Jump to content

Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, John Dehlin, & Lou


Recommended Posts

Really bad form in a number of ways, John. Too bad. I follow your activities and now it appears you're just another frothing anti I wouldn't want my kids to read. Find peace, brother.

Edited by Bob Crockett
  • Upvote 4
Link to post

Really bad form in a number of ways, John. Too bad. I follow your activities and now it appears you're just another frothing anti I wouldn't want my kids to read. Find peace, brother.

A "frothing anti"? Good grief.

Link to post

Maybe an overstatement for which I apologize. But what person in his right mind would ever now carry on an email dialogue with John. And where are my GA pals when I need protection from the Mormons?

  • Upvote 1
Link to post

Really bad form in a number of ways, John. Too bad. I follow your activities and now it appears you're just another frothing anti I wouldn't want my kids to read. Find peace, brother.

Bob - I honestly don't know another way to stop the ad hominem attacks than to stand up to them...to confront the bully. If you have ideas, please let me know. I'm sorry if this disappoints you. Maybe if you were the target of such attacks, you would understand.

Link to post

Nice to know where JD draws the line about promoting diversity of opinions and individual conscience, etc.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post

Really bad form in a number of ways, John. Too bad. I follow your activities and now it appears you're just another frothing anti I wouldn't want my kids to read. Find peace, brother.

I also wonder if you have any feedback for Greg Smith, Daniel Peterson or Louis Midgley regarding "bad form."

Edited by mormonstories
Link to post

You need PR help. You are pissing all over the brand you have worked hard to establish. I can't speak for them but what Givens, Bushman or Gardner would now submit to an interview?

I routinely try to help clients try and squelch negative press stories about to be published. Just as there is a First Amendment right to publish them in the first place so is there a right to back channel them before they are published.

But to go public about it and post private emails is to invite the public in to your home to look at your porn stash, so to speak.

You are a public figure. Of course people will criticize what you do. I have done it. Isn't your brand and what you are trying to do greater than your need to get revenge? Just sayin.

Edited by Bob Crockett
Link to post

John, would you please quote your original email to Dan Peterson? It seems fair for full disclosure.

I agree.

There's no way to legitimately judge Daniel's email response without seeing the original email sent to him. It's kind of odd that it wasn't included in the OP.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post

You need PR help. You are pissing all over the brand you have worked hard to establish. I can't speak for them but what Givens, Bushman or Gardner would now submit to an interview?

I routinely try to help clients try and squelch negative press stories about to be published. Just as there is a First Amendment right to publish them in the first place so is there a right to back channel them before they are published.

But to go public about it and post private emails is to invite the public in to your home to look at your porn stash, so to speak.

For some who just called John a frothing anti, I am puzzled that you would be offering him such helpful and constructive advice.

It seems to me that if you want to be a critic of Mormonstories and John, then dagnabit, just be a critic.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post

Bob - I honestly don't know another way to stop the ad hominem attacks than to stand up to them...to confront the bully. If you have ideas, please let me know. I'm sorry if this disappoints you. Maybe if you were the target of such attacks, you would understand.

You might want to pull back on the self-righteous indignation just a touch. First of all, you were the one to bring up a threat of going to the GA's. I think if someone had reached me with that type of statement up front, I would react badly. It is a little bit like, "Look chap, you don't know what you are talking about. You don't threaten me to start off a conversation. Lastly, talk to anyone you want. Next, wait until I contact you. Until then, ....choice words about what you can do with yourself."

To confront the Bully???? You are the bloody chap with the bully bullpit. Wake the friggin heck up! Geez, what type of hypocrisy does it take to speak form your frame of mind? Do you not get your own roll in this little piece of stupidity?

I am sorry, but I reject your interaction with DP. I reject your attempt to paint yourself a whited sepulcher, and I reject the utter stupidity of the mindless supporters of your actions. In fact, this whole thing is so stupid there is nothing else to say.

I can tell you one thing; you would never want to contact me in the same manner.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post

If what OP is saying is that the proposed story was defamatory, then he should have said that. (And if he hadn't read the story, how would he know?) If he was saying he objected to someone investigating him, hearing stories and rumors about him, writing about what their research lead them to, and printing it then he should have said that. The whole, "I'm going to my GA friends" is just plain ugly: even if one had such "friends", and even if GA's put themselves in the awkward position that OP asked them to be in. And the OP's suggestion that any decision was the result of GA pressure, when it could as easily have been the end result of the internal debate that he already knew of, is unctous.

There may be enough misunderstandings to go around, surely. But this thread and the ugly words leveled as labels against Dan Peterson, particularly, are so very disgusting. If it is true that any of the article was defamatory, the OP's advertising of the article here and to apparently others would have to be construed as the republishing that caused the harm.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post

What I'm missing in the OP is the original email John sent DCP - a conspicuous omission which leads me to believe DCP's response may well have been warranted.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post

2) I immediately emailed Daniel Peterson, and cc'd a few people I consider to be friends, to find out if this was true -- telling him that if, indeed, the story was true, that I would appreciate knowing about it, and that I would be contacting my GA friends to ask for their involvement. This was his response:

It is interesting that you quote DCP's email verbatim, but not the email which precipitated it (yours).

Will you post your email to DCP?

Thanks,

-Smac

  • Upvote 1
Link to post

John, you are a valiant man to take on the old-school, slash and burn type of apologetics. I hope you are successful in your efforts to stop this kind of thing.

So says the self-described "Fifth Columnist."

-Smac

Link to post

So says the self-described "Fifth Columnist."

-Smac

Freedom of speech ought to flow in one direction only, to the "neutrals".

Still waiting on the original email sent to DCP.

Edited by Log
Link to post

Freedom of speech ought to flow in one direction only, to the "neutrals".

Still waiting on the original email sent to DCP.

I am waiting, too. I have a measure of the man when it comes to DCP. As to John Dehlin ... not so much.

John, please post your email to DCP.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to post

I've been personally attacked for some of my stances in the past. However, I've never gone to a GA to complain before. Must be nice to be connected, even when you are no longer connected....

I am not a fan of Mormon Stories, as I feel that it tends to sensationalize and focus on the problems, rather than on the strengths of Mormonism. I can see how an article regarding Dehlin's work and the reasons behind what he's doing could be important. That I haven't read Greg's article, I cannot judge it either way on whether it is ad hominem or not. Sadly, I'm only getting half the story here. I know that Lou Midgely can be an attack dog, as I've seen his work for 20 years in doing this. But Greg's work is usually not in that same vein. So, I cannot determine if this is an attempt to prevent an ad hominem attack, or someone just whining about it. Since Dehlin has posted this, he has only given wings to the issue.

Link to post

/snip self-immolating rant/

It's been no more than two weeks since I predicted, in a conversation with Lou, that you would eventually self-destruct. I just didn't expect it to occur this soon.

Oh, well ... as the old saw goes:

"All's well that ends well."

Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...