LDS

Status
Not open for further replies.
I do not usually respond to argumentive, rude, insulting, objectionable, offensive posters.

To be fair, you don't usually respond to anyone, except occasionally with tiresome Mormon copypasta. I suppose that makes the majority of us argumentative, rude, insulting, objectionable, and offensive posters in your mind. Which is odd, as I've found this thread to be generally positive with some good discussion of your faith. Could it be that your parameters of what makes someone unworthy of responding to, is their refusal to accept your LDS doctrine as fact?
 
I do not usually respond to argumentive, rude, insulting, objectionable, offensive posters nor to personal attacks. Fortunately I have retained my free agency, which entitles me to that right.

You generally get back what you've been dishing out.
 
Birds of a feather flock together.

A stitch in time saves nine.
The early bird catches the worm.
Too many cooks spoil the broth.
Half a loaf is better than none.
A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down.
Patty cake, patty cake baker's man. Bake me a cake as fast as you can.

Now, about those anachronisms in the Book of Mormon...
 
Birds of a feather flock together.

Did you or did you not lie when you stated people here were violating "international internet rules"? Where can I find those rules? What is the governing body who created those rules and from where does this body derive regulatory authority? Did you make up the existence of those rules?
 
Hi Janadele.
With all due respect, I looked back over your post and I assumed the text was yours and that Fair was a word starting a phrase you'd cut from the final post and this word escaped the cut.
This has happened to me while editing a post :o

It never occurred to me to associate it with FAIR, because in that case you'd have copied the link to the text's source.
That's my take on a partly-sunny Sunday.


I actually took it as a quote, and understood the word 'Fair' to be a statement of support. After I Googled a sentence of the quote, and sifted through a few results, I realised it should have read FAIR. Doesn't change anything I've posted though. Other people obviously read it as Janadeles' words.

Still, if it's true that she/he has been trolling for 6 years then I'm probably wasting my time.
 
Is this maybe some twisted exercise to discredit he LDS by projecting their beliefs in a not very flattering light? Sort of Guerrilla anti marketing?
 
In case your eyesight is poor, I draw your attention to the quotes, and the word Fair at the conclusion.
Unless you're really pressed for time or are a disabled keyboard user, there's no reason you could not at least make the attribution clearer. "Quoted from [website citation]" would be a whole lot better, and avoid some obvious controversy. Copy and paste the URL, type in "quoted from," time taken very small.
 
I do not usually respond to argumentive, rude, insulting, objectionable, offensive posters nor to personal attacks. Fortunately I have retained my free agency, which entitles me to that right.

...so, please, if you would be so kind, tell me, in your opinion, when did the "noachian fludde" happen?

...and, if you would be so kind, tell me, in your opinion,when "Eve" and "Adam" lived.

...for a start...
 
Birds of a feather flock together.

I apologize, but I have another question.

If you would be so kind, please post a link to the "International Rules of the Internet" that you mention--I would very much like to see under what authority it is illegal to quote from, or reference to, another forum. Ignorance of the law is nno excuse, and I would like to conform my habit...
 
Unless you're really pressed for time or are a disabled keyboard user, there's no reason you could not at least make the attribution clearer. "Quoted from [website citation]" would be a whole lot better, and avoid some obvious controversy. Copy and paste the URL, type in "quoted from," time taken very small.

The problem is that plagiarism as shown here isn't solvable with a simple citation or quote marks:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8923837&postcount=2394

The only thing that's done right there is quoting Walker as saying "We left no stone unturned." The rest involves taking full phrases and sentences word-for-word from several other sources, sometimes changing a word or two like "Mormons" to "LDS," sometimes leaving them verbatim, adding a few phrases, and stringing it all together, then presenting the whole as one's own, without quote marks or anything to indicate the words weren't actually original.
 
Birds of a feather flock together.

Interesting you mention this. I was just reading about Smith and Young's sexual behavior that was inconsistent with their outward teachings. Yes, it seems people who engage the services of prostitutes do flock together.
 
I do not usually respond to argumentive, rude, insulting, objectionable, offensive posters nor to personal attacks. Fortunately I have retained my free agency, which entitles me to that right.

I asked "what is your churches position on lies and deceit?" Seems to be a polite and straightforward question to me. Why can't you answer it?
 
I do not usually respond to argumentive, rude, insulting, objectionable, offensive posters nor to personal attacks. Fortunately I have retained my free agency, which entitles me to that right.
That a question is difficult doesn't make it rude or insulting.

And people have the freedom to see that you avoid reasonable questions and that you refuse to engage in a substantive discussion. Most theists on this forum, including at least 3 Mormons, will do just that.

You do yourself no favors but please continue.
 
In an attempt to help janadele I searched around and the closest thing I could find to the mythical international internet rules is this; http://www.ilpf.org/ but it has nothing to do with any list of rules nor is it a governing body of the interwebs.


