Scott Lloyd Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 4 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: Don't know how to take this comment. Are you suggesting I had less than honourable or truthful motivations for my OP? It was meant as a joke. I even included a winking emoticon. Kind of on a hair trigger, aren't we?
Johnnie Cake Posted May 28, 2016 Author Posted May 28, 2016 5 hours ago, smac97 said: Not necessarily. "Anti-Semite" could be considered "a loaded word," too. But that's because anti-semitism is an innately ugly, unpleasant thing. Look at all the tapdancing you are doing in this thread. You are fine with "Pro-Mormon," presumably because it's objectively definable, but then you bristle at its antonym. You merely assert, but do not explain or demonstrate, that "anti-Mormon" is "offensive" and an "ad hominem" (huh?) and a "dishonest tool" (huh? again), that it should be replaced with some sort of touchy-feely nicety like "Alternative Point of View" because . . . you say so, I guess. You suggest - again without explanation - that "anti-Mormon" can only be used to describe "anyone who purposely lies or knowingly distorts LDS doctrines for the purpose of deceiving others from belief in Mormonism," as though opposition to the Church per se requires dishonesty (a position, oddly enough, you seem to be taking, and which I am rejecting). You ignore my explanation for my usage of the term and (falsely) characterize my usage as "a descriptor against those who engage in a honest discussion." You weirdly suggest that my recognition that "anti-Mormons" exist amounts to me declaring "moral high ground" over you (huh? cubed). "Anti-Mormonism" exists. It is a thing. There are people with "pro-Mormon" perspectives, and people with "anti-Mormon" perspectives (and there are those who are indifferent/ambivalent about us). You recognize the former, but just can't bring yourself to admit to the reality of the latter. I don't understand that. Nope. Its very purpose is to quantify a person's perspective vis-à-vis the LDS Church. Some people can, I suppose, use it as a thought-terminating cliché. I don't. I have my faults, but failing to think about my faith or criticisms leveled against it is not one of them. The term describes an unpleasant proclivity. I would not like to be called an anti-Catholic or an anti-Jew or an anti-Muslim or an anti-Hindu. I think religious beliefs form a very important part of many people's lives. There are few circumstances I can contemplate wherein I would actively oppose a religious group. Nevertheless, it is absurd to suggest that such perspectives don't exist. Or that they should be spared normative descriptors in favor of touchy-feely niceties because, well, some who harbor such repellant sentiments just don't want that spade to be called a spade. So with respect, I disagree. The term is eminently useful and reasonable. My "conscience" isn't really a part of the equation. People exist who are actively opposed to the LDS Church and/or its doctrines / practices / leaders / members. And that such people can and should be described as "anti-Mormon." There is no moral code breached or conundrum encountered when I choose to use this apt portion of the English language. None. At all. Thanks, -Smac You're very passionate in your own defence. I merely told you the term was offensive and now we've gone on nearly 5 page defending why you feel it's ok to use the term. I tried to give you on opportunity to nuance your use but you doubled down . I will hence forth wear your use of anti Mormon as a badge of honor when ever you call me such only because you are so insistent in its use. But also know that my estimation of you as a fair minded adversary has diminished. Which I'm guessing only makes you smile. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 4 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: Curious. By your standards am I anti Mormon? 4 hours ago, jkwilliams said: I would not go there at all. Why try to goad him when he has already indicated a determination not to personalize the argument? That's classic chip-on-the-shoulder behavior.
Scott Lloyd Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said: You're very passionate in your own defence. I merely told you the term was offensive and now we've gone on nearly 5 page defending why you feel it's ok to use the term. I tried to give you on opportunity to nuance your use but you doubled down . I will hence forth wear your use of anti Mormon as a badge of honor when ever you call me such only because you are so insistent in its use. But also know that my estimation of you as a fair minded adversary has diminished. Which I'm guessing only makes you smile. When did he say you are an anti-Mormon? When has he ever said it? As I said, chip on the shoulder. He has said he doesn't throw it around willy-nilly and in fact is sparing in his use of it. Is that not nuanced enough for you? The only instance that comes to my mind of his using it was earlier on this thread when he said Ed Decker is anti-Mormon. Do you deny that Decker is anti-Mormon? Edited May 28, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
Scott Lloyd Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 4 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: I have refrained from using TBM for this same reasons...out of respect to those who may fine offense with its use What is there about it that would cause offense?
