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

[provoman]

3 hours ago, california boy said:

Calm, I am trying to understand your position.  Are you saying that using violent metaphors is never a problem for some people that might misinterpret what is being asked for?  Haven't we seen many instances of that occurring?  Does January 6th ring a bell?  How many defendants have claimed in court that they were caught up in the moment and thought they were doing what Donald Trump wanted them to do?

ACAB, and improper use of Facist / Nazis, all 3 used to incite violence.

 

 

 

[MorningStar]

1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

Porn, casinos, and liquor stores are not vilified as pedophiles and groomers by people in the media, politicians, and religious leaders. 

I’m talking about the church though. The church vilifies porn more than anything, yet no members of the church have lashed out violently at the industry (that I know of) and certain websites actually have videos of minors being sexually abused and nothing is done about it. 
 

We don’t even know the guy’s motive. It’s assumed. 
 

 

[The Nehor]

2 minutes ago, smac97 said:

The Latter-day Saints are not inciting violence.  You and yours, however, are inciting hatred and anger with your blood libels against us.

And now we are equating worry about how some speech could lead to violence to rabid anti-Semites claiming that Jews are abducting Christian children and using their blood in satanic rituals. What a clown show you are putting on.

The irony is there is a modern-day equivalent to blood libel. Hear all those people claiming there are child groomers and pedophiles everywhere? That is the mild form. The true believers believe that the “elite” are (in addition to the raping and general abuse) harvesting the blood of the young to extend their own lives. The stupidest expression was the Pizzagate “scandal”. The modern version of diabolical alchemy. Satan is pretty boring. Come up with an original storyline you tiresome bore! And who is preaching that gospel in both its mild and extreme forms?

In any case the evidence is clear that the people screaming about grooming and pedophilia aren’t that bothered by it in practice:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/04/from-hastert-to-gaetz-lets-talk-about-republicans-and-sex-crimes.html

The concern is there only when it is needed for its rhetorical value. How has it come to this?

[The Nehor]

17 minutes ago, provoman said:

ACAB, and improper use of Facist / Nazis, all 3 used to incite violence.

If your only defense is a counter accusation then you are admitting you don’t really have a defense.

ACAB is a political slogan about defunding the police. As to Nazis being prevalent in law enforcement the FBI seems to agree with it being a serious problem:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/fbi-white-supremacists-in-law-enforcement

We really should have done something.

[smac97]

35 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Quote

The Latter-day Saints are not inciting violence.  You and yours, however, are inciting hatred and anger with your blood libels against us.

And now we are equating worry about how some speech could lead to violence to rabid anti-Semites claiming that Jews are abducting Christian children and using their blood in satanic rituals. What a clown show you are putting on.

HJW has done more than express "worry."  His accusations against Elder Holland are explicit.  He 

• declared that Elder Holland's "musket metaphor implies that members should be 'willing to defend the faith' with violence,"
• declared that "Holland is appealing to people to defend the religion by talking about muskets and musket fire," that "Perhaps you think they are mis-hearing/reading Holland by enthusiastically wanting to defend their religion with violence (even if hyperbolic) but they really aren't,"
• that - referencing Elder Holland - "it is immoral to incite people to violence," 
• that - referencing Elder Holland - "I'm also opposed to politicians (on any side) urging people to violent action, even if it is hyperbole. IMO it is classless for politicians to do it. But it is even worse for a 'man of God' to do it {incite violence}"

This is blood libel.  It differs from the blood libel against Jews in degree, but not in kind.

35 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

The concern is there only when it is needed for its rhetorical value. How has it come to this?

I think because some people cannot tolerate viewpoints which differ from yours.  It's their way or the highway. 

In this particular context, we can either abandon our religious beliefs which deem same-sex behavior to be sinful, or else be branded as bigots and haters (and accused of inciting violence against gays).  My, what a tolerant lot these folks are.

The irony of you, of all people, decrying violence is staggering.  How many times have you A) specifically and gleefully approved of physical violence against "Nazis," while at the same time B) remaining decidedly mum, on what "Nazi" means, who qualifies, and so on.

In this one, you said, in response to "You wouldn't be saying that if you were summarily and arbitrarily called a 'Nazi' and beaten up for it," that you would "punch the idiot (and possible Nazi)."  You are labeling him a "possible Nazi" not because you have any information or evidence that he is "a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party," but because he arbitrarily called you a Nazi.

