Another Gauntlet Hits the Ground

[Ray Agostini]

CFR that Utahns decided Californians' fate.

CFR that Utahns didn't decide Californians' fate.

[cjcampbell]

CFR that Utahns didn't decide Californians' fate.

CFR that space aliens didn't decide Californians' fate.

[Ray Agostini]

CFR that space aliens didn't decide Californians' fate.

CFR that space aliens exist.

Be afraid, be very afraid. I will out-CFR you. Do not underestimate me, nor my deep and intense hatred of Mormons.

Remember, I'm scum. And you should be wary of scum.

I'm an unprincipled apostate.

I will, I swear, wipe you all out with Kleenex tissues. That's how I feel. Macho to the core.

[Hamba Tuhan]

In other words, if all your arguments fail, your logic falls to pieces, your 'evidence' is shown to be inaccurate, and, ironically, you end up being exhibit A for why your opponents were right in the first place, just bluff and bluster. Maybe no one will notice.

[Ray Agostini]

In other words, if all your arguments fail, your logic falls to pieces, your 'evidence' is shown to be inaccurate, and, ironically, you end up being exhibit A for why your opponents were right in the first place, just bluff and bluster. Maybe no one will notice.

But I will never again be part of "Utah Mormonism".

Of that you can rest assured.

I'm independent, of both Mormon and Exmo communities.

Swallow dat!

[Hamba Tuhan]

But I will never again be part of "Utah Mormonism".

Of that you can rest assured.

I'm independent, of both Mormon and Exmo communities.

Swallow dat!

Your call, mate. If, however, you ever change your mind, I'll happily be amongst the first to welcome you back; consequently, I'd rather not 'rest assured' if it's OK with you.

[Ray Agostini]

Your call, mate. If, however, you ever change your mind, I'll happily be amongst the first to welcome you back; consequently, I'd rather not 'rest assured' if it's OK with you.

I'm not coming back, but I wish you well.

Mormonism has done its purpose in my life, and I'm finished with it.

[Hamba Tuhan]

I'm not coming back, but I wish you well.

Mormonism has done it's purpose in my life, and I'm finished with it.

Again, your call. I will simultaneously wish you well and keep a seat open and a plate set at the banquet table.

[cjcampbell]

And you are nothing but Mormon vermin!

I, I hate you...beyond words...

Oh yeah, I'm also a "pretender". How could I forget to add that minus to my pathetic apostate and unprincipled character?

Marvels never cease in the process of vain self-justification.

Pardon me. Some honest self-assessments are in order. I'm apostate scum.

Oh, please can the histrionics. What, you hate Mormons because we insist on things like freedom of speech and the right to vote? Or is it because the Church has the unmitigated gall to actually disagree with you on some issues? Grow up.

I am not, btw, from Utah, having never lived there. Neither are most of the 700,000 Mormons living in California. Whatever your issue is, it is not with your imaginary "Utah Mormons."

[Daniel2]

Kudos to Dallin Oaks for delivering this "major talk" with such boldness. The world will become a better place as more Latter-day Saints reflect these types of very-public sentiments with similar zeal. The bravado displayed in Oak's leadership is likely to ensure that non-Mormons' awareness about the ideology that the LDS church seeks to advance, and the oppressive treatment that some have unjustly suffered, will continue to grow.

Darin

[ttribe]

Kudos to Dallin Oaks for delivering this "major talk" with such boldness. The world will become a better place as more Latter-day Saints reflect these types of very-public sentiments with similar zeal. The bravado displayed in Oak's leadership is likely to ensure that non-Mormons' awareness about the ideology that the LDS church seeks to advance, and the oppressive treatment that some have unjustly suffered, will continue to grow.

Darin

Why yes...we are are truly oppressed when asked to live God's laws. And, of course, we've hidden our true agenda for years. Perhaps this was a strategic blunder...we shouldn't let people know that we wish to rule over them with an iron fist of theocracy!!!!!! Bwhaahaaahhhaaa, Bwahhhaahhhaaa.[/sarcasm]

Talk about inflammatory...Darin, you've outdone yourself this time.

[Deborah]

and the oppressive treatment that some have unjustly suffered, will continue to grow.

You are right, the saints have suffered unjustly and it appears they will continue to do so as they stand more and more for what is right before God. In our politically correct and humanistic society the church and others who stand on principle will continue to be oppressed.