Scott Lloyd Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 4 hours ago, smac97 said: My favorite books growing up were Louis L'amour novels, Greco-Roman mythology, Lee Nelson's "Storm Testament" series, and To Kill a Mockingbird. Favorite Comics: Calvin and Hobbes, The Far Side, and Bloom County. Thanks, -Smax I can see your youthful tastes were more sophisticated than mine. Though I did enjoy Sherlock Holmes stories. And Perry Mason mysteries. And my friend and I did write detective/crime fighter/super hero stories.
Johnnie Cake Posted May 28, 2016 Author Posted May 28, 2016 21 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: It was meant as a joke. I even included a winking emoticon. Kind of on a hair trigger, aren't we? Fair enough. I was still rattled by smacs insistence on using anti Mormon for those who disagree with his conclusions on this board
Teancum Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 5 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: It's non-sequitur because you were endeavoring to draw a comparision between false characterizations and a true one. Thus it does meet the definition of non-sequitur. As I noted to Smac it depends on perspective. Many would argue that to be pro Mormon is to be anti truth. Mormons bristle when EV critics charecterize the LDS religion as a cult, non Christian, etc. The term anti Mormon is typically used in a very negative way by Mormons and even as a perjorative. My only point is to call an LDS defender anti truth or anti Christian or cult is no more useful than the term anti Mormon. Broad labels aren't effective really and I beleive it was Jwhitlock who pointed this out to me when I was using broad brush labels. I have tried to avoid them since. On the other hand I suppose there has to be some terms to define where one stands. I imagine many here would label me a anti Mormon who is stil LDS. I view myself more a skeptic and truth seeker and don't even now rule out the LDS truth claims. There may well be anti Mormons on this board but I don't think all who raise issues in the critical or skeptical sense are thus. Smac's post seemed to argue that. On another note I am also opposed to abortion. I use the term pro life. I do not call myself anti abortion.
Garden Girl Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 7 hours ago, jkwilliams said: I understand that a lot of people wouldn't perceive it as an insult, but a lot of people do, and frankly, a lot of times it's said it is meant as an insult. The reason I don't use it is that I want to talk to people in as respectful a manner as possible, and using words that some people find offensive is a hindrance to such respectful conversation. Literally, "anti-Mormon" and "TBM" seem fairly descriptive and innocuous, but both have very strong connotations. Consider the phrase "trailer park." Descriptive? Yes. Loaded with connotations? Absolutely. Glad you're enjoying the beach. Totally jealous here, where it's hot and humid, and we're 3 1/2 hours from the beach. Hello jkw... Regarding the term "TBM"... the acronym for "true believing Mormon"... it really is beyond me why someone would think of it as a hindrance to respectful conversation if used correctly and respectfully... If the term's history is correct, it started when one of the early apostles was approached by a group of men demanding to know if he was "one of them Mormons"... Unflinching, he looked them in the eye and declared, Yes I am... true blue, through and through. GG
Johnnie Cake Posted May 28, 2016 Author Posted May 28, 2016 1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said: What is there about it that would cause offense? From my estimation nothing...but someone on this board told me they were offended when I used the term so out of respect to them I stopped using it.