In this one, I posted a link to to protesters screaming at an elderly woman with a walker, calling her "Nazi scum." 

And your response:

You previously posted this:

I responded:

Quote

"Nazis" being a pejorative label that anyone can, for any reason or no reason at all, attach to any other person.  And then comes the mob to mete out extralegal violence against that person.

An example:

Quote

Two Marine reservists testified Dec. 13 in a Philadelphia courtroom about an incident a month prior in which they were reportedly maced, beat up and robbed by a group of 10 to 12 people with alleged ties to antifa, the left-leaning, oftentimes violent, groups who proclaim to be vehemently anti-racist.

Visiting Philadelphia on Nov. 17 with their Joint Base McGuire–Dix–Lakehurst, New Jersey, unit for an event at a nearby hotel, Alejandro Godinez and Luis Torres decided to do a little sightseeing of the historic city...

But unbeknownst to the Marines, a controversial “We the People Rally” was kicking off nearby, attracting a small alt-right crowd — with a much larger group, Tom Keenan and Thomas Massey included, of counterprotestors flooding the scene near Independence Hall, the magazine described.

Spotting the two visitors, not in uniform at the time, Keenan approached and asked, “Are you proud?" according to the Marines' testimonies.

“We are Marines,” Godinez claims to have responded, inevitably confused.

Keenan persisted with his gauche interrogation techniques. “Are you Proud Boys?" he allegedly asked, referencing one of the far right groups leading the rally.

“I didn’t know what Proud Boys meant,” Torres told the judge.

Godinez and Torres testified that immediately after the short exchange, about a dozen people — including Keenan and Massey — attacked the two Marines, punching and kicking them, spraying them with mace and calling them “Nazis.”

“I’m Mexican!” a “bewildered” Godinez said he shouted while being attacked and called a “white supremacist.”

With that newly-discovered ethnic information, Keenan and other members reportedly shifted to racial insults, calling Godinez “spic” and “wetback,” the Marine told the judge.

Imagine the Everest-like mountain of idiocy one must scale to accuse a person of being a racist, only to then transition to accosting that same person with a barrage of racial slurs moments after learning of his Mexican background.

As the group allegedly chanted “F--k him up," Godinez was maced at least six times, stomped, kicked in the side and hit in the head, he told the judge.

“The best way I can describe it is the sound of people chanting in a soccer stadium,” Godinez testified, adding that Keenan was “laughing, smiling, and having a good time, while I could have died that day.”

Torres, meanwhile, said he was holding his hands up near his head to protect himself while Massey struck him repeatedly with “full force.”

“We were outnumbered,” Gordinez said in a statement obtained by Philadelphia magazine. There were “two Marines against 10 to 12 assailants.”

When the attack finally subsided, Gordinez said he tried to dial 911, but was unable to see his phone’s display due to being maced.

Eventually, Torres was able to call the police and the two were transported to the hospital to be treated for injuries. Godinez testified that he is still dealing with the injuries he sustained during the attack and may require surgery.

 

You've spoken of having a "touch of fun" while punching "Nazis" (a label you can apply to anyone).

Also Nehor:

• Yeah, punching Nazis is funny and people should rejoice when it happens.
• War “laws” are broken in every war. Repeatedly. So yes, extralegal {violence}.
• Punching Nazis is not wrong...
• I didn’t advocate for burning down the homes of Nazis………..yet.

"Inciting violence is just fine when I do it, because shut up," Nehor explained.

-Smac

Edited November 23, 2022 by smac97

[pogi]

1 hour ago, provoman said:

Of the top 10 - 12 States with highest number of gun violence, many of those States have stringent firearms laws.

Of US Cities with mass shootings, Chicago, Philedelphia, and Baltimore are the tops 3 with the most - triple digit amount. Chicago and the State it is in, have stringent gun laws.

Can one argue that more laws do not work?

If we consider the number of firearms in the US to the number of mass shootings, can we argue current laws do work?

 

gunviolencearchive.org, complie the mass shooting yearly reports, and filter.

First, I was talking specifically about red-flag laws.  Second, you are not considering all the data (how are these laws being implemented, for example). and third, you are making the same mistake in interpreting numbers that I already responded to.  This looks like the same play book from Covid.   These numbers don't show what might have been. 

Having the law is one thing, implementing it is another all together.  

