Ray A.....total nut.

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Post by _Jersey Girl »

Ray A wrote:
Mister Scratch wrote:
How do you figure? Or is this just more of your insane babbling? To illustrate: I thought Pahoran was a class-A jerk long, long before I knew his name. Personal information like that is irrelevant, Ray.


Have you ever heard of "declaring your interests"? That's why you can't be taken seriously in your commentary about others. You know lots and lots about others' personal lives, and from your protected Ivory Tower you shoot arrows at them. I know the backgrounds of many posters here, and they know mine. The position you hold is relevant to your commentary, if not in the eyes of your supporters, certainly in the eyes of those you criticise. Otherwise, you're what's commonly known as a cowardly bully. "Let's have a duel with one gun, I get to hold the gun."


Excuse me for butting into this redundant series of exchanges....or not. How is it that Scratch has come to know "lots and lots about others' personal lives"? Where did he gather his information from and can you give me just a couple of examples?
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Post by _Jersey Girl »

Ray A wrote:
Mister Scratch wrote:So what? How does this somehow make me deserving of less respect? Why am I to be labeled a "coward" simply because I don't go blabbing about my personal affairs? Your argument doesn't make any sense, Ray.


It makes a lot of sense. You said you only post what's online, but you posted all of DCP's emails to you. That wasn't "online". It was gutless. To the contrary, when I had my tiffs with DCP in 2003, at least he didn't do that. He offered, privately, for anyone who wanted to read our exchanges to do so by asking him to send them, and I assume with the condition they were not to be posted publicly. That I have always respected, even when we were crossing wires at the time. He was, for short time, a "enemy" I could respect. Yes, I'm even prepared to respect "enemies", if they have a sense of fair play.


How is agreeing to send a person's emails to another via email, "fair play"? Are you saying that DCP was willing to send your emails to others? Was there a condition that the "others" would never post them publicly on line and if so, how exactly would DCP have enforced that condition?
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

Mister Scratch wrote:Ray---this doesn't answer my point at all. I asked you why the fact that I have been cagey vis-a-vis my private information makes me "deserving of less respect." Now you are saying that I am deserving of "less respect" because I posted some of DCP's and I's email exchanges, which is something different.


Well, I would like to know who you are, for a start. PM or email me and tell me about yourself. If you are willing to do this, you have my absolute guarantee that what you reveal will remain strictly confidential. To me, you are a mask. Show me what lies behind the mask. Even if I don't like it, you have my word that it will remain between us.

Mister Scratch wrote:Do you have a real argument, or are you just letting off steam, mate?


I let off plenty of steam tonight, watching some of the most beautiful women in Oz at the Melbourne Cup.

One thing we should be clear about, Scratch, I'm not going to turn into a mocker of Mormonism, or Mormons. I am well beyond any of that, now. I'm only inviting you to explain your feelings, and your personal beliefs, to me. I'm genuinely interested to hear your viewpoint away from "the madding crowd".
_Chap
_Emeritus
Posts: 14190
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:23 am

Post by _Chap »

Ray A wrote:
Mister Scratch wrote:Ray---this doesn't answer my point at all. I asked you why the fact that I have been cagey vis-a-vis my private information makes me "deserving of less respect." Now you are saying that I am deserving of "less respect" because I posted some of DCP's and I's email exchanges, which is something different.


Well, I would like to know who you are, for a start. PM or email me and tell me about yourself. If you are willing to do this, you have my absolute guarantee that what you reveal will remain strictly confidential. To me, you are a mask. Show me what lies behind the mask. Even if I don't like it, you have my word that it will remain between us.

Mister Scratch wrote:Do you have a real argument, or are you just letting off steam, mate?


I let off plenty of steam tonight, watching some of the most beautiful women in Oz at the Melbourne Cup.

One thing we should be clear about, Scratch, I'm not going to turn into a mocker of Mormonism, or Mormons. I am well beyond any of that, now. I'm only inviting you to explain your feelings, and your personal beliefs, to me. I'm genuinely interested to hear your viewpoint away from "the madding crowd".


Dear Ray,

May I remind you that you are posting in thread called 'Ray A. - total nut'. And yet every time I log on, there you are. Just think about this Ray ...

Chap
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

Chap wrote:Dear Ray,

May I remind you that you are posting in thread called 'Ray A. - total nut'. And yet every time I log on, there you are. Just think about this Ray ...

Chap


This conversation is between me and Scratch, so butt the f*** out A-hole.
_Chap
_Emeritus
Posts: 14190
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:23 am

Post by _Chap »

Ray A wrote:
Chap wrote:Dear Ray,

May I remind you that you are posting in thread called 'Ray A. - total nut'. And yet every time I log on, there you are. Just think about this Ray ...

Chap


This conversation is between me and Scratch, so butt the f*** out A-hole.


Like I said, this thread is called ... Oh heck. Just set me down at the next corner. I'm just up the street.
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Post by _Mister Scratch »

Ray A wrote:
Mister Scratch wrote:Ray---this doesn't answer my point at all. I asked you why the fact that I have been cagey vis-a-vis my private information makes me "deserving of less respect." Now you are saying that I am deserving of "less respect" because I posted some of DCP's and I's email exchanges, which is something different.


Well, I would like to know who you are, for a start. PM or email me and tell me about yourself. If you are willing to do this, you have my absolute guarantee that what you reveal will remain strictly confidential. To me, you are a mask. Show me what lies behind the mask. Even if I don't like it, you have my word that it will remain between us.


You *still* have not answered my question, Ray. Why would my "revelation" of this stuff earn me respect? Moreover, why do I deserve to be treated with disrespect merely because I've stayed mum?



I let off plenty of steam tonight, watching some of the most beautiful women in Oz at the Melbourne Cup.

