The Calculated Suppression Of Mormon Apologetics: The Case Of William Schryver

[ttribe]

ttribe: I've never listened to Rush Limbaugh.

Well, he coined the phrase. You're welcome to look it up.

cal: You really, really need to get out more. You spend far too much of your life glued to a monitor. This has become the universe for you, and your perspectives are entirely molded by it. I like you and I think you always mean well, but you DON'T have any conception whatsoever of what it's like on the front lines of this war, nor can you consistently identify the enemy, and therefore you are being made into a tool. It's sad to me, because you weren't always like this.

IOW, the ends justify the means.

[jwhitlock]

That's just sad.

Now there's a cogent, non- judgmental comment. Evidently anything who doesn't conform to your rather narrow view of what's appropriate is " just sad ".

After such gems from you such as having earned the right to criticize apologists, and how your IRL experiences trump others, and how I evidently think that the end justifies the means, I really don't think you've tried or even want to understand what Will is really saying. Personally I've found a number of your comments rather ironic, considering the attacks on Will being made in this thread.

[Bob Crockett]

Will is in a unique situation. While Peterson, Hamblin, et. al. are free to go find or create publishing venues that are willing to support their style of apologetics, Schryver can’t publish his work anywhere without the express permission of the top leadership of the church, in accordance with the research contract he signed.

Thanks. I guess I should have known that but didn't. Good information, if true. But I've obtained very sensitive information from archives in my research. Rick Turley was involved in getting me stuff. I am credited in his most recent book. Elder Jensen knows me personally have has read my work. Nobody ever asked me to limit what I was doing.

When a church disciplinary meeting is over, all those involved very rarely speak about it again and even rarer in public. I sure would like to see us just stop talking about what Will posted in his past and face the future with an attitude that we all are human and all of us are our Fathers children and I would like to see a more brotherly love spread especially to one of our own. We all have skeletons in the closet, some of those bones are our own. I say let the bones stay in the closet and be forgiven (and forgotten) and move on.

I said my one or two oblique statements about disagreeing with Will on that nasty board and nothing more than that. I am willing to grant people their personality quirks. I have my own.

But now to come on with a big post of self justification, I think that apologists with credentials (I admit, mine might be weak, perhaps) ought to step forward and say: "Hey, I don't go along with this program."

[Calm]

That's fine, but I disagree with how you and others are perceiving the reality of what Will is saying.

The reality of what he says takes place in a context, as he himself says. What I think he is ignoring is the greater context of what impact such comments have due to the place he has chosen to make them. I think you are ignoring the reality of the audience he was dealing with.

He chose to post there in a certain way (and chose to stop later on), they chose and choose to react to him in a certain way. We can choose our actions though we can't choose the consequences of them, but sometimes we can foresee the consequences and if so, it is simply good policy to act on that foresight. I think this is a case where a little foresight would have gone a long way. And a little thought and caution would have probably provided that foresight.

He doesn't say such things on this board, he manages to get his points across without the coarseness. Why is it necessary for him to say them elsewhere?

[jwhitlock]

Remember my prophecy: The sun will not set today before a new dawn arises.

Looking forward to an update later on.

[Calm]

cal: You really, really need to get out more. You spend far too much of your life glued to a monitor. This has become the universe for you, and your perspectives are entirely molded by it. I like you and I think you always mean well, but you DON'T have any conception whatsoever of what it's like on the front lines of this war, nor can you consistently identify the enemy, and therefore you are being made into a tool. It's sad to me, because you weren't always like this.

You have no idea what I deal with elsewhere in my life. And if you don't think I was always like this, you didn't know me very well.

What you don't seem to see is that you've allowed yourself to be made into a tool as much as anyone else I've seen.

[Analytics]

I have a curiosity question for Analytics.

Suppose that Schryver's piece gets published in some venue in the future. What would this imply about Elder Jensen, et al.?

Ben M.

It depends on the specifics of that future situation. If Schryver were to eventually admit that he behaved inappropriately and apologize, it would reflect quite well on Elder Jensen to be forgiving. If Schryver maintains his belligerent position that he has nothing to apologize for, then it would show a certain degree of tolerance.