Quote

There is broad concern in Illinois about the lack of orders in the state, despite a wave of mass shootings there. State legislators have criticized the implementation of their state's 2019 red flag law, calling it widely underused. The court records obtained by CBS News show only 51 emergency orders issued statewide in 2020 and 37 of them in 2021.

Quote

 Court records show only dozens of emergency orders in recent years in Massachusetts and Delaware. 

Quote

New York state court records show approximately 500 emergency orders issued a year in New York state, only slightly more than the less populous state of Maryland.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/red-flag-laws-states-implementation/

Clear evidence of failure of implementation:

Quote

"Buffalo was a textbook case. It was not the failure of the law. It was the failure of the implementation of the law," said John Feinblatt of Everytown for Gun Safety.    The suspected shooter in the Buffalo rampage had allegedly made prior statements and had reportedly undergone a psychiatric examination that could have triggered the state's red-flag law any time he tried to buy a weapon. 

The same failure of implementation can be attributed to the Colorado shooting. 

Take a look at the following real-life scenario and try to tell me with a straight face that the action taken was a mistake:

Quote

 

According to a police report filed in Osceola County in May 2018, a teacher alerted police about a janitor who was allegedly complaining about colleagues and mentioned a plan to bring a new gun to the school. The police report said the custodian told the teacher, "I'm angry and I'm set on something. I'll do it, you don't know me."

The police report, which was released to CBS News under a public records request, also noted that the custodian had been accused of throwing a chair and showing photos of a murder scene while on the job at the school.  The Osceola County Sheriff's Department would arrest him in May 2018 and seek an order that the firearm he'd recently purchased be seized under an emergency risk protection order (ERPO), also known as a "red flag" law. 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/red-flag-laws-states-implementation/

 

 

Edited November 23, 2022 by pogi

[The Nehor]

10 minutes ago, MorningStar said:

I’m talking about the church though. The church vilifies porn more than anything, yet no members of the church have lashed out violently at the industry (that I know of) and certain websites actually have videos of minors being sexually abused and nothing is done about it. 
 

We don’t even know the guy’s motive. It’s assumed. 
 

 

There are very few easily accessible websites showing child abuse. To get access to that material you generally have to go to the darkweb or pass the material around on a private basis. The worst of the child porn rings require members to submit material before being allowed to join in a kind of equivalent to the “made man” phenomenon to make sure that no one can turn on the ring without implicating themselves. These groups often fail at policing themselves and screw up anyways but new ones always crop up. In the recent Duggar trial the defense desperately did not want the jury to see the videos the defendant was watching. One of them is amongst the unofficial top five worst videos according to people in the FBI. It messes with the most hardened people. I read a description and am glad I have pretty close to total aphantasia. If I could have visualized it while reading it I don’t know how I would have reacted to it. Just reading a clinical description made me vomit and cry afterwards.

There are serious efforts to hunt this stuff. There are also serious efforts to trivialize it by throwing the accusation of pedophile and groomer around to entire demographics and their sins will hopefully be on their own heads.

There are things being done about it. There are child porn producers that are wanted in virtually every nation on Earth. The last one I read about is in prison in the Philippines and if he ever gets out (doubtful) there are a ton of nations who will gladly rearrest him.

[jkwilliams]

22 minutes ago, MorningStar said:

I’m talking about the church though. The church vilifies porn more than anything, yet no members of the church have lashed out violently at the industry (that I know of) and certain websites actually have videos of minors being sexually abused and nothing is done about it. 
 

We don’t even know the guy’s motive. It’s assumed. 
 

 

I’m just saying that what the church teaches does not happen in a vacuum. There is a ton of overt and often violent hostility toward the LGBTQ+ community, so religious leaders should be careful not to add fuel to that fire (and I’m not singling out the LDS church). 

I don’t know this guy’s motive, either. I’m on record as not “blaming” the church for his actions. But, as I said, the hostility and hatred are already out there (see Tucker Carlson’s vile guest last night). If anything, we should be trying our hardest to dial back the rhetoric. If people stop hating gays, maybe we’ll stop assuming that anti-gay violence is motivated by hatred. 

[smac97]

25 minutes ago, MorningStar said:

I’m talking about the church though. The church vilifies porn more than anything, yet no members of the church have lashed out violently at the industry (that I know of) and certain websites actually have videos of minors being sexually abused and nothing is done about it. 