[Zakuska]

I didn't say you have no right to express your opinion. I just said that Californians should decide their fate. Not Utahns.

Is that so hard to understand?

If Utahns had voted you might have a valid point. Is it so hard to understand that only Californians DID decide their fate?

And when you complain about all the money spent on advertising you are directly denying our right to express our opinions. Did the adds force Californians to vote the way they did? NO.

<Edit: Rude remark Removed by user>

[Zakuska]

Kudos to Dallin Oaks for delivering this "major talk" with such boldness. The world will become a better place as more Latter-day Saints reflect these types of very-public sentiments with similar zeal. The bravado displayed in Oak's leadership is likely to ensure that non-Mormons' awareness about the ideology that the LDS church seeks to advance, and the oppressive treatment that some have unjustly suffered, will continue to grow.

Darin

Darin,

At least read the talk before you make such bone headed remarks.

[Daniel2]

Why yes...we are are truly oppressed when asked to live God's laws.

[/q And, of course, we've hidden our true agenda for years. Perhaps this was a strategic blunder...we shouldn't let people know that we wish to rule over them with an iron fist of theocracy!!!!!! Bwhaahaaahhhaaa, Bwahhhaahhhaaa.[/sarcasm]

Talk about inflammatory...Darin, you've outdone yourself this time.

Thanks, ttribe.

Although... you missed the point of my use of the term "oppression" in reference to Oak's talk--when viewed alongside Deborah's interpretation, it beautifully illustrates how much two people's paradigms and experiences can drastically alter their personal interpretation of the exact same sentance.

As someone who spent the first 32 years of my life as a devouted Latter-day Saint, I'm not aware that Mormons have "hidden [their] true agenda for years"--nor would I have ever presumed to make any such claim. My earlier references echo how the LDS church, in recent decades, has become more familiar with a non-Mormon Audience. Truly, the information age has certainly helped increase many lesser-known religions' ideologies, moving them from obscurity (even when that obscurity has been undesirable) into the public square.

In that same vein, I believe both the content and tone of Oak's remarks bring further external attention to this very important issue, and am gratified that he has shared his views so candidly.

Darin

[Daniel2]

Darin,

At least read the talk before you make such bone headed remarks.

What gives you the impression that I didn't read Oak's talk...? (I have, in its entirety. In fact, one reason I haven't commented until page 13 of this thread is because I've spent the last several days "digesting" Oak's comments, rather than impulsively reacting to or risk emotionally reading-my-own-interpretation into to what he said).

Which of my comments do you find "bone-headed," and in what sense?

Darin

[Jaybear]

And when you complain about all the money spent on advertising you are directly denying our right to epress our opinions.

Common misconception made by people who are ignorant of the what the first amendment means.

When he complains about the money spent, he is not "directly denying" your right to express your opinion. He is simply expressing his opinion that the LDS church and Utah Mormons should stay out of CA politics.

Let me give you a score card:

Protected speech: Utah Mormons contributing money to the passage of Prop 8.

Protected speech: The LDS Church urging members to donate money to the passage of Prop 8.

Procted speech: Gay rights activists boycotting business owners (some of whom are Mormon) who donated towards prop 8.

Protected speech: Dan Peterson and Dalin Oaks complaining about the boycotts.

Not protected: Violence and vandalism.

Not protected: Voter suppression. (Which, by the way, never happened)

Irony: The only ones who lost any "right" in this whole affair were the CA gays, who lost the right to marry. And yes, depsite your pathetic apologetic arguments, prior to the election gays had secured by court order the right to marrry. After the election, they no longer had that right. So yes, they were deprived of the right to marry.

So please stop whining about Ray trying to take away your rights. Its unseemly.

[Zakuska]

What gives you the impression that I didn't read Oak's talk...? (I have, in its entirety).

Which of my comments do you find "bone-headed," and in what sense?

Darin

What is it Mormons are always dinged on? Taking things out of context?

Lets not just look at the one sentence.

What does Elder Oakes do for at least two paragraphs before the "supposed" offending sentence?

He dispells the Myth that the reactions where Religious persecution, as many of the Younger Generation were supposing. It also intresting to note that this "dasterdy wrech" of an Apostle wouldn't do all in his power to feed the supposed overgrown Mormon persecution complex? What ever that is supposed to be.

