? for Ray A

[_Jersey Girl]

What sort of complaint, Ray, would you like to see about Scratch's blog? That he used the real life names that the people themselves linked to themselves publicly and when they complained he removed their names?

Have you seen Scratch refer to the family members of posters on his blog by name? How about their location?

Jersey Girl

I'm afraid you still don't get it, and I doubt you will.

There were 4 questions in that post, Ray. You answered none of them.

Jersey Girl

[_Jersey Girl]

And Ray,

Next time this so called topic comes up again, if you think I don't "get it", please keep in mind that when I saw complaints made on behalf of Pahoran and Juliann (neither of which I have any particular liking for) over on Z, I bagged up those complaints and posted them HERE on this board in order to help resolve the matter.

Don't tell me what I don't "get".

Jersey Girl

[_Ray A]

TBMs deserve to be held to higher standards.

Why? Isn't this double talk? Are you saying that you should be less accountable for what you write, because you are not a TBM? "I have the right to kick you in the butt, but because you are a TBM you have no right to kick me back." "You must cop all I say but remain silent, because your religion says you must be tolerant of abuse! And I'm going to dish out all the abuse I want because I know you're just a little sheep following orders."

Great stuff indeed.

Where is the Itchy's blog now? Why did it vanish?

It all comes back to my original point. If you sow bad seeds, you get bad flowers. If you throw crap, you get crap thrown back at you.

[_Jersey Girl]

TBMs deserve to be held to higher standards.

Why? Isn't this double talk? Are you saying that you should be less accountable for what you write, because you are not a TBM? "I have the right to kick you in the butt, but because you are a TBM you have no right to kick me back." "You must cop all I say but remain silent, because your religion says you must be tolerant of abuse! And I'm going to dish out all the abuse I want because I know you're just a little sheep following orders."

Great stuff indeed.

Where is the Itchy's blog now? Why did it vanish?

It all comes back to my original point. If you sow bad seeds, you get bad flowers. If you throw crap, you get crap thrown back at you.

But he took the crap DOWN.

Let's try that again...

He took the bloody frickin' names DOWN the day after he learned of the complaints.

[_Ray A]

But he took the crap DOWN.

Let's try that again...

He took the bloody frickin' names DOWN the day after he learned of the complaints.

That's not the point I'm addressing in the post to Scratch.

[_Mister Scratch]

TBMs deserve to be held to higher standards.

Why? Isn't this double talk? Are you saying that you should be less accountable for what you write, because you are not a TBM? "I have the right to kick you in the butt, but because you are a TBM you have no right to kick me back." "You must cop all I say but remain silent, because your religion says you must be tolerant of abuse! And I'm going to dish out all the abuse I want because I know you're just a little sheep following orders."

Great stuff indeed.

No. TBMs must be held to a higher standard because they claim that any and all criticism of Mormonism is---as you yourself said---"ark steadying." And yet they dish out judgments, criticism, gossipmongering, and ad hominem attacks of all kinds.

Where is the Itchy's blog now? Why did it vanish?

It is still there, with Itchy threating "I'll be back." My guess is that the powers-that-be at FAIR/MAD realized that they were in a tenuous legal position on account of the fact that they had leaked what was supposed to be (by their own contractual suggestion) very private information.

This takes us back to your above citation of my assertion that TBMs deserve to be held to a higher standard. Why, may I ask, do you disagree with this? Is the LDS Church *not* the One True Church? Is the Mormon lifestyle *not* superior to all others? Is Mormonism *not* the one legitimate path back to God?

If Mormonism has adopted a liberal and pluralistic approach to life, please let me know, Ray, and I will lower my critical standards of it.

It all comes back to my original point. If you sow bad seeds, you get bad flowers. If you throw crap, you get crap thrown back at you.

Your original point is a "you started it" sort of argument, and, as I pointed out above, Mormonism predates us all.

[_Ray A]

It is still there, with Itchy threating "I'll be back." My guess is that the powers-that-be at FAIR/MAD realized that they were in a tenuous legal position on account of the fact that they had leaked what was supposed to be (by their own contractual suggestion) very private information.

And that's why this whole thing gets nasty. Your "entertainment" blog started it all. You could have offered all the criticisms of Mormonism you wanted without becoming personal. Remember, this is your revenge Scratch, no more, no less, for what you call being unfairly being kicked off FAIR. I have offered many criticisms of Steve Benson and Tal Bachmann, but I've not started a blog to try to discredit them. I ceased to engage Tal after a while, because I had my say. You relentlessly pursue Mormons, and in particular DCP and Juliann. Do you have any line, anywhere in the sand? Would you like to take a bet? Stop your revenge campaign and I bet it all dies down. Don't keep doing your posts which start with "the good professor P" and then launch into a tirade against him. The same could apply to RFM, who in the name of "recovery" launch bitter attacks against the Church. I would also be willing to bet you that the "the good Professor P" would have nothing to say about you if you left him alone.