One thing we should be clear about, Scratch, I'm not going to turn into a mocker of Mormonism, or Mormons. I am well beyond any of that, now.


Yes, I'm well aware of this. Instead, you have become a mocker of ex-Mormons and ex-Mormonism, and quite a violent one at that.
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

Mister Scratch wrote:Yes, I'm well aware of this. Instead, you have become a mocker of ex-Mormons and ex-Mormonism, and quite a violent one at that.


You talk like ex-Mormonism is some kind of idea, group-think, or movement. I became a liberal Mormon in 1985. I became an ex-Mormon in 1987. Where were you then, Scratch? In diapers? In all of my sporadic returns to the Church, I was liberal, and in 2000 a senior apostle who read my writings was hesitant to let me back into the Church. This is what I understand from what I heard from my bishop at the time.

I'll put it to you bluntly, Scratch, what you and others are "going through", I went through in the early 1980s. I'll be bold enough to say there are apostates unborn (!) who will go through every stage I went through. All of the exmos who have commented in the last five or six years, and all of the ideas/emotions they expressed, I went through in the early '80s. I even predicted this. Here is what I wrote in my blog (which I have now ceased, and changed the URL link);

Twenty years and two months ago I walked away from the Church. Not before I gave this warning to the Church leaders - you need to be more open and honest about Mormon history, because if you aren't, there will be mass apostasy on a grand scale in the future. These were the pre-Internet days, the late 1980s. With the advent of the Internet, and the creation of ex-Mormon websites in the late 1990s (primarily Recovery From Mormonism), and the rapid spread of information, the prediction I made began to come true. I had been studying "alternative" Mormon history since the early 1980s when this realisation struck me. Now I've always been an advocate of seeking knowledge, and I found all the sources I needed to learn everything I could about Mormon history. In the mid-80s, when I was at university doing a BA degree majoring in history, I spent countless hours reading up on anything I could on Mormonism, mainly on Saturdays. I would spend some four or five hours every Saturday, apart from my course of study, reading volumes of books, checking microfilm, perusing journals, and I began ordering books from alternative publishers of LDS history, like Signature books. By the time of the Internet, there was little I didn't know. But now everyone could easily access what I had learned in the 80s through much effort. People who didn't have the drive or interest I did in LDS history could now access everything through a keyboard at home, in minutes. A housewife, a son or daughter, could digest information from a multitude of sources that formerly required painstaking perusal of hardcopy on library shelves, usually only done by the most foolhardy.


Even Steve Benson only "recognised" what I recognised, ten years after I did!

I'm really tired, and have to go to bed, but I'll be succinct in my summarisation:

You don't know a fart. The critics of Mormonism don't know a fart. What they are now expressing, including what Kevin Graham is now expressing - is child's play. The only reason Kevin is popular here is because he mimics "truths" which dumb people never researched for themselves. Because his faith has been killed stone dead, he seriously believes that others will be likewise affected. Kevin still does not understand the real underlying basis of belief. Book of Abraham studies are boring, "s*** boring", because they do not address the real basis of belief.

If Kevin thinks he has some "revolutionary" "insights", "understandings", which will "wake up Mormons", he's sadly mistaken. 95% of them will will use what he writes for toilet paper. Likewise you, Scratch. You don't have clue what motivates true belief. Your commentary is absolutely asinine, and all it will do is enhance belief. You are a complete JOKE to Mormons, especially those who post on MADB. When you finally grow a brain, in regard to Mormonism, I will show you how to approach this more intelligently, and in a more objective way.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

Ray A wrote:If Kevin thinks he has some "revolutionary" "insights", "understandings", which will "wake up Mormons", he's sadly mistaken. 95% of them will will use what he writes for toilet paper. Likewise you, Scratch. You don't have clue what motivates true belief. Your commentary is absolutely asinine, and all it will do is enhance belief. You are a complete JOKE to Mormons, especially those who post on MADB. When you finally grow a brain, in regard to Mormonism, I will show you how to approach this more intelligently, and in a more objective way.


Same ol', same ol'. No one knows anything except Ray and his friends. *yawn*

Let me help you out here, Ray. You wouldn't know what a complete joke to Mormons looks like, since the Mormons you know don't represent the Mormons as a group. You can't show anyone anything, because what you know is simply too ethnocentric to matter to the vast majority of the 12+ million Mormons on the planet. Get the idea, Ray? You're one guy. Big deal. When you finally grow a brain, the rest of us will know it. If and when it happens, we'll be sure to let the whole rest of the world know it too. Even the Mormons. Prepare for the announcement: RAY GREW A BRAIN! Until then, keep trying. Even the least among us benefits from your example.
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Post by _Mister Scratch »

Ray A wrote:
Mister Scratch wrote:Yes, I'm well aware of this. Instead, you have become a mocker of ex-Mormons and ex-Mormonism, and quite a violent one at that.


You talk like ex-Mormonism is some kind of idea, group-think, or movement. I became a liberal Mormon in 1985. I became an ex-Mormon in 1987. Where were you then, Scratch? In diapers? In all of my sporadic returns to the Church, I was liberal, and in 2000 a senior apostle who read my writings was hesitant to let me back into the Church. This is what I understand from what I heard from my bishop at the time.


I see that you are *still* not addressing my questions, Ray. What, are you afraid that you might be forced to admit that you have an anger problem? Hmmm... It is interesting to note your presumptuousness here, and also the fact that you are engaging in some pretty obvious flip-flopping yet again. Earlier, you were asking me (quite nicely, I might add!) what my status was vis-a-vis the Church. Now, on the other hand, you are making all sort of completely unsupportable assumptions, and boasting about all your "experience" to boot! How about that!

Boy, Ray---am I ever glad that I refrained from telling you anything! Whew!
Post Reply