Then he gets to the supposed offending sentence and he talks about "effects" "Civil Rights" "Lead to Voter Intimidation laws" he wasn't saying that the actions of the post-prop-8 demonstrations etc. where equal in magnitude to the Civil rights movement in the least. But their "EFFECT" was in the same genre. To try and intimidate voters. Try and Stop voters from Voting. Make them second guess themselves the next time something like this comes up.

[Zakuska]

Not protected: Violence and vandalism.

Not protected: Voter suppression. (Which, by the way, never happened)

Unquantifiable. Next time a vote comes up how many people are going to think twice about donating money and voting. Fearing they might just get and angry crowd of Gay rights thugs infront of their business to heckle their patrons?

Did you also forget that Both sides made threats to businesses etc. Prior to the vote?

Voter supression certianly did happen. It was akin to keeping blacks from even registering to vote. You can stick your head in the sand all you want, no skin off my teeth.

So please stop whining about Ray trying to take away your rights. Its unseemly.

Aaaa... ray seems to want to make it ilegal for out side sources to be able to buy advertising. He most definatley wants to take rights away.

PS. No rights where taken. They still have civil unions which gives them every right and priveledge as a Hetero Marraige.

[Jaybear]

Unquantifiable. Next time a vote comes up how many people are going to think twice about donating money and voting. Fearing they might just get and angry crowd of Gay rights thugs infront of their business to heckle their patrons?

You are conflating efforts to supress financial donations, with efforts to suppress voting.

People on both sides of the issue, have every legal right to use legitimate means which includes boycots, letters, and protests to dissuade or encourage contributions from business owners.

I suspect you are smart enough to understand the difference between the two, but realize that you can't a credible argument that illegal voter suppression occurred, so you deliberately conflating the two issues.

Voter suppression certainly did happen. It was akin to keeping blacks from even registering to vote. You can stick your head in the sand all you want, no skin off my teeth.

First, Oaks was complaining about the backlash in the aftermath of Prop 8. But, if you have evidence of illegal voter suppression, I would be glad to rescind my statement that no voters suppression occurred. Though, I am not going to take your word for it.

Aaaa... ray seems to want to make it illegal for out side sources to be able to buy advertising. He most definatley wants to take rights away.

How would Ray go about doing that?

BTW, does this mean you want to criminalize politically inspired boycotts? You seem to have a concern about the effect of such boycotts when the business owners or key employees are Mormons.

PS. No rights where taken. They still have civil unions which gives them every right and priveledge as a Hetero Marraige.

They lost the right to obtain a marriage certificate. Considering the money that went into the fights, that is obviously a very important right.

[ttribe]

They lost the right to obtain a marriage certificate. Considering the money that went into the fights, that is obviously a very important right.

Maybe you will pick up where Ray left off then - Post Link

[Zakuska]

Boycotts are fine Jaybear. But what the Gay rights groups did to the Elcyote and trying to bilk sister Majorie into an Apology and milk donations out the deal to boot crossed the line. Common thuggary at its finest. It also borders on extortion.

PS. Civil Unions have certificates. No rights were taken.

[Deborah]

Although... you missed the point of my use of the term "oppression" in reference to Oak's talk--when viewed alongside Deborah's interpretation, it beautifully illustrates how much two people's paradigms and experiences can drastically alter their personal interpretation of the exact same sentance.

I understood perfectly what you meant. I was reminding you of who has actually been oppressed and persecuted.

[Jaybear]

Boycotts are fine Jaybear. But what the Gay rights groups did to the Elcyote and trying to bilk sister Majorie into an Apology and milk donations out the deal to boot crossed the line.

In politics, the only line that exists is where you engage in illegal behavior. As far as I am aware, the El Coyote boycott/protests, never crossed that line.

As for your sister Majorie, she was foolish if she did not realize that donating money to Prop 8 would offend a significant component of her customer base. Client relations are the lifeblood of a small business.

She is not the first, nor will she be the last person to lose a job, because they did something that offended the customer base.

For some reason that truly puzzles me, Mormons don't seem to truly grasp how important this issue is for the gay community. To me and you, its academic, to them, it is truly personal.

[Deborah]

They lost the right to obtain a marriage certificate. Considering the money that went into the fights, that is obviously a very important right.

Only after the CA court had turned aside what the voters had already said they didn't want. The voters simply overturned the court's decision, per CA statute. Obtaining a marriage certificate isn't a "right", it's a privilege. The state denies marriage certificates in many situations and certain criteria must be met to get one.