Dan Reynolds - Prophet

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, kllindley said:

That and the tweet about literally killing our youth by saying same sex attraction.  

I'm sorry both you and HappyJW took it literally.  Of course Dan hasn't ever interacted with me personally.  I've tried to reach out to him, but he has chosen not to respond.  

But seriously, this whole thread has been greatly informative.  I will make sure to help both of you if ever you make any statement that isn't exactly backed up by the record.  Apparently, it's cool if Dan makes a strong statement, which may or may not actually be supported by the evidence.  Cause, that's brave and powerful.  But heaven forbid I use "took out of context" when someone else says "distorted."  Or use a metaphorical "told me" to describe a celebrity's public proclamations.  

I look forward to the future consistency.

 

It’s odd to me that you’re so concerned about distortion for your friend, but are so willing to perpetuate your own distortions in this discussion.  

I feel sorry that you’re hurting over various different things related to the topic in this thread, but that doesn’t justify the accusations or intentionally misleading statements.  

[Calm]

7 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

but are so willing to perpetuate your own distortions in this discussion.  

I understood what he meant.  I think if people remembered his previous comments, it would have been clear what he meant.  That he assumed people remembered rather than assuming this was a brand new conversation...well, posters make that error all the time while the reality is sometimes other posters don't remember whether or not someone is lds, gender, new poster or longtime infrequent poster, etc.  sometimes they don't remember because they just forgot, other times they weren't involved in the other threads.

Edited August 7, 2018 by Calm

[Hamba Tuhan]

11 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

I feel sorry that you’re hurting over various different things related to the topic in this thread, but that doesn’t justify the accusations or intentionally misleading statements.  

No, indeed. If we're going to go about justifying accusations, we should be good and certain they're deserving of it, like claims that the Church's teachings 'are literally killing our youth'. <sigh>

Edited August 7, 2018 by Hamba Tuhan

[hope_for_things]

38 minutes ago, Calm said:

I understood what he meant.  I think if people remembered his previous comments, it would have been clear what he meant.  That he assumed people remembered rather than assuming this was a brand new conversation...well, posters make that error all the time while the reality is sometimes other posters don't remember whether or not someone is lds, gender, new poster or longtime infrequent poster, etc.  sometimes they don't remember because they just forgot, other times they weren't involved in the other threads.

Except we both directly asked him to clarify the statement and he could have easily done that but instead chose not to. 

[Calm]

10 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Except we both directly asked him to clarify the statement and he could have easily done that but instead chose not to. 

You mean this isn't clarification in your view?  (I may be lost on what you are referring to)

Quote

Of course Dan hasn't ever interacted with me personally.  I've tried to reach out to him, but he has chosen not to respond.  

 

[hope_for_things]

9 hours ago, kllindley said:

The fact that you have so much respect for a man who told me that sharing my experience is "literally killing" people, seemed to clearly communicate what you think of my experience.

Don’t forget how what he stated was worded.  

22 minutes ago, Calm said:

You mean this isn't clarification in your view?  (I may be lost on what you are referring to)

He responded to both of us earlier in the timeline and didn’t say anything about our asking for clarification.  I don’t know why he didn’t say anything, perhaps he thought we’d never find out so chose not to say anything because it sounds so much more impressive to claim Dan was speaking about him specifically when he made that statement.   

Also, the actual statement from Dan calls out the church’s policies and teachings, not individuals, especially not LGBTQ individuals.  It’s a clear misrepresentation on not only a personal level, but factually what Dan was speaking about as well.  

Edited August 7, 2018 by hope_for_things

[kllindley]

6 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Don’t forget how what he stated was worded.  

He responded to both of us earlier in the timeline and didn’t say anything about our asking for clarification.  I don’t know why he didn’t say anything, perhaps he thought we’d never find out so chose not to say anything because it sounds so much more impressive to claim Dan was speaking about him specifically when he made that statement.   

Also, the actual statement from Dan calls out the church’s policies and teachings, not individuals, especially not LGBTQ individuals.  It’s a clear misrepresentation on not only a personal level, but factually what Dan was speaking about as well.  

Well if you're going to get into false accusations, please refer to where you asked for clarification. Just cite the post. Or do you just think we'll never find out that you have now twice claimed that you did when you didn't. 

[kllindley]

7 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

I've tried to be respectful to you throughout this thread.  I have made no attempt to gaslight you.  I'm sorry you are frustrated with Dan Reynolds.  I had no idea he told you that sharing your story is literally killing people, that sounds horrible and I of course wouldn't support that.  

I didn't start this thread directed at you, and had no intention of rubbing salt in your wounds.  I think its important that we always try to be respectful of the experiences of others, even those we disagree with. 

I would also like to point out that I know of people who've been traumatized by LDS church leaders and statements and positions of the church.  That when people support them as "prophets" that this can be traumatic for those who've been hurt by church leaders in the same way that you feel hurt by Dan Reynolds.  Yet, this message board is here to discuss topics of faith, so we have to try our best to be respectful and tolerant of the ideas of others, even when sometimes those ideas have hurt us personally or those that we love.  I know that I personally have room to improve in this respect, and I will try to continue to improve on this.  

 

6 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

Thanks, thats fair.  I didn't lead with the fantasy world comment, that was only after I was getting frustrated with you continuing to accuse myself and Happy of things we weren't doing, and you didn't directly respond to any of my queries to explain why you were making those accusations.  But I agree that was a little over the top, and I apologize for saying it.  

This is all you said after my post. Where in that is your direct request for clarification? 

 

[kllindley]

12 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Don’t forget how what he stated was worded.  

