Jump to content

Colorado Nightclub Shooter is a (Nominal) Member of the Church


Recommended Posts

On 11/25/2022 at 2:27 PM, Teancum said:

 Because many here have a persecution complex and play it well.  Even a small thimble of criticism and an attach on a "religious minority."  There is a lot of thin skin among Latter day Saints.

Perhaps some, but as an institution and for the vast majority, criticism is often disregarded or rolled with. One common criticism is that we don't respond to criticism enough. As such. I find your accusation of thin skin utterly abhorrent and I can scarcely contain the foam and spittle as I type this being so infuriated that I can barely see well enough to type this. Rage!!! If I had a shoe to dust and you were nearby, consider it dusted. 👺

Link to comment
1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Rebutting public accusations against a religious minority of inciting mass murder is not reasonably characterized as a "persecution complex."

Publicly accusing a religious minority of inciting mass murder is not reasonably characterized as "a small thimble of criticism."

Rebutting public accusations against a religious minority of inciting mass murder is not reasonably characterized as being "thin-skinned."

-Smac

YOur are pretty thinned skinned.  And you have a HUGE persecution complex.  

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Nofear said:

Perhaps some, but as an institution and for the vast majority, criticism is often disregarded or rolled with. One common criticism is that we don't respond to criticism enough. As such. I find your accusation of thin skin utterly abhorrent and I can scarcely contain the foam and spittle as I type this being so infuriated that I can barely see well enough to type this. Rage!!! If I had a shoe to dust and you were nearby, consider it dusted. 👺

Thank you for proving my point.

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Thank you for proving my point.

Your welcome. I'm glad to oblige. For the record, the accusation of "thin skinned" to another is really just a variant of an ad-hominem and really doesn't have place in rational discussion (which, of course, is why it shows up on discussion boards so often :)). That's not to say that that the accusations of thin skinness are never accurate. But, they are rarely ever helpful.

 

PS: I stop now since my comments are rather a bit too much in the board nannying vein (my apologies to all the nanas out there for my use of that social group as a non-positive metaphor).

Edited by Nofear
Link to comment
On 11/24/2022 at 9:37 AM, LoudmouthMormon said:

Ok.  Hold on.  Wait a moment.  Full stop please.  So, folks on this thread have suggested church leaders "tone down war rhetoric".  @ttribe is calling out responses to this suggestion, saying there is anger and vitriol.

Can someone point to any post on this thread exhibiting anger and vitriol? ttribe, cite your source please. 

One thing that I know happens on occasion, is sometimes folks will look at a response they don't like, and they'll demonize it. Claiming anger and vitriol exists when it doesn't.  I'm wondering if that's happening here, or if I missed a post.  So yes, please - if someone is exhibiting anger and/or vitriol in response to the suggestion, please point it out.  I'd like to maybe add my voice to those who would seek a calmer discourse.  

Or, if no examples are forthcoming because they don't exist, then I'd call on ttribe to stop the inflammatory unproductive demonizing rhetoric.  Such things aren't helpful.

 

Fair enough. Point taken. Perhaps I should have stated "impassioned responses" rather than "anger and vitriol."

Link to comment

The only way for us to understand the impact of our words is to listen to those who receive it. I can't speak for how Elders Holland and Oaks "Musket Fire" was received by members of the LBTBQ community, but I think any discourse that leverages violence/guns should be shunned, and that goes for both sides (there was a reference to an LGBTQ leader using war/battle reference). It is easy for those of us that are straight to not view the musket fire reference as a metaphor. But I don't blame members of the LGBTQ community to be upset by it. I would think if prominent, powerful group used "Musket fire" referencing the Church (LDS), members would be upset (rightfully so).  

Link to comment
58 minutes ago, Snodgrassian said:

The only way for us to understand the impact of our words is to listen to those who receive it. I can't speak for how Elders Holland and Oaks "Musket Fire" was received by members of the LBTBQ community, but I think any discourse that leverages violence/guns should be shunned, and that goes for both sides (there was a reference to an LGBTQ leader using war/battle reference). It is easy for those of us that are straight to not view the musket fire reference as a metaphor. But I don't blame members of the LGBTQ community to be upset by it. I would think if prominent, powerful group used "Musket fire" referencing the Church (LDS), members would be upset (rightfully so).  

https://braininjurysvcs.org/choose-wisely-how-our-words-impact-others/#:~:text=As author Yehuda Berg states,bring the community together or

"When it comes to living an altruistic lifestyle, a lot can be said for what we say. As author Yehuda Berg states, “Words are singularly the most powerful force available to humanity… Words have energy and power with the ability to help, to heal, to hurt, to harm, to humiliate and to humble.” The words we choose and how we use them can build others up or tear them down; bring the community together or rip it apart."

Link to comment
1 hour ago, bluebell said:

This is true, but at the same time, listeners have a responsibility as well.  The way that we choose to interpret words can also have power to help, to heal, to hurt, to harm, to humiliate, and to humble.  When we choose to interpret words in ways that they were not meant to be interpreted, then we are responsible for the negative energy that our interpretation puts out into the world.

 

Very true bluebell! I often have to decide how to react to someone saying something and if I'm reading them wrong.

Link to comment

I don't believe the LDS church is in any way responsible for the shooting in CO. Does the church have a less than welcoming history toward LGBTQ? Absolutely. This is when it would seem more mature to simply disregard the source of the contention and move on with life. One of the best decisions I ever made was to stop caring about what the church taught on a subject that leadership may likely be very ignorant about. Violent metaphor is sometimes warranted, IMO. For example, and not to derail with heavy politics, listen to the lyrics of the song "The Great Divide" by the band Anti-Flag.

In the context of the song and the social and economic climate of the US "fix your bayonets" seems appropriate. 

As for Holland's choice of words...reward him and his rhetoric with "muskets" on behalf of those whom he has a problem with.  The sanctimonious ignorance with which he speaks should be treated as such or just outright and justifiably ignored. Just like the rest of us he's just a dude with a mouth and an opinion. 

Edited by Damien the Leper
Link to comment
15 hours ago, Damien the Leper said:

As for Holland's choice of words...reward him and his rhetoric with "muskets" on behalf of those whom he has a problem with.  The sanctimonious ignorance with which he speaks should be treated as such or just outright and justifiably ignored. Just like the rest of us he's just a dude with a mouth and an opinion. 

Nah, I don't think I will.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...