We don’t even know the guy’s motive. It’s assumed. 

There's this item just in:

Quote

Anderson Lee Aldrich, the suspect in the deadly Colorado LGBTQ nightclub massacre, is nonbinary and uses they/them pronouns, their lawyers said in new court filings Tuesday.

Public defenders Joseph Archambault and Michael Bowman filed several motions on Tuesday night that included a footnote about their client’s identity.

“Anderson Aldrich is nonbinary,” the footnote states, the Denver Post reported. “They use they/them pronouns, and for the purposes of all formal filings, will be addressed as Mx. Aldrich.”
...
Meanwhile, in another bizarre twist, Aldrich’s estranged father has been identified as an ex-con former MMA fighter-turned-porn star, it was revealed Tuesday.

Aaron Franklin Brink, 51, entered the mixed martial arts cage in the ’90s, clocking up 21 victories over the 10 years of his fighting career — including during appearances with the Ultimate Fighting Championship and World Extreme Cagefighting, MMA Junkie wrote in a profile.

Brink also took up porn acting at age 27 under the name **** Delaware, the Denver Gazette reported.
...

It was also revealed that the suspected shooter’s name was changed more than six years ago after filing a legal petition in Texas seeking to “protect himself” from a dad with a criminal history.

Aldrich was known as Nicholas Franklin Brink until 2016 when a petition was submitted on Brink’s behalf by their grandparents, who were their legal guardians at the time.

“Minor wishes to protect himself and his future from any connections to birth father and his criminal history. Father has had no contact with minor for several years,” the petition stated.

The request for a name change came months after Aldrich was apparently targeted by online bullying. 

Last year, Aldrich was arrested after their mother reported her child threatened her with a homemade bomb and other weapons.

Ring doorbell video obtained by the Associated Press shows Aldrich arriving at their mother’s front door with a big black bag the day of the bomb threat.

Aldrich tells Voepel that police were nearby and adds, “This is where I stand. Today I die.”

Authorities later said no explosives were found, but gun control advocates have asked why police didn’t use the state’s “red flag” laws to seize weapons she said her child had.

I suspect nobody will rush out to blame causation for the shooting on A) Aldridge's status as "nonbinary" (which is far more recent that his activity in the Church), or B) Aldrich's cage-fighter / porn star dad, or C) Aldrich's online bullies.

Nope.  Aldrich listened to Elder Holland's talk last year, heard the references to scholars defending the Church via "metaphorical muskets" (scholarship), and interpreted that as meaning "go commit a mass murder at a gay nightclub."  Proof positive that Mormons hate gays and are inciting violence against them.

Sure, sure.  That makes perfect sense.

-Smac

[The Nehor]

11 minutes ago, smac97 said:

HJW has done more than express "worry."  His accusations against Elder Holland are explicit.  He 

• declared that Elder Holland's "musket metaphor implies that members should be 'willing to defend the faith' with violence,"
• declared that "Holland is appealing to people to defend the religion by talking about muskets and musket fire," that "Perhaps you think they are mis-hearing/reading Holland by enthusiastically wanting to defend their religion with violence (even if hyperbolic) but they really aren't,"
• that - referencing Elder Holland - "it is immoral to incite people to violence," 
• that - referencing Elder Holland - "I'm also opposed to politicians (on any side) urging people to violent action, even if it is hyperbole. IMO it is classless for politicians to do it. But it is even worse for a 'man of God' to do it {incite violence}"

This is blood libel.  It differs from the blood libel against Jews in degree, but not kind.

I think because some people cannot tolerate viewpoints which differ from yours.  It's their way or the highway. 

In this particular context, we can either abandon our religious beliefs which deem same-sex behavior to be sinful, or else be branded as bigots and haters (and accused of inciting violence against gays).  My, what a tolerant lot these folks are.

The irony of you, of all people, decrying violence is staggering.  How many times have you A) specifically and gleefully approved of physical violence against "Nazis," while at the same time B) remaining decidedly mum, on what "Nazi" means, who qualifies, and so on.

In this one, you said, in response to "You wouldn't be saying that if you were summarily and arbitrarily called a 'Nazi' and beaten up for it," that you would "punch the idiot (and possible Nazi)."  You are labeling him a "possible Nazi" not because you have any information or evidence that he is "a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party," but because he arbitrarily called you a Nazi.