If Mormonism has adopted a liberal and pluralistic approach to life, please let me know, Ray, and I will lower my critical standards of it.

So you want to turn around the ship Zion. And you're going to keep attacking Mormons until they change. Eventually, I will leave you alone too - to your grand delusion.

Your original point is a "you started it" sort of argument, and, as I pointed out above, Mormonism predates us all.

And this is where everyone can clearly see the anti-Mormon in you. I think you'd prefer if Joseph Smith claimed nothing. I think you'd prefer if Joseph Smith was just a liberal, and wasn't out spoken, and had not given such "TBM" revelations, and in particular had not given such clear definitions in the revelations. Yes, indeed, it offends us all, it offends us because either we can't live it, or don't want to live it, and we want to see those who DO live it brought down to our level. Right? Hence your campaign to change the Church - so YOU can feel comfortable in it. It reminds me of the lady whose son was marching, quite contrary to all the others, and she remarked "everyone is out of step except my son".

[_Bond...James Bond]

And that's why this whole thing gets nasty. Your "entertainment" blog started it all. You could have offered all the criticisms of Mormonism you wanted without becoming personal. Remember, this is your revenge Scratch, no more, no less, for what you call being unfairly being kicked off FAIR. I have offered many criticisms of Steve Benson and Tal Bachmann, but I've not started a blog to try to discredit them. I ceased to engage Tal after a while, because I had my say. You relentlessly pursue Mormons, and in particular DCP and Juliann. Do you have any line, anywhere in the sand? Would you like to take a bet? Stop your revenge campaign and I bet it all dies down. Don't keep doing your posts which start with "the good professor P" and then launch into a tirade against him. The same could apply to RFM, who in the name of "recovery" launch bitter attacks against the Church. I would also be willing to bet you that the "the good Professor P" would have nothing to say about you if you left him alone.

The thing about RfM is that when they leave the church mentally, alot of them still have family connections to the Church. Even after years and years of having left the church (either through inactivity or through resignation or whatever) people often still have spouses and parents who believe. This church invades every facet of a person's life, and recovery is a hard thing (and possibly impossible) with all the fingers the Church wiggles into a person's life. So even if RfMers stopped posting and attacking the Church, it still doesn't mean they won't become estranged from their family or their wife/husband or kids or whatever because of differences about Mormonism and the Church.

The old saying "some leave the church, but they can't leave it alone" could just as easily go the other direction, "they can leave the church, but the church keeps dragging them back in." For some people, the only way they'll ever recover is if their whole family leaves the church....and with the large families (and the ancestor worship that is the complex genealogies and the "pioneer" stock stuff) that will never happen for some people....thus making recovery impossible. But the people still have to release their feelings somewhere....might as well be on the Net.

Just some observations from an outsider.

[_Ray A]

The thing about RfM is that when they leave the church mentally, alot of them still have family connections to the Church. Even after years and years of having left the church (either through inactivity or through resignation or whatever) people often still have spouses and parents who believe. This church invades every facet of a person's life, and recovery is a hard thing (and possibly impossible) with all the fingers the Church wiggles into a person's life. So even if RfMers stopped posting and attacking the Church, it still doesn't mean they won't become estranged from their family or their wife/husband or kids or whatever because of differences about Mormonism and the Church.

The thing about RFM is that they are going about the whole recovery process the wrong way. Can you imagine Amnesty International setting up a website like RFM? Or for that matter, Alcoholics Anonymous? If you want to deal with problems, you don't antagonise, you dialogue. There are many moderate voices expressing opinions. One of the founders of Dialogue was a TBM - Eugene England (he was TBM in his basic Mormon beliefs, such as the Restoration, etc). He got criticism from both sides, and I am sure had he lived to see all this and been in a healthy frame of mind, he would have had some very significant and balanced viewpoints to contribute. He once criticised both FARMS and Signature. He was also a fully practising Mormon who criticised the Church Educational System for not speaking out more about the treatement of blacks, and not clearly removing the stigmas attached to blacks, which left many young Mormons still believing the old teachings. And he did not demonise the Church in the process. What you are seeing on RFM is not dialogue. He also had a respectful conversation with Joseph Fielding Smith about the teachings about blacks, and Fielding Smith made a concession to him he would never in a million years have made to an anti-Mormon. See his book Dialogues With Myself. Yes, some change in ideas may come, without compromising the Church, but it ain't going to come from RFM, nor from Scratch's blog. It's not going to come from shouting "fraud". It's not going to come through animosity to the Church, nor mockery of the Church, nor agendas to change the Church's basic teachings.

[_marg]

It seems to me that for Ray, DCP, Juliann, Hamblin etc to be so pissed off at RFM, and so intent on exaggerating out of proportion what is said in order to smear, means most likely that RFM posters must be doing something right.