smac97 Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: You're very passionate in your own defence. I merely told you the term was offensive and now we've gone on nearly 5 page defending why you feel it's ok to use the term. I tried to give you on opportunity to nuance your use but you doubled down . I will hence forth wear your use of anti Mormon as a badge of honor when ever you call me such only because you are so insistent in its use. But also know that my estimation of you as a fair minded adversary has diminished. Which I'm guessing only makes you smile. First, I don't believe I have attached the "anti-Mormon" label to you. Meanwhile, you - without even a scintilla of justification - publicly, and casually, and unfairly compared me to an appalling racist named Mark Furman. So you'll pardon me if I am not particularly worried about your perception of what is "fair minded." Second, I have been and will continue to be parsimonious in my use of the term. Third, I am befuddled at how using the term "anti-Mormon" is incompatible with being "fair minded." Fourth, and with respect, I think your position on the term is unreasonable and not very coherent. You have barely tried to explain your position. You've just asserted a because-I-say-so declaration that "anti-Mormon" is not a legitimate descriptor (which is plainly is), and now you've become irritated because I have failed to defer to your dainty sensibilities. Well, whatever. Calling a spade a spade may, in your estimation, be innately offensive and verboten. But that's your position, not mine. And it's a weird one. And I feel no obligation to defer to you about such things. Anti-Mormonism is not a likeable word. But that's because what it is describing is not a likeable thing. And although I have not applied it to you, you have apparently decided to apply it to yourself, and even to publicly trumpet it as "a badge of honor." I have no idea what you are doing in saying such things. But then, I don't understand your overall position. And I also don't understand how someone as obviously intelligent - and apparently decent - as you could feel comfortable in casually slurring someone you barely know by publicly comparing him to a vile racist. Thanks, -Smac Edited May 28, 2016 by smac97 1
smac97 Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: Fair enough. I was still rattled by smacs insistence on using anti Mormon for those who disagree with his conclusions on this board I have never advocated "using anti Mormon for those who disagree with {my} conclusions on this board." Never. Not once. You are bearing false witness here. Mighty "fair minded" of ya. Thanks Edited May 28, 2016 by smac97 1
smac97 Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 1 hour ago, Teancum said: I imagine many here would label me a anti Mormon who is stil LDS. I view myself more a skeptic and truth seeker and don't even now rule out the LDS truth claims. There may well be anti Mormons on this board but I don't think all who raise issues in the critical or skeptical sense are thus. Smac's post seemed to argue that. I did not argue this. Thanks, -Smac 1
jkwilliams Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 8 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Why try to goad him when he has already indicated a determination not to personalize the argument? That's classic chip-on-the-shoulder behavior. I'm on record as not wanting to personalize or goad, thanks.
Teancum Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 8 hours ago, smac97 said: I did not argue this. Thanks, -Smac I will go back and review your initial post when I have a bit more time. For now I will assume I misunderstood you.
saemo Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 I've been called far worse than anti-Mormon. Call me whatever you want. Just don't call me late for dinner.
saemo Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 19 hours ago, jkwilliams said: When I was home last month, my dad had me alone in the car for 45 minutes, and he really lit into me. I should have just shut up, but I tried to have a civil conversation, which was a mistake. I ended up talking about the church's policy about children of gay couples. He accused me of making it up. That really hurt. I don't think my father has accused me of lying ever, but there it was. I just stopped talking. Not one of the happier moments of my life. I know those cornered conversations. Been accused of far worse than lying. Including not loving my daughter because I didn't raise her Mormon. My reaction has been avoidance of one on one time with my dad. Unfortunate as that is, I think if I allowed one more session of bagging on me, I'd never speak to him again. 1
jkwilliams Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 53 minutes ago, saemo said: I know those cornered conversations. Been accused of far worse than lying. Including not loving my daughter because I didn't raise her Mormon. My reaction has been avoidance of one on one time with my dad. Unfortunate as that is, I think if I allowed one more session of bagging on me, I'd never speak to him again. I'm usually very good at disengaging from conversations about the church. My parents and other family members talk about church a lot, which is of course fine with me. I just leave it alone and listen, as I should have on that occasion.
jkwilliams Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 13 hours ago, Garden Girl said: Hello jkw... Regarding the term "TBM"... the acronym for "true believing Mormon"... it really is beyond me why someone would think of it as a hindrance to respectful conversation if used correctly and respectfully... If the term's history is correct, it started when one of the early apostles was approached by a group of men demanding to know if he was "one of them Mormons"... Unflinching, he looked them in the eye and declared, Yes I am... true blue, through and through. GG Again, if it isn't offensive to you, that's fine. I just know people who find it offensive and those who use it as a pejorative. For me, that is reason enough to avoid the term.