In this one, I posted a link to to protesters screaming at an elderly woman with a walker, calling her "Nazi scum." 

And your response:

You previously posted this:

I responded:

You've spoken of having a "touch of fun" while punching "Nazis" (a label you can apply to anyone).

Also Nehor:

• Yeah, punching Nazis is funny and people should rejoice when it happens.
• Everyone should unite in joy at things that frustrate, stop, or harm Nazis.
• War “laws” are broken in every war. Repeatedly. So yes, extralegal {violence}.
• Punching Nazis is not wrong...
• I didn’t advocate for burning down the homes of Nazis………..yet.

"Inciting violence is just fine when I do it, because shut up," Nehor explained.

-Smac

That is not blood libel. You chose the blood libel comparison knowing about the difference in degree for rhetorical effect.

I am not convinced that the church’s stance had any impact on this attacker. I would want a timeline as to when mom joined and a bunch of other details. The defense of the Church in this thread by some posters (including you) has been hyperbolic and deranged and racist and cynically disingenuous.

I stand by my statement that punching Nazis is morally correct. You keep saying (without evidence) that I apply that label to anyone like I am Oprah giving away cars: “You are a Nazi! And you are a Nazi! And you get to be a NAZI!” Punching Nazis is usually not legal though. You have to be careful with Nazi punching. Those whose express goal it is to overthrow the law to oppress and persecute don’t deserve any sympathy or hand-wringing if others hit back. It is crazy that we are at a point that punching fascists is a bad thing. Maybe they just don’t like freedom and liberty?

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, smac97 said:

There's this item just in:

I suspect nobody will rush out to blame causation for the shooting on A) Aldridge's status as "nonbinary" (which is far more recent that his activity in the Church), or B) Aldrich's cage-fighter / porn star dad, or C) Aldrich's online bullies.

Nope.  Aldrich listened to Elder Holland's talk last year, heard the references to scholars defending the Church via "metaphorical muskets" (scholarship), and interpreted that as meaning "go commit a mass murder at a gay nightclub."  Proof positive that Mormons hate gays and are inciting violence against them.

Sure, sure.  That makes perfect sense.

-Smac

It is questionable whether the Church’s statements caused this specific event but after your disparagement of an entire ethnic group and saying that what the Church is experiencing is like blood libel do you really think you can pull off a pivot now and call for less hyperbole and a more reasonable stance?

[smac97]

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

That is not blood libel.

It's an update on blood libel.

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

You chose the blood libel comparison knowing about the difference in degree for rhetorical effect.

I chose the comparison because it is apt, yes.

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

I am not convinced that the church’s stance had any impact on this attacker. I would want a timeline as to when mom joined and a bunch of other details. The defense of the Church in this thread by some posters (including you) has been hyperbolic and deranged and racist and cynically disingenuous.

The venomous attacks on the Church have been pretty horrible.  

I think the Church is a wonderful institution, and will defend it against false accusations, calumnies, etc.

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

I stand by my statement that punching Nazis is morally correct.

Yes, I know.  

And anyone you don't like can be labeled a "Nazi."

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

You keep saying (without evidence) that I apply that label to anyone like I am Oprah giving away cars: “You are a Nazi! And you are a Nazi! And you get to be a NAZI!”

I have repeatedly noted that "Nazi" is "a pejorative label that anyone can, for any reason or no reason at all, attach to any other person," and that "then comes the mob to mete out extralegal violence against that person."

You have repeatedly ignored this observation, and have refused to explain what you mean by "Nazi."  From this I infer that you reserve the right to label anyone a "Nazi," for any reason or no reason whatsoever, after which your preemptive approval of physical violence comes into play.

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

Punching Nazis is usually not legal though. You have to be careful with Nazi punching.

See?

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

Those whose express goal it is to overthrow the law to oppress and persecute don’t deserve any sympathy or hand-wringing if others hit back. It is crazy that we are at a point that punching fascists is a bad thing. Maybe they just don’t like freedom and liberty?

"Fascist" is likewise just a pejorative label you can attach to anyone at any time, for any reason or no reason at all.

The irony of you speaking against violence is . . . strong.

-Smac

[HappyJackWagon]

5 minutes ago, smac97 said:

There's this item just in:

I suspect nobody will rush out to blame causation for the shooting on A) Aldridge's status as "nonbinary" (which is far more recent that his activity in the Church), or B) Aldrich's cage-fighter / porn star dad, or C) Aldrich's online bullies.