He responded to both of us earlier in the timeline and didn’t say anything about our asking for clarification.  I don’t know why he didn’t say anything, perhaps he thought we’d never find out so chose not to say anything because it sounds so much more impressive to claim Dan was speaking about him specifically when he made that statement.   

Also, the actual statement from Dan calls out the church’s policies and teachings, not individuals, especially not LGBTQ individuals.  It’s a clear misrepresentation on not only a personal level, but factually what Dan was speaking about as well.  

So you think that his tweet was only about institutional usage of the phrase same-sex attraction?  Or does it just sound better to deflect his comments to the Church? 

[Calm]

 

Quote

Also, the actual statement from Dan calls out the church’s policies and teachings, not individuals, especially not LGBTQ individuals.  It’s a clear misrepresentation on not only a personal level, but factually what Dan was speaking about as well.  

There are two statements, the tweet speaks to all instances of the usage of struggling with same sex attraction (he never wants to hear the phrase again). So every time kllindley describes his own life experiences as including struggling with same sex attraction, Reynolds is claiming kllindley is contributing to literally killing lgbt youth. 

Church teachings and policies could do no harm without people who teach and carry them out. So anyone who does that is a contributor to the killing logically speaking from Reynolds’ comments. 

Edited August 7, 2018 by Calm

[hope_for_things]

10 hours ago, kllindley said:

This is all you said after my post. Where in that is your direct request for clarification? 

19 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Wow. I must have missed that. Dan Reynolds told you that sharing your experience is "literally killing" people?

17 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Can you share any details of the conversation you had with Dan Reynolds when he told you that telling your story is literally killing people?

 

17 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

I'm sorry you are frustrated with Dan Reynolds.  I had no idea he told you that sharing your story is literally killing people, that sounds horrible and I of course wouldn't support that.  

Well, since I said what I said, and HJW asked you directly twice, I was trying to not pile on and pester you for an answer.  Why didn't you correct the record right up front, and why would you have used the language you did in the first place.  

 

[hope_for_things]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

 

There are two statements, the tweet speaks to all instances of the usage of struggling with same sex attraction (he never wants to hear the phrase again). So every time kllindley describes his own life experiences as including struggling with same sex attraction, Reynolds is claiming kllindley is contributing to literally killing lgbt youth. 

Church teachings and policies could do no harm without people who teach and carry them out. So anyone who does that is a contributor to the killing logically speaking from Reynolds’ comments. 

I think you know what Dan was saying.  The use of SSA is a term that is generally looked down upon by the gay community because of how its used to be dismissive towards people's identity.  Reynolds is just making a strong statement about how that phrase is hurtful to so many, he's just trying to be an ally.  

[Steve-o]

14 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Well, since I said what I said, and HJW asked you directly twice, I was trying to not pile on and pester you for an answer.  Why didn't you correct the record right up front, and why would you have used the language you did in the first place.  

 

No use letting details and facts get in the way of a good story. I agree with you. He was pushing a story to gain sympathy and credibility. Turns out it wasn't true. And he claims you misread? Holy moly. It appeared to be an intentional embellishment but it would be embarrassing for him to admit that.

Edited August 7, 2018 by Steve-o

[Steve-o]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

 

There are two statements, the tweet speaks to all instances of the usage of struggling with same sex attraction (he never wants to hear the phrase again). So every time kllindley describes his own life experiences as including struggling with same sex attraction, Reynolds is claiming kllindley is contributing to literally killing lgbt youth. 

Church teachings and policies could do no harm without people who teach and carry them out. So anyone who does that is a contributor to the killing logically speaking from Reynolds’ comments. 

I'm surprised you are defending what was a blatant falsehood on kllindley's part.

[HappyJackWagon]

10 hours ago, kllindley said:

Well if you're going to get into false accusations, please refer to where you asked for clarification. Just cite the post. Or do you just think we'll never find out that you have now twice claimed that you did when you didn't. 

I'm disappointed.

You made a false claim. Hope and I both commented and even asked questions about that. You didn't take the first opportunity to correct the story but I'm glad you eventually did. But instead of admitting the mistake you are now attacking Hope. It's sad, man.

[kllindley]

24 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Well, since I said what I said, and HJW asked you directly twice, I was trying to not pile on and pester you for an answer.  Why didn't you correct the record right up front, and why would you have used the language you did in the first place.  

 

Because I was at work.  My first response to HJW after his request for more details was to post a reference to the article (Calm had already posted the tweet).  If I was trying to make it sound like a personal conversation, why would I do that?  I could have easily maintained that it was a personal conversation, which wouldn't have been subject to a CFR.  If I was going to make a false claim about what he told me, why even worry about my friend's experience at all?

I already explained the language; I thought that you both had followed the previous 38 page thread about the documentary.  In fact You were one of the first commentors on that thread.  Why is is so unreasonable to assume that you had followed?  If you want to get picky about language, why did you claim to Calm that you had asked me directly?  

[kllindley]

1 minute ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I'm disappointed.

You made a false claim. Hope and I both commented and even asked questions about that. You didn't take the first opportunity to correct the story but I'm glad you eventually did. But instead of admitting the mistake you are now attacking Hope. It's sad, man.

See above.  

[kllindley]

2 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

You didn't take the first opportunity to correct the story

Yeah, sorry about working to provide for my family.  My first response to your request for additional details was to post the article, (Calm had already posted the tweet.)  

But be honest, this isn't about my wording.  Multiple people understood what I meant, though I admit it wasn't perfectly clear and understand how it could be misunderstood.  Like I said, I look forward to doing my part to make sure that everyone is held to the same standard.