Wall Street Journal (Opinion Section) Slams "8: The Mormon Proposition"

[ERMD]

well by that general sense of grouping, you are in the same group as many anti-Mormons.

Au contraire. Then why do the anti-Mormons single out the Mormons in their Prop-8 tirades and not include the others in the GROUP? I'll give you this answer so you don't have to think so hard--because this is an ANTI-MORMON campaign. Who is attacking the Catholics, Evangelicals, and Black churches? NO ONE!

[the narrator]

Au contraire. Then why do the anti-Mormons single out the Mormons in their Prop-8 tirades and not include the others in the GROUP? I'll give you this answer so you don't have to think so hard--because this is an ANTI-MORMON campaign. Who is attacking the Catholics, Evangelicals, and Black churches? NO ONE!

My grouping of you with anti-Mormons has nothing to do with Prop 8.

Both you and anti-Mormons are humans.

[mfbukowski]

I seriously doubt this. Someone lost a temple recommend because they publicly opposed Prop. 8? I don't believe it for a second. If you can substantiate either of these allegations of lost callings or lost recommends simply for publicly opposing Prop 8, please provide Salt Lake with the Stake and Ward where it occurred and I promise you, action will be taken.

I asked a similar question, with no reply either. Since when do people other than real, rabid apostates tell why they supposedly did not get a recommend and make it public?

How would anyone know why someone else did not get a recommend except the Bishop who made the decision and won't tell? We would only have the activist's word for it.

[the narrator]

How would anyone know why someone else did not get a recommend except the Bishop who made the decision and won't tell? We would only have the activist's word for it.

This may come as a big surprise to you, but sometimes people talk to other people about things without making a big deal out of it.

I may be really special, but I happen to know a lot of things about individuals that haven't been publicized, even though I am in no way a confidant.

[ERMD]

My grouping of you with anti-Mormons has nothing to do with Prop 8.

Both you and anti-Mormons are humans.

Into the abyss! You have officially become a waste of my time.

[the narrator]

Into the abyss! You have officially become a waste of my time.

Just pointing out the your silliness of using arbitrary boundaries to classify people into groups.

[Jeff K.]

I love the way those for changing the definition of marriage have obfuscated time and again. Everyong thought that the defeat of prop 8 was a relatively sure thing, especially those who wanted to impose their minority view of changing the definition of marriage upon the majority of the state. Gavin Newsom's "Its gonna happen, whether you like it or not" pretty much speaks to the arrogance of that bunch.

So they lost, with the majority of the money for their support coming from outside CA, with the group outspending the pro Prop 8 group. They still lost. And of course many Mormons paid for that loss, they were fired from their jobs, driven from their jobs, temples were attacked and graffiti'd, personal property damaged. And of course they looked up every name they could in order to attack those who supported it. This is their version of a constitutional democracy in action. Frankly I don't like the group. They certainly aren't good for America.

And now they are attempting to make themselves the victims. Sorry, they have no credibility where that is concerned. They are the perpetrators, not the victims. LIke the bully who swings, misses and gets knocked down and starts crying. I have little sympathy for their type.

[mfbukowski]

I can assure you that I am being honest. It's not my job to jump in.

I'm not asking details- but how do you know? That's all I want to know. And what does that mean- "It's not my job to jump in."? You mean you know someone was wronged but you don't want to get involved?

[the narrator]

I'm not asking details- but how do you know? That's all I want to know. And what does that mean- "It's not my job to jump in."? You mean you know someone was wronged but you don't want to get involved?

Yes. I know some.

As I said long ago in my first comment on this thread. Those who were disciplined through removal of callings or loss of recommends were openly opposing Prop 8 and were not just simply not supporting it. As far as I am aware, their rhetoric was milder than mine, but just ended up on the downside of an often arbitrary standard of discipline in the Church.

I myself had long and good discussions with both my bishop and stake president about my vocal opposition to Prop 8. They did not find my actions worthy of taking my recommendation of away.

[Mark Beesley]

Not to throw too much gasoline on this fire, but I too recall hearing of one particularly....virulent....Bishop who was not content to say, "No thank you" to Salt Lake for their guidance.

He made a huge fuss on the local news (I think- but am not certain- that he was from a stake in New Mexico) and attacked the Church and its position and used his calling to claim some sort of "expert" status.

IIRC, he was released- not for opposing Prop, but for publically and aggressively slandering and maligning the Church.

Much like the pair who were released from their calling with the Tabernacle choir, and the one associate professor at BYU who was not picked up for tenure.

In each case, it was not thier opposition to Prop 8 that got them in trouble- it was their attempt to trade on their "insider" status to bolster hurtful and hateful attacks on the Church- in short, for misusing their membership and leadership status to somehow legitimize thier very public apostacy.

I recall these incidents too. Not one of these subjects lost a calling or temple recommend for publicly opposing Prop 8. They went much further. Are these the types of incidents you are referencing the narrator?

[selek]

Just pointing out the your silliness of using arbitrary boundaries to classify people into groups.

A laudable standard which also happens to condemn statements like these:

Most Mormons simply don't question what comes down to them from the Church leaders.

I was merely pointing out that a majority of Mormons (like most people) did not question and think about their support of Prop 8. They just did so because they were told to.

You are an odd one. Gratefully, several on this board have privately told me that you don't represent them. Also gratefully, my experience has taught me that most Mormons are not like you, and in fact the vast majority of Mormons are not the pharisees your example might make others believe Mormons to be.