Nope.  Aldrich listened to Elder Holland's talk last year, heard the references to scholars defending the Church via "metaphorical muskets" (scholarship), and interpreted that as meaning "go commit a mass murder at a gay nightclub."  Proof positive that Mormons hate gays and are inciting violence against them.

Sure, sure.  That makes perfect sense.

-Smac

You really don't pay attention very well. You seem to have tunnel vision in cramming your narrative down everyone's throat.

There have been many posts (including from me) that suggest many ways an individual may be influenced. It has been noted that family, friends, church, politics can all play a role in shaping a person's belief system that can then lead to negative and violent behavior. This is true regardless of the individuals political affiliation or church membership. Those things are influential in a person's development. But you just keep pushing your 1 narrow narrative and ignore everything else around you.  All it does is make you seem overly defensive and a bit desperate. 

Could negative family dynamics influence this perp? Of course. Could politics influence them? Sure. Could bullies and negative experiences be an influence? Yep. Apparently the only thing that couldn't possibly be an influence is church teachings.

Me thinks thou doth protest too much.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, rodheadlee said:

The only one responsible for this shooting is the guy that pulled the trigger. Trying to Pawn off responsibility on other parties doesn't cut it.

And in conclusion Hitler never personally killed anyone so cannot be blamed for the Holocaust. Thanks for coming to my TED talk.

[HappyJackWagon]

3 minutes ago, smac97 said:

It's an update on blood libel.

I chose the comparison because it is apt, yes.

The venomous attacks on the Church have been pretty horrible.  

I think the Church is a wonderful institution, and will defend it against false accusations, calumnies, etc.

Yes, I know.  

And anyone you don't like can be labeled a "Nazi."

I have repeatedly noted that "Nazi" is "a pejorative label that anyone can, for any reason or no reason at all, attach to any other person," and that "then comes the mob to mete out extralegal violence against that person."

You have repeatedly ignored this observation, and have refused to explain what you mean by "Nazi."  From this I infer that you reserve the right to label anyone a "Nazi," for any reason or no reason whatsoever, after which your preemptive approval of physical violence comes into play.

See?

"Fascist" is likewise just a pejorative label you can attach to anyone at any time, for any reason or no reason at all.

The irony of you speaking against violence is . . . strong.

-Smac

I'm just going to leave this right here since you don't seem to know the definition.

[smac97]

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

It is questionable whether the Church’s statements caused this specific event

There is zero evidence of causation.

"It is questionable whether John Smith is a cannibalistic pedophile."  Do you think John Smith might take umbrage at this?

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

but after your disparagement of an entire ethnic group

I have not disparaged any ethnic group.

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

and saying that what the Church is experiencing is like blood libel

"Like blood libel" in kind, yes.  The degree is less, but not by a whole lot.

Publicly accusing a religious minority (Jews) of murdering boys is pretty abhorrent.

Publicly accusing a religious minority (Latter-day Saints) of hating gays and inciting violence against them is also pretty abhorrent.

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

do you really think you can pull off a pivot now and call for less hyperbole and a more reasonable stance?

Says the guy harrumphing about abstract notions of "violence" while elsewhere openly and repeatedly advocating for actual violence against anyone he arbitrarily decides to label a "Nazi" or a "Fascist."

The irony is pretty strong.

-Smac

[jkwilliams]

13 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

And in conclusion Hitler never personally killed anyone so cannot be blamed for the Holocaust. Thanks for coming to my TED talk.

It’s kind of funny to hear the same folks who condemned the Provo drag show as a “grooming” event now pretending that they can’t see why anyone would attack a similar grooming event. 

[Tacenda]

17 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

And in conclusion Hitler never personally killed anyone so cannot be blamed for the Holocaust. Thanks for coming to my TED talk.

The talks in the church throughout the years, I have no doubt contributed to at least one or more suicides. 

https://www.kuer.org/religion/2018-07-25/can-the-lds-church-be-blamed-for-utahs-lgbt-suicides

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-lgbq-religion-suicide/religious-faith-linked-to-suicidal-behavior-in-lgbq-adults-idUSKBN1HK2MA

Edited November 23, 2022 by Tacenda

[smac97]

9 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I'm just going to leave this right here since you don't seem to know the definition.

Right.  But that's not Nehor's definition.

