Treatment of Anti-Mormons on this Forum

[jerome1232]

I'm honestly amazed anyone who participated in Byron's threads thinks he was in anyway sincere. He pointedly ignored almost every sincere attmept to engage on his questions. The only attempt at it was in the Galatians thread and there it was a "you are wrong, I am right" type of engagement not a "oh that's how you see it but I disagree" type of engagement.

I tried, I tried to tell Byron what he was doing that tripped so many alarms, stank of shotgunning little one liners to shake leaves off of the tree. I was trying to give the benefit of the doubt right up until he posted that leaves of grass thing. I can see only two ways he could have come across that, in some sort of anti mormon seminar that fell for Jeff Lindsey's satire, or by googling for anti-mormon issues and falling for the satire. I asked how he learned of