I am merely stating that the vast majority of Mormons in California who supported Prop 8, did little thinking, research, etc concerning whether or not they should support it. Instead they simply did so because they were told to. They just accepted Elder Bednar's fallacious claims about us no longer being able to teach our doctrine, without taking a few seconds to realize how untrue his claim was.

Based on the many posts you have written on this board, I'm guessing that you are just reading my comments through your heavily tinted lenses of your persecution complex (and need to have an Other for your own self-worth), and have thus seen something that simply wasn't there.

Do you recall who made those posts, Narrator?

You've offered a lot of inneundo.

A lot of character assassination.

A lot of name-calling.

But not once have you offered a single scrap of evidence as to why supporting Prop 8 was wrong.

You've got the shuffle and the evasiveness down-pat.

But you haven't offered a single logical, consistent, reasoned argument in defense of homosexual marriage.

[mfbukowski]

You lost about all credibility for me when you used the language "corporate" church.

Yep. I don't know how you get through a TR interview. You are clearly opposed to the church.

[ERayR]

I am just sad about the waste of money. Just think about how much food could be put into a pantry for mormon families in need with the money spent on Prop 8?

I hadn't heard. You mean the LDS Church is no longer taking care of its poor and needy? What appalls is how much the other side spent and they are doing a very poor job of taking care of their poor and needy.

[wenglund]

I'm done debating with you. Ever.

Not that you actually debate, but how did Selek get so lucky? I am sure we won't agree on the answer, but I am interested in your perspective.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[the narrator]

Not that you actually debate, but how did Selek get so lucky? I am sure we won't agree on the answer, but I am interested in your perspective.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

It's pretty simple. Start accusing me of nonsense and i'll get bored of you.

[selek]

It's pretty simple. Start accusing me of nonsense and i'll get bored of you.

Which, when translated to English means, "Make me back up my assertions with facts and I'll take my ball and go home."

[ERayR]

This may come as a big surprise to you, but sometimes people talk to other people about things without making a big deal out of it.

I may be really special, but I happen to know a lot of things about individuals that haven't been publicized, even though I am in no way a confidant.

Then your either awfully snoopy or your making it up. Take your choice.

[mfbukowski]

This may come as a big surprise to you, but sometimes people talk to other people about things without making a big deal out of it.

I may be really special, but I happen to know a lot of things about individuals that haven't been publicized, even though I am in no way a confidant.

As I surmised, we apparently have only have one person's word for it. I suppose he told you because he was happy about it. If not, he had an axe to grind, regardless of whether or not he was "making a big deal about it".

One Bishop who perhaps stepped over the line.

The mere fact he he told you indicates he was making a big deal about it.

So much for the idea that people (plural) were punished for Prop 8 advocacy. Or at least your evidence for it.

[the narrator]

Which, when translated to English means, "Make me back up my assertions with facts and I'll take my ball and go home."

edit* replied to wrong post

[the narrator]

Then your either awfully snoopy or your making it up. Take your choice.

Or I occasionally meet them at conferences and elsewhere and have friendly chats at lunch.

It's not that uncommon for two friendly people to share information that isn't public.

[the narrator]

As I surmised, we apparently have only have one person's word for it. I suppose he told you because he was happy about it. If not, he had an axe to grind, regardless of whether or not he was "making a big deal about it".

One Bishop who perhaps stepped over the line.

The mere fact he he told you indicates he was making a big deal about it.

So much for the idea that people (plural) were punished for Prop 8 advocacy. Or at least your evidence for it.

Or I occasionally meet them at conferences and elsewhere and have friendly chats at lunch.

It's not that uncommon for two friendly people to share information that isn't public. Seriously, people talk about things private things without having axes to grind.

[ERayR]

Or I occasionally meet them at conferences and elsewhere and have friendly chats at lunch.

It's not that uncommon for two friendly people to share information that isn't public.

But you intimate that you know of a lot of these cases. Again are you having a lot of these conferences where people just come up, take you out to dinner and confide in you or are you uh well expanding a bit?

[the narrator]

But you intimate that you know of a lot of these cases. Again are having a lot of these conferences where people just come up and confide in you or are you uh well expanding a bit?

I participate in a lot of conferences. One of the best things about doing Mormon Studies is meeting new people at conferences. It doesn't take long to find similar interests and make friends at them.

[mfbukowski]

Or I occasionally meet them at conferences and elsewhere and have friendly chats at lunch.

It's not that uncommon for two friendly people to share information that isn't public. Seriously, people talk about things private things without having axes to grind.

Nevetheless, it seems clear that your evidence is rather limited, and if true, would indicate only a local aberration restricted to your friends. I can't imagine why they would be singled out like that, can you?

[selek]

Nevetheless, it seems clear that your evidence is rather limited, and if true, would indicate only a local aberration restricted to your friends. I can't imagine why they would be singled out like that, can you?

In either case, we're looking at a numerically insignificant and self-selecting sample- the existence of which relies upon the word of a single hostile witness with a specific agenda.

This kind of "evidence" is the antithesis of any kind of scientifically accurate analysis.

Like John Kerry's hat and Harry Reid's various imaginary friends, these so-called "testimonies" exist ONLY to bolster a certain agenda, and cannot be verified or even quantified.