Just like the dictionary definition of "Nazi" is not Nehor's.

-Smac

[provoman]

49 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

If your only defense is a counter accusation then you are admitting you don’t really have a defense.

ACAB is a political slogan about defunding the police. As to Nazis being prevalent in law enforcement the FBI seems to agree with it being a serious problem:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/fbi-white-supremacists-in-law-enforcement

We really should have done something.

They are examples of language that people use to justify violence.

But if "political slogan" justifies the violent language used, then your are justifing Nazis poltical slogans.

 

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

The talks in the church throughout the years, I have no doubt contributed to at least one or more suicides. 

 

Yup. The church I grew up in referred to homosexuality as a vile and disgusting crime against nature. A guy I knew in my ward at BYU killed himself because he had been taught to loathe himself. 

[The Nehor]

8 minutes ago, smac97 said:

It's an update on blood libel.

No, it isn’t. I shared the real update on blood libel. Your attempt to contort this to be the modern version of blood libel would impress the guy who built the bed for Procrustes.

11 minutes ago, smac97 said:

  And anyone you don't like can be labeled a "Nazi."

I have repeatedly noted that "Nazi" is "a pejorative label that anyone can, for any reason or no reason at all, attach to any other person," and that "then comes the mob to mete out extralegal violence against that person."

You have repeatedly ignored this observation, and have refused to explain what you mean by "Nazi."  From this I infer that you reserve the right to label anyone a "Nazi," for any reason or no reason whatsoever, after which your preemptive approval of physical violence comes into play.

See?

"Fascist" is likewise just a pejorative label you can attach to anyone at any time, for any reason or no reason at all.

Nazi and fascist are not just arbitrary labels. Words have meanings. Look them up in the dictionary if you find them this confusing. The constant whimpering about their meaning being fuzzy is asinine.

If you are that worried about the poor fascists you may be comforted to know that I only rarely seek them out deliberately and I can go for hours…..sometimes even days without punching a Nazi. It is not an occupation. It is more of a hobby I take up when the opportunity presents itself.

(*whispering* Make sure to add this one to your document you use when you want to talk about how mean I am to all those poor white supremacists who would gladly kill me for what I am. I think it will fit in best right before the funny one where I said I haven’t called for burning Nazi homes……..yet.)

10 minutes ago, smac97 said:

The irony of you speaking against violence is . . . strong.

Cool. I like irony.

[The Nehor]

3 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Right.  But that's not Nehor's definition.

Just like the dictionary definition of "Nazi" is not Nehor's.

-Smac

Wrong.

[smac97]

15 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

You really don't pay attention very well. You seem to have tunnel vision in cramming your narrative down everyone's throat.

There have been many posts (including from me) that suggest many ways an individual may be influenced. It has been noted that family, friends, church, politics can all play a role in shaping a person's belief system that can then lead to negative and violent behavior. This is true regardless of the individuals political affiliation or church membership. Those things are influential in a person's development. But you just keep pushing your 1 narrow narrative and ignore everything else around you.  All it does is make you seem overly defensive and a bit desperate. 

Could negative family dynamics influence this perp? Of course. Could politics influence them? Sure. Could bullies and negative experiences be an influence? Yep. Apparently the only thing that couldn't possibly be an influence is church teachings.

Me thinks thou doth protest too much.

You have publicly accused Elder Holland of inciting violence, have ratified and re-affirmed this in this very thread, and are standing by it now, and you have also heavily implied that the Church caused or incited mass murder.

It's kind of hard to "protest too much" about such over-the-top hatefulness.

Your behavior is appalling.  It is an updated version of blood libel, differing only in form and degree.  The same malicious intent and falsity are there.

You are inciting hatred and anger against the Latter-day Saints.

-Smac

[smac97]

22 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

It is questionable whether the Church’s statements caused this specific event

"It is questionable whether Jews murdered babies for blood rituals."

Doesn't really come across well, does it?

22 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

but after your disparagement of an entire ethnic group

I have not disparaged any ethnic group.

22 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

and saying that what the Church is experiencing is like blood libel do you really think you can pull off a pivot now and call for less hyperbole and a more reasonable stance?

Says the guy pivoting between decrying violence in this thread while gleefully advocating it, over and over again, against anyone he arbitrarily decides to label a "Nazi" or "Fascist."

-Smac

Edited November 23, 2022 by smac97