sethpayne Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 So apparently Kate Kelly is not content with the distribution of her opinion piece via the Salt Lake Tribune. It's also being published by RNS (Religion News Service) and by The Washington Post. Also, I note that Kate Kelly is still advertising herself as the co-founder of OrdainWomen. I wonder how the OW folks will respond to this development, as her present stance is rather hard to reconcile with the OW folks wanting to portray themselves as being "faithful" Latter-day Saints. Thanks, -Smac ob·ses·sionnounthe state of being obsessed with someone or something."she cared for him with a devotion bordering on obsession"an idea or thought that continually preoccupies or intrudes on a person's mind. plural noun: obsessions"he was in the grip of an obsession he was powerless to resist"synonyms: fixation, ruling/consuming passion, passion, mania, idée fixe, compulsion, preoccupation, infatuation, addiction, fetish, craze, hobbyhorse; 1
jkwilliams Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 So apparently Kate Kelly is not content with the distribution of her opinion piece via the Salt Lake Tribune. It's also being published by RNS (Religion News Service) and by The Washington Post. Also, I note that Kate Kelly is still advertising herself as the co-founder of OrdainWomen. I wonder how the OW folks will respond to this development, as her present stance is rather hard to reconcile with the OW folks wanting to portray themselves as being "faithful" Latter-day Saints. Thanks, -Smac How dare she let a wire service pick up her op-ed.
Calm Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 (edited) Also, I note that Kate Kelly is still advertising herself as the co-founder of OrdainWomen. I wonder how the OW folks will respond to this development, as her present stance is rather hard to reconcile with the OW folks wanting to portray themselves as being "faithful" Latter-day Saints.Advertisement apparently works one way for Kelly since she refused to participate in a book about OW, iirc, because she didn't have enough control over the text. What is good for Kelly is good for OW, not so much the reverse. Kelly withdrew from the “Voices for Equality” book, explaining that she felt she wouldn’t have “enough input.” http://www.religionnews.com/2015/06/23/feminist-mormons-stand-year-excommunication/ Edited July 20, 2015 by calmoriah
smac97 Posted July 20, 2015 Author Posted July 20, 2015 (edited) ob·ses·sionnounthe state of being obsessed with someone or something."she cared for him with a devotion bordering on obsession"an idea or thought that continually preoccupies or intrudes on a person's mind. plural noun: obsessions"he was in the grip of an obsession he was powerless to resist"synonyms: fixation, ruling/consuming passion, passion, mania, idée fixe, compulsion, preoccupation, infatuation, addiction, fetish, craze, hobbyhorse; Posting links amounts to "obsession?" Really? It is unfortunate that a relative of mine has chosen to lie and deliberately misrepresent my statements for purposes of polemics. I would have expected better from a Taylor with roots in Colonial Mexico. Meanwhile, I wonder if "obsession" might be apt to describe Kate Kelly's actions. -Smac Edited July 20, 2015 by smac97
Scott Lloyd Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 How dare she let a wire service pick up her op-ed.Wire services don't pick up things willy nilly. They are marketed to the wire services with the consent, if not the earnest encouragement, of the author. 1
Calm Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 Wow, talk about thread resurrection...what was sealed is now unsealed, locked now unlocked.
jkwilliams Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 Wire services don't pick up things willy nilly. They are marketed to the wire services with the consent, if not the earnest encouragement, of the author. I know, just terrible.
Damien the Leper Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 My question is why close the thread only to re-open it to continue whine about KK? Did you decide that you weren't done yet after all? Who cares what she does! She's not even relevant.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 Wow, talk about thread resurrection...what was sealed is now unsealed, locked now unlocked.Yeah, I wondered about that too.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 My question is why close the thread only to re-open it to continue whine about KK? Did you decide that you weren't done yet after all? Who cares what she does! She's not even relevant.To whom are you addressing this?
Damien the Leper Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 To whom are you addressing this?The person who closed then re-opened the thread.
smac97 Posted July 20, 2015 Author Posted July 20, 2015 My question is why close the thread only to re-open it to continue whine about KK? Did you decide that you weren't done yet after all? Who cares what she does! She's not even relevant. If you are not interested in the thread, feel free to withdraw from it. Thanks, -Smac
Damien the Leper Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 You didn't even answer my questions. Did you think they were rhetorical? I don't see why you're so obsessed with KK. She hasn't done anything to you or your church.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 The person who closed then re-opened the thread.And who is that?
smac97 Posted July 20, 2015 Author Posted July 20, 2015 You didn't even answer my questions. Did you think they were rhetorical? I don't see why you're so obsessed with KK. She hasn't done anything to you or your church. With respect, I decline to enter into a discussion with you. Thanks, -Smac
Damien the Leper Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 And who is that?Smac, obviously. If a mod had closed the thread, we wouldn't be having this cute little exchange, Scott.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 You didn't even answer my questions. Did you think they were rhetorical? I don't see why you're so obsessed with KK. She hasn't done anything to you or your church.I think the questions have been answered previously. She has fostered and continues to foster a spirit of divisiveness that warrants addressing head-on. The Book of Mormon tells of a number of prominent, bitter and vocal dissidents and the harm they caused. They weren't ignored either.
Damien the Leper Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 (edited) With respect, I decline to enter into a discussion with you.Thanks,-SmacThat's neat. You've got no substance. Just a soapbox. Edited July 20, 2015 by Valentinus
smac97 Posted July 20, 2015 Author Posted July 20, 2015 And who is that? That would be me. Thanks, -Smac
smac97 Posted July 20, 2015 Author Posted July 20, 2015 That's neat. You e got no substance. Just a soapbox. Again, I decline to enter into a discussion with you. Thanks, -Smac
jkwilliams Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 I think the questions have been answered previously. She has fostered and continues to foster a spirit of divisiveness that warrants addressing head-on. The Book of Mormon tells of a number of prominent, bitter and vocal dissidents and the harm they caused. They weren't ignored either. Bitter must be in the eye of the beholder, as she doesn't seem particularly bitter to me. YMMV.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 Smac, obviously. If a mod had closed the thread, we wouldn't be having this cute little exchange, Scott.As has been pointed out, you are free to withdraw from the thread.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 (edited) Bitter must be in the eye of the beholder, as she doesn't seem particularly bitter to me. YMMV.Tell that to the bishop she has vilified in public. What does YMMV mean? Edited July 20, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
Damien the Leper Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 I think the questions have been answered previously. She has fostered and continues to foster a spirit of divisiveness that warrants addressing head-on. The Book of Mormon tells of a number of prominent, bitter and vocal dissidents and the harm they caused. They weren't ignored either.I'm not disagreeing with you, Scott. But this still doesn't answer my question of closing and re-opening the thread. All this thread is a "Look at what that Kate Kelly has gone and done now!" diatribe.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 (edited) I'm not disagreeing with you, Scott. But this still doesn't answer my question of closing and re-opening the thread. All this thread is a "Look at what that Kate Kelly has gone and done now!" diatribe.I appreciate the information and analysis and find it useful. Maybe you don't, but you are free to ignore the thread. As for why the thread was closed, I don't know, but I can suggest a possible reason. We were getting a lot of drive-by jabs devoid of substance, and enough irrelevancies and derailments to warrant a warning from a moderator that the thread was going in too many different directions and was on the verge of being closed. Sometimes, suspending the thread for a while can curtail such nonsense. I've tried that in the past, and it has worked. Edited July 20, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
Recommended Posts