I do know of a humorous set of internet rules though...
 
Last edited:
Birds of a feather flock together.

Not true. The members have respected me for sometimes saying "I don't know," or "I believe it because I do, there's no rational explanation." They've not embraced my beliefs but for the most part they accept and respect me. Not everything on this thread is anti-Mormon, I've said it before and I'll say it again I'm LDS.

What concerns me is your post on Mountain Meadows where you took a sentence or two from various sites and put them all together, changed only a word here or there, and gave no attribution. If you'd like to know more about plagairism and the Church, try looking at BYU's Undergraduate Catalog pay particular attention to "Plagiarism Mosaic," though all forms are important to understand.

Here's a story from the New Era that says it quite well. Note the title of the article "Stolen Words" it was written by Lisa A. Johnson and appeared in Sept. 1992, (emphasis my own).

“She’d get a pretty bad impression of the Church if you had to explain that one of her star LDS students was plagiarizing.”

“Exactly!” Josh cried. “Well, not exactly. I don’t really feel like I stole it, since I did change it a little bit. Besides, you know the LDS kids are pretty well respected at this school. How would we look if one of us was caught cheating? You know the story would be all over the campus in five minutes.”

FWIW, Elder Oaks said, of plagiarism that it's a choice between good and evil. I'm gonna assume (as any reasonable person would) that plagairism is not good, so that leaves only one alternative according to Elder Oaks.

We often hear about the choice between good and evil. For example, most students will have to choose sometime between plagiarism or cheating to get a higher grade or relying on honest personal efforts to get what we deserve from our own preparation and qualifications.

While most of the above deals with education, it is something that is standard practice throughout most of the civilized world (at least to the best of my knowledge).
 
I think Janadele is still annoyed this thread didn't go the way she expected. She started it fully expecting it to be her personal pulpit. It didn't work out that way so she (I am assuming here) reported a bunch of posts as off-topic in the hopes the moderation staff would clear the way for her evangelizing.

The moderators did clear out a bunch of posts; they were off-topic; but then again, the opening poster never really responded to on-topic discussion. At that point, though, after the great thread purge, the thread resurrected itself. Much to Janadele's annoyance, it did so without satisfying her propaganda agenda but stayed perfectly on topic.

And despite interjections of Jandadele's mindless sermons and skyrider44's semantic minutia, the thread has plodded along ever since.

I've learned a great deal. I have insights from rational people that are Mormons, were Mormons, and never were Mormons. I also have insights into the character of brainwashed religious zealots.

I don't know how much more there is for this thread to discuss about Mormonism generally, but there are still the occasional amusing posts. To paraphrase Art Linkletter, [some] Mormons say the darndest things.
 
Last edited:
No event in history can fully be known, but Massacre at Mountain Meadows by Ronald W. Walker, Richard E. Turley and Glen M. Leonard, is an attempt to present the true picture, and as Walker says: " we left no stone unturned". This was a personal project by the authors, and although Church employees, and given full access to all relevant materials held by the Church, they retained full editorial control and have drawn their own conclusions from the exhaustive body of historical material they assembled.

The early and mid 1850s was the time of the Utah War, when people expected the US Army to enter Utah and either kill the LDS or force them from their homes. It was a time of great anxiety, tension, and attendant rumours among the general populace. We all know from movies of the violence and lawlessness of the American frontiers at this time. LDS members had suffered greatly from this unruly violence, and also from vicious and horrific persecution from those opposed to their religion.

After having been driven so many times from their homes and possessions, violated as they had been by fiends from hell, and now having to endure the unbelievable hardships of relocating to the harsh, freezing isolated wilderness of Mountain Meadow...it was understandable that these pioneer settlers would no longer "turn the other cheek" when the news came to them of this group, who were boasting of the atrocities they intended to commit on the "Mormons" and of their participation in the violence against LDS in both Missouri and Illinois, and that they had participated in the killing of Parley P. Pratt in Arkansas, poisoned a spring, and were threatened to destroy LDS settlements.

The message conveying the will and intent of Brigham Young not to interfere with the immigrants and instructing the Saints to allow the group safe passage did not arrive in time. The isolation, incomplete news of the approaching US Army, and fear of non-Mormons, contributed to paranoia on the part of the Mountain Meadows community. The responsibility for the massacre lies with Southern Paiute Indians and local leaders of settlers in the regions and those acting under their direction. Yes the Indians. who were friends of the LDS, were involved, their precious water and life line had been poisoned by those on which they took vengeance.

I have visited this area many times, and found it bitterly cold, inhospitable, and remote even today, and can imagine the despair of these settlers in those times, who after having endured so much to escape their persecutors now found they had followed them even there.

I was priviliged to have a discussion with a direct descendant of one of the local leaders, interesting that the family still reside in the area.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom