? for Ray A

[_marg]

previously:
That's how you portray exmormons, they've all abandoned their moral values according to your thinking.

Ray:

No, Marg. I do not believe all ex-Mormons have abandoned their moral values. A significant portion have, and that is what I argue.

I'm sorry I misunderstood you, thanks for correcting me. Here I was thinking you thought all exmormons have abandoned their moral values, but you only think a significant portion have.

Until we have studies done, we will not know definitely. My anecdotal evidence is that one of the most popular threads on RFM is, "What are we drinking tonight?" Fine, but are you going to bash or cheat on your wife after you imbibe? Maybe not. Don't delude yourself to what alcohol can do.

Huh..I drink all the time. Yes some people abuse it and some people hurt others as a result of it, but you are making a leap to an incorrect conclusion that those who drink are immoral.

I just qualified above, Marg, that I don't care how much exmos drink, as long as they are under control. But alcohol lowers inhibitions. It creates the sort of wanton society I see every night. People who would not do things sober which they do when drunk. Will you deny this?

Yes I deny this. I go to parties frequently. This weekend I went to 2 parties, each party with a different group of people, each having at least 60 people, many of whom drank, some smoked dope, and I saw only one person who over did the drinking. But most people from my observations don't overdo it. It is the odd one who does.

Come and spend a night with me driving taxis and getting a "taste" of the real world. You have no idea. You and your relativist ideas do not impress me. You think all atheists will think like you, right? You and your atheist friends are building a bedrock for the destruction of society because you naïvely believe that our youth can believe in - NOTHING.

Believe in nothing? What is so wonderful, so fulfulling about believing in a fictional book, as if it is from a God (divinely inspired) What is so great about worshipping a God? What is so morally inspiring about a God belief. Why do you presume to think that somehow those beliefs give one purposeful meaning in life?

Accountable to no one! They have no respect for the law, the police, or other people. By all means drink your table wine, but if you think our youth are going to be satisfied with "table wine", you have another think coming.

Ray I have 2 adult kids..24 and 26, neither are into drugs, they don't drink to excess, they've never gone through a period in life of rebellion against me or anyone.

The majority of people I know do not overdo alcohol.

You wouldn't work out what I believe if you lived to the age of Methuselah, and that's not a reflection on Methuselah's intelligence.

I wouldn't want to work out what you believe, I've seen enough of your nonsense already.

[_Bond...James Bond]

No, Marg. I do not believe all ex-Mormons have abandoned their moral values. A significant portion have, and that is what I argue. Until we have studies done, we will not know definitely. My anecdotal evidence is that one of the most popular threads on RFM is, "What are we drinking tonight?" Fine, but are you going to bash or cheat on your wife after you imbibe? Maybe not. Don't delude yourself to what alcohol can do.

I think the whole point of the "what are we drinking tonight?" weekly thread is to flip the metaphorical bird at the church. It's about rejection of church institutions and values. It's freedom baby, yeah! (to quote Austin Powers).

[_Mister Scratch]

What "approach", Ray? You mean grovelling and smooching the butts of the various FAIRites who will confirm your beliefs for you? Frankly, that doesn't seem very "scholarly" to me, and far less entertaining/enjoyable to boot.

What you call "entertainment" is distortion.

I disagree. I do not think I have "distorted" anything.

Ray---I cannot get "engagement." I have been *banned* from MAD, remember? When DCP does engage my arguments, he does so from the cozy confines of the fittingly named MADboard. Or else he departs from scholarly orthodoxy in order to publish unattributed quotes in FROB, which he himself edits.

And you got banned because you never wanted respectful engagement. You wanted to be sensational,

Go ahead and prove it, Ray. Where was I "sensational" on the fittingly named MADboard?

but MAD would not allow you to use their board to pedal your distortions. Here you can do it unfettered.

What "fan club," Ray? What "fame"? You have belabored the point that I post pseudonymously. How can I therefore "bask in [my] five minutes of fame"? How can I in anyway benefit from such a thing? Please enlighten me.

Easy, tell us who you are. Or are you afraid to put a real name to the trash you write?

I'll tell you what: you get DCP to name his peer reviewers, and I will reveal my in real life name.

As for the word "imbibe", here's one definition:

To absorb or take in as if by drinking: "The whole body . . . imbibes delight through every pore" Henry David Thoreau.

That's another thing I've noticed about you - your comprehension skills and not always up to....Scratch?

Wow, Ray. I'm just blown away by your erudition! Citing the archaic idiomatic definition of "imbibe" in order to show my "poor comprehension skills." Well done, Ray! Bravo! You sure got me on that one!

[_Ray A]

Huh..I drink all the time. Yes some people abuse it and some people hurt others as a result of it, but you are making a leap to an incorrect conclusion that those who drink are immoral.

Marg, this is why I usually don't interact with you, but I'll be generous today. Where did I say that all people who drink are immoral? I drink, so I guess I must be immoral. You already made one error in your reading, which you corrected upon another reading. Read carefully, marg.

Yes I deny this. I go to parties frequently. This weekend I went to 2 parties, each party with a different group of people, each having at least 60 people, many of whom drank, some smoked dope, and I saw only one person who over did the drinking. But most people from my observations don't overdo it. It is the odd one who does.

Okay, you live in America, I understand. You don't have an alcohol or dope problem there. Everyone drinks moderately, and very few people smoke dope.

Believe in nothing? What is so wonderful, so fulfulling about believing in a fictional book, as if it is from a God (divinely inspired) What is so great about worshipping a God? What is so morally inspiring about a God belief. Why do you presume to think that somehow those beliefs give one purposeful meaning in life?

I don't know, marg. I guess I just like to believe in fictional books. I was a MAD magazine junkie as a child. Alfred E. Neuman was my childhood hero. It must have rubbed off on me from then.

Ray I have 2 adult kids..24 and 26, neither are into drugs, they don't drink to excess, they've never gone through a period in life of rebellion against me or anyone.

Congratulations again, well done! If only every family could be like yours.

The majority of people I know do not overdo alcohol.

You have chosen wise friends.

I wouldn't want to work out what you believe, I've seen enough of your nonsense already.

You have never worked it out, so I doubt things will change. As long as I know what nonsense I believe, I can revel in it.

[_Ray A]

Go ahead and prove it, Ray. Where was I "sensational" on the fittingly named MADboard?

You mean I have to go dig up all those quotes again? I'm too lazy. Judging by what you posted here, in any case, proves your obsession and desire to ridicule people like Dan and Juliann. Face it, Scratch, you have an obsession, an unhealthy obsession. But on this free board you also have the freedom to indulge in that obsession. Sorry, but I can't help you with your addictive obsession.

What "fan club," Ray? What "fame"? You have belabored the point that I post pseudonymously. How can I therefore "bask in [my] five minutes of fame"? How can I in anyway benefit from such a thing? Please enlighten me.

By one day saying, "I was Mister Scratch". See, great glory awaits you!

I'll tell you what: you get DCP to name his peer reviewers, and I will reveal my in real life name.

I will email him and order him to do so, upon Scratch's demand. He trembles upon hearing the very name "Mister Scratch".

Wow, Ray. I'm just blown away by your erudition! Citing the archaic idiomatic definition of "imbibe" in order to show my "poor comprehension skills." Well done, Ray! Bravo! You sure got me on that one!

If it's archaic then the 1995 edition of Roget's Thesaurus is out of date:

1. To take in and incorporate, especially mentally: absorb, assimilate, digest, take up.

[_Mister Scratch]

Go ahead and prove it, Ray. Where was I "sensational" on the fittingly named MADboard?

You mean I have to go dig up all those quotes again? I'm too lazy.

Ah, I see. In other words, you have not case. The truth is that I was unfairly booted off of the ironically named FAIRboard. I have said it before and I will say it again: if DCP wants to offer up a sincere apology for smearing me, I will permanently cease posting.

Judging by what you posted here, in any case, proves your obsession and desire to ridicule people like Dan and Juliann. Face it, Scratch, you have an obsession, an unhealthy obsession. But on this free board you also have the freedom to indulge in that obsession. Sorry, but I can't help you with your addictive obsession.

Again, evidence? It is true that I've done a fair number of posts on DCP/juliann, but let's face it: they are among the most interesting posters on the fittingly named MADboard. At least I've never said that they are on a par with the Nazis, and that there nasty comment about me and others will "lead to violence."

What "fan club," Ray? What "fame"? You have belabored the point that I post pseudonymously. How can I therefore "bask in [my] five minutes of fame"? How can I in anyway benefit from such a thing? Please enlighten me.

By one day saying, "I was Mister Scratch". See, great glory awaits you!

Your argument continues to dissipate. Seriously, is this the best you've got?

I'll tell you what: you get DCP to name his peer reviewers, and I will reveal my in real life name.

I will email him and order him to do so, upon Scratch's demand. He trembles upon hearing the very name "Mister Scratch".

Okay, I'll be waiting. I'm very interested to hear his explanation. I'm also interested to know why he sent those "GA-wannabe" emails to Rollo.

Wow, Ray. I'm just blown away by your erudition! Citing the archaic idiomatic definition of "imbibe" in order to show my "poor comprehension skills." Well done, Ray! Bravo! You sure got me on that one!

If it's archaic then the 1995 edition of Roget's Thesaurus is out of date:

1. To take in and incorporate, especially mentally: absorb, assimilate, digest, take up.

First of all, why are you relying on a thesaurus for your definition? Second, idiomatically speaking, the word "imbibe" means "to drink." I see that in your post above you conveniently edited out your nearly 200-year-old example from Thoreau. I wonder why....

[_Ray A]

Ah, I see. In other words, you have not case. The truth is that I was unfairly booted off of the ironically named FAIRboard. I have said it before and I will say it again: if DCP wants to offer up a sincere apology for smearing me, I will permanently cease posting.

Get over it, Scatch. Why should there be an apology when you've ridiculed him ad nauseam?

Again, evidence? It is true that I've done a fair number of posts on DCP/juliann, but let's face it: they are among the most interesting posters on the fittingly named MADboard. At least I've never said that they are on a par with the Nazis, and that there nasty comment about me and others will "lead to violence."

And I have never said any ex-Mormons were "on a par with Nazis". I have read where many ex-Mormons refer to "Nazi Mormons".

Your argument continues to dissipate. Seriously, is this the best you've got?

Don't worry, I said I would eventually leave you alone, but it looks like you want me to pursue you? Obviously, you'd want the last word with an echo. You're obsessed, Scratch.

Okay, I'll be waiting. I'm very interested to hear his explanation. I'm also interested to know why he sent those "GA-wannabe" emails to Rollo.

I know nothing about "GA wannabe" emails because I haven't seen them.

First of all, why are you relying on a thesaurus for your definition? Second, idiomatically speaking, the word "imbibe" means "to drink." I see that in your post above you conveniently edited out your nearly 200-year-old example from Thoreau. I wonder why....

Like I said, you'd want the last word with an echo. Better write Roget's and tell them they're archaic. Or better, start a blog: "Mister Scratch's corrections of Roget's".

[_Jersey Girl]

Quote from Ray

Not at all hard to grasp. And the reason I'm on "their side" is solely because of the Book of Mormon. I've had my share of criticisms from TBMs, and just like you are not deterred by the slander you got on RFM, I am not deterred by TBM criticism because of my belief in the Book of Mormon. In the end, we just have some fundamental differences, and we choose to stay with the "side" we believe in, regardless of abuse.

and so have DCP, Juliann and others, inspite of slander and harsh criticism decided to remain actively posting/commenting on MAD. Hell, you can throw me on the same pile in that regard, Ray.

What I think I see going on with RFM (not counting the serious and temperate postings) is that when LDS make their choice to disconnect from the church there is almost a detectable pendulum swing in the other direction from where they came. They make note of trying their first cup of coffee, a glass of wine, talk about what everyone's drinking tonight, throwing away their g's, and using swear words.

I see their harsh criticism of Hinckley, DCP and others no different than the above. They are using their new found freedom to criticize church leaders and other prominent LDS.

Jersey Girl

[_Ray A]

What I think I see going on with RFM (not counting the serious and temperate postings) is that when LDS make their choice to disconnect from the church there is almost a detectable pendulum swing in the other direction from where they came. They make note of trying their first cup of coffee, a glass of wine, talk about what everyone's drinking tonight, throwing away their g's, and using swear words.

I think that's correct about the "pendulum swing", to some extent. To be fair, I did go through the "What are we drinking...?" thread, and most appear to be moderate drinkers, and some said they tasted alcohol and didn't like it.

I see their harsh criticism of Hinckley, DCP and others no different than the above. They are using their new found freedom to criticize church leaders and other prominent LDS.

So would you say Steve Benson is using his "new found freedom"? Or the long time professional anti-Mormons there? Many of these people are pursuing a vendetta. Others can't get the negativity out of their system. Benson takes every opportunity he can, like his latest Neal A. Maxwell thread, to portray the Church and Church leaders in the worst possible light. And this is what they call "recovery". Does that sound like recovery to you?

Then there was the comment by a poster that "Hinckley" could have benefited by drinking coffee, and not had colon cancer. He's nearly 97. These are the sorts on inane comments that show their motives, and it happens regularly. Message: Mormons are always wrong. How do they "recover"? By telling everyone how stupid Mormons are. People who have to feed off such constant negativity will never recover. They just feed the cycle of negativity.

[_marg]

previously: Huh..I drink all the time. Yes some people abuse it and some people hurt others as a result of it, but you are making a leap to an incorrect conclusion that those who drink are immoral.

Marg, this is why I usually don't interact with you, but I'll be generous today. Where did I say that all people who drink are immoral? I drink, so I guess I must be immoral. You already made one error in your reading, which you corrected upon another reading. Read carefully, marg.

Ray you have been going on about how Mormons are more moral than a significant portion of exmormons. And you warranted that with not only observing threads started by exmormons "What are we drinking tonight" but with your personal anedotal evidence in which you inferred that the majority of people who drink, will do something immoral.

You wrote: " My anecdotal evidence is that one of the most popular threads on RFM is, "What are we drinking tonight?" Fine, but are you going to bash or cheat on your wife after you imbibe? Maybe not. Don't delude yourself to what alcohol can do."

Now it appears you are attempting to backtrack and take back your inference that drinking typically leads to immoral behavior. If you do that Ray, then you have no justification that exmormons are substantially more immoral than Mormons.

previously: Believe in nothing? What is so wonderful, so fulfulling about believing in a fictional book, as if it is from a God (divinely inspired) What is so great about worshipping a God? What is so morally inspiring about a God belief. Why do you presume to think that somehow those beliefs give one purposeful meaning in life?

I don't know, marg. I guess I just like to believe in fictional books. I was a MAD magazine junkie as a child. Alfred E. Neuman was my childhood hero. It must have rubbed off on me from then.

My comment was in response to what you wrote: You said: "You and your atheist friends are building a bedrock for the destruction of society because you naïvely believe that our youth can believe in - NOTHING. Accountable to no one! "

I fail to see how belief in a God, amount to believing in something which translates into better morals than not having a God belief.