statements that could result in violence. I would never DEFEND a poster who promotes hate of anybody. You defend apologists that have been cruel and hateful to posters that struggle with history.

Hate campaigns? Haven't seen those here yet, but I don't read every single post that comes through here. I have been on RFM and have never seen threats of violence or hatred that could result in that. Again, if there were, it was probably a TBM trying to make exmos look wicked or a very rare exmo venting hatred.

Why are critics and doubters even talking about Juliann and Peterson? Why are they even a topic of discussion? Could it be the bigotry and hate they express to critics? There may be a few angry exmo people, but I haven't personally seen anything close to hatred that could result in physical violence in which we would have "blood on our hands" for. If I ever witnessed statements like that, you would see me and alomost all critics speak out against that. Peterson and Juliann bring the attention to themselves and enjoy it. (as exhibited by their signatures)

You said:
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.


Your definition of "sick sentiments" would need to be defined by providing us with the statements that have you so worried about acts of violence on apologists or Mormons in general. When you provide the answers to Beastie's 2 questions, then I will have a better idea of what you are talking about.
"Happiness is the object and design of our existence...
That which is wrong under one circumstance, may be, and often is, right under another." Joseph Smith
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

Seven wrote:Where are these abusive exMormons here?


I think you seriously need to make an appointment with your optometrist.
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

Seven wrote: I would have thought this would be one area you could agree with the critics, yet you defend some of the most abusive apologists.


What I see here is the most insecure, feeble-minded exmos who waste and wear out their lives trying to justify themselves instead of moving on with their lives. They have this obsession to prove every point of Mormonism wrong so they can feel justified.

God is dead. Mormonism is dead. There is no afterlife. Happy now? Make you feel better? "Forum therapy", it's called. Let's all get together and shout "FRAUD!". We shouted it, so it must be true.

And where are you "coming from"?

Why are critics and doubters even talking about Juliann and Peterson? Why are they even a topic of discussion? Could it be the bigotry and hate they express to critics?


Ah yes, you're just another wasted exmo apologist who wouldn't know lightning if it struck you. I'll get stuck into the others when I have some time later today. You know, you are really a pathetic lot. Why not just go eat, drink and be merry instead of wasting your lives running down Mormons?

Have you ever heard of "live, and let live"?
Post Reply