My only criticism of Elder Jensen et. al. would be the requirement that he enter into the contract in the first place. I’m in favor of the unfettered exchange of ideas, and I’d want Schryver and everybody else that was interested to have unfettered access to the digital images so that they could analyze them and publish their analysis without strings attached.

I sincerely hope Schryver is able to fully publish what he wants to publish. I would think that all critics agree with that.

[Calm]

If Schryver were to eventually admit that he behaved inappropriately and apologize, it would reflect quite well on Elder Jensen to be forgiving.

This is of course all speculation.

[Analytics]

Thanks. I guess I should have known that but didn't. Good information, if true. But I've obtained very sensitive information from archives in my research. Rick Turley was involved in getting me stuff. I am credited in his most recent book. Elder Jensen knows me personally have has read my work. Nobody ever asked me to limit what I was doing.

You bet. Schryver says in footnote #6 of his blog entry:

One of the stipulations of my contract with the CHL is that anything I desire to publish, if it employs any of the copyrighted images of the KEP or JSP, must be submitted to and authorized for publication by the Church Historian, his direct supervisors in the Quorum of the Twelve (currently Elder Russell M. Nelson and Elder Jeffrey R. Holland), and the First Presidency. It should be clearly understood that "authorized for publication," in this context, does NOT constitute endorsement.

[jwhitlock]

The reality of what he says takes place in a context, as he himself says. What I think he is ignoring is the greater context of what impact such comments have due to the place he has chosen to make them. I think you are ignoring the reality of the audience he was dealing with.

He chose to post there in a certain way (and chose to stop later on), they chose and choose to react to him in a certain way. We can choose our actions though we can't choose the consequences of them, but sometimes we can foresee the consequences and if so, it is simply good policy to act on that foresight. I think this is a case where a little foresight would have gone a long way. And a little thought and caution would have probably provided that foresight.

He doesn't say such things on this board, he manages to get his points across without the coarseness. Why is it necessary for him to say them elsewhere?

From what I know about Will, he doesn't say things thoughtlessly. At least to me, he's rather deliberate about what he posts.

Knowing that, rather than tuning out and rushing to judgment, I ask myself why he's saying it and what his purpose is. Knowing that Will is an intelligent individual, and that he is not sexist and does not condone abuse, I ask why he would make the choice to post such things.

You come at his comments from the perspective that they are never appropriate in any context I look at his comments and ask why. Because of those differing perspectives, we come to very different conclusions about Will.

I know some very coarse people who would give me the shirt off their back. I've learned that rushing to judgment about perceived coarseness in some situations is exactly the wrong thing to do - and I think this is one of them.

[ttribe]

Now there's a cogent, non- judgmental comment. Evidently anything who doesn't conform to your rather narrow view of what's appropriate is " just sad ".

Nope, not what I was referring to at all.

After such gems from you such as having earned the right to criticize apologists, and how your IRL experiences trump others, and how I evidently think that the end justifies the means, I really don't think you've tried or even want to understand what Will is really saying. Personally I've found a number of your comments rather ironic, considering the attacks on Will being made in this thread.

Since you seem bent on shifting the focus away from Mr. Schryver's conduct to mine (a discussion he started, by the way), why don't you enlighten me on my "gems" and "ironic" posts?

[jwhitlock]

Nope, not what I was referring to at all.

Since you seem bent on shifting the focus away from Mr. Schryver's conduct to mine (a discussion he started, by the way), why don't you enlighten me on my "gems" and "ironic" posts?

I disagreed with you. Rather than address that disagreement, you said it was "sad". Please feel free to elaborate rather than just replying with obtuse comments.

I stated specifically what gems you posted. Why you act like didn't is puzzling.

Otherwise, if you're keen on rushing to judgment about what Will posts, you really shouldn't be surprised when your own posts are likewise analyzed. Since you have a stated antipathy towards Will, I find your condemnation ironic given what you have posted.

[jwhitlock]

And good luck with searing others consciense that sexualized vulgarity is ever appropriate.

This makes no sense.

[mapman]

Thanks for the kind remarks. They are much appreciated.

As for the risk you mention, it's one I'm willing to take. I don't mind having enemies.

Well, so be it. You've decided what's important to you and now you are the enemy of a bunch of crazy anti-Mormons, blocked from publishing in the Maxwell Institute, and making a lot of other Mormons want to distance themselves from you.