Garden Girl Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, saemo said: 1 hour ago, saemo said: I know those cornered conversations. Been accused of far worse than lying. Including not loving my daughter because I didn't raise her Mormon. My reaction has been avoidance of one on one time with my dad. Unfortunate as that is, I think if I allowed one more session of bagging on me, I'd never speak to him again. Hello saemo, and others in similar situations... I was fortunate when I was inactive in that my folks, while never hiding their faith, belief and love of the gospel/Church, did not rag on me but simply loved me... and, they loved my non-LDS husband, which kept the doors wide open. In fact, they loved to come up to San Fran then Oregon to visit us... I suppose the fact that, unlike you, they knew that I was still a believer and that made a difference... they simply lived the gospel by example every day of their lives. It was the Spirit more than anything that tugged at me from time to time to return. We are poles apart in our faiths now, but I can understand how you feel... I hope you won't close any doors with your folks... it can be and is difficult I'm sure... My regret is that my mom did not live to see me reactivate... and know that her prayers were answered... GG Edited May 28, 2016 by Garden Girl 3
Scott Lloyd Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 On May 27, 2016 at 9:35 AM, stemelbow said: I noticed something as I rep'd you for this post. You have more reps than posts. wow. Impressive. Anyone else have more reps than posts? The question not necessarily meant for you, but meant to say good job, sometimes overly articulate man. Since the reboot after Pahoran was banned and he became Russell C. McGregor, he has continuously had many more rep points than posts, almost two to one for a while. This is a remarkable thing since it's a safe assumption that some on here hold him in low regard, this due to his directness and incisive wit. The interesting thing about Smac is that he has only known about rep points for about a year.
Scott Lloyd Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 (edited) On 5/27/2016 at 9:47 PM, Teancum said: As I noted to Smac it depends on perspective. Many would argue that to be pro Mormon is to be anti truth. Mormons bristle when EV critics charecterize the LDS religion as a cult, non Christian, etc. The term anti Mormon is typically used in a very negative way by Mormons and even as a perjorative. My only point is to call an LDS defender anti truth or anti Christian or cult is no more useful than the term anti Mormon. Broad labels aren't effective really and I beleive it was Jwhitlock who pointed this out to me when I was using broad brush labels. I have tried to avoid them since. On the other hand I suppose there has to be some terms to define where one stands. I imagine many here would label me a anti Mormon who is stil LDS. I view myself more a skeptic and truth seeker and don't even now rule out the LDS truth claims. There may well be anti Mormons on this board but I don't think all who raise issues in the critical or skeptical sense are thus. Smac's post seemed to argue that. On another note I am also opposed to abortion. I use the term pro life. I do not call myself anti abortion. I'm "pro-life" but would have no problem with being called anti-abortion, as that's what I am. And if people harbor misguided or false notions about Mormons that's their problem, and it doesn't mean I have to reject the label pro-Mormon or, more simply, Mormon. Edited May 30, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
jkwilliams Posted May 28, 2016 Posted May 28, 2016 1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said: Since the reboot after Pahoran was banned and he became Russell C. McGregor, he has continuously had many more rep points than posts, almost two to one for a while. This is a remarkable thing since it's a safe assumption that some on here hold him in low regard, this due to his directness and incisive wit. Why do I suddenly feel less impressed by rep points? Apparently they'll give them out to anyone. 1
Teancum Posted May 29, 2016 Posted May 29, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: I'm "pro-life" but would no problem with being called anti-abortion, as that's what I am. And if people harbor misguided or false notions about Mormons that's their problem, and it doesn't mean I have to reject the label pro-Mormon or, more simply, Mormon. Did I suggest you reject the label of pro-Mormon or Mormon? as noted I was once taken to task for simply using the term believer to refer to those on this board who believe the truth claims of the LDS church. Not TBM, which I think above you said you were quite fine with that label, but simply believer. Apparently I should have ignored Mr.Whitlock. Edited May 29, 2016 by Teancum
Scott Lloyd Posted May 29, 2016 Posted May 29, 2016 4 hours ago, jkwilliams said: Why do I suddenly feel less impressed by rep points? Apparently they'll give them out to anyone. As indicated by my having the second-highest number on the board. By the way, has anybody else hit 10,000 yet?
Recommended Posts