[ttribe]

I disagreed with you. Rather than address that disagreement, you said it was "sad". Please feel free to elaborate rather than just replying with obtuse comments.

I find it sad you see no evidence that society has progressed in 100+ years.

I stated specifically what gems you posted. Why you act like didn't is puzzling.

My apologies. I'll restate. Please help me understand why you labeled these things "gems." Furthermore, can you do so without altering my statements, please?

Otherwise, if you're keen on rushing to judgment about what Will posts, you really shouldn't be surprised when your own posts are likewise analyzed. Since you have a stated antipathy towards Will, I find your condemnation ironic given what you have posted.

A "rush to judgment" would imply I hadn't been personally witness to this behavior for YEARS; and that would be incorrect. Furthermore, I have no antipathy for Will, the person. I do, however, have antipathy for the type of actions exhibited by Will over the years. See the difference?

[Somebodyz]

Thanks for the kind remarks. They are much appreciated.

As for the risk you mention, it's one I'm willing to take. I don't mind having enemies.

ttribe: I've never listened to Rush Limbaugh.

cal: You really, really need to get out more. You spend far too much of your life glued to a monitor. This has become the universe for you, and your perspectives are entirely molded by it. I like you and I think you always mean well, but you DON'T have any conception whatsoever of what it's like on the front lines of this war, nor can you consistently identify the enemy, and therefore you are being made into a tool. It's sad to me, because you weren't always like this.

jwhitlock: You are a stalwart. I would go to war with you anytime.

Anijen: You're a good man, too.

Ok, gotta hit the road.

Remember my prophecy: The sun will not set today before a new dawn arises.

Will, I hope you enjoy a break with your reunion. I don't believe most of what's said at the Trailer park, because it's seems to be claimed that some posters post have been tampered with. This has happened to me on another board. It's too easy to get pulled down and let ones standards drop, as it's so sleazy over there, best to stay clear. You're getting piled on here, if you showed a bit of humility, it probably wouldn't happen...but I hate it when people conform or show false humility, which certainly isn't your style. Which is probably part of the problem, it too easy to take you the wrong way.

IMO you owe Cal an apology. She's on of best and fairest posters on this board.

..plus telling someone who's ill and stuck at home, they should get out more, is a bit crass.

I'm one of your fans but think maybe you're feeling a bit picked and got irked here.

[Nemesis]

The board nannies have been removed.

Nemesis

[Damien the Leper]

"Feminazi?" Is that what you call feminists?

I recall reading of the ignoramus and ex U.S. president Woodrow Wilson. He was a misogynist himself and definitely of the worst kind. Dr. James Loewen, a U.S. history authority, reported in his book Lies My Teacher Told Me that Wilson had attempted to defame Keller and later ordered several attempts on Helen Keller's life and despised her for her 'feminazi' attitudes during the early 20th century. Little did that twit Wilson know that what Keller did would be a gamechanger for American feminism.

I bet Keller is being Celestialized as we speak...

[Calm]

IMO you owe Cal an apology. She's on of best and fairest posters on this board.

..plus telling someone who's ill and stuck at home, they should get out more, is a bit crass.

It is remarkable how much one can experience by people coming to you and just having the opportunity to listen to them.

Thank you, I don't need an apology though. I don't think he meant it that way, more about an outlook than about a physical state, I suspect. And I told Will how I saw things, he told me and that is fair.

[Damien the Leper]

He got the phrase from Rush Limbaugh.

Limbaugh and his ilk of worshippers are irrelevant.

[ERayR]

Limbaugh and his ilk of worshippers are irrelevant.

I think Limbaugh has long since passed being irrelevant.

[ttribe]

Word is Bob Crockett was banned from this thread. For what, pray tell?

[Damien the Leper]

I think Limbaugh has long since passed being irrelevant.

Limbaugh and his ilk have all the credibility of a midnight infomercial selling products that don't really work.

[ERayR]

Limbaugh and his ilk have all the credibility of a midnight infomercial selling products that don't really work.

You really ought to get out more.

[Damien the Leper]

Word is Bob Crockett was banned from this thread. For what, pray tell?

Don't speculate or ask questions that lead to speculation...we can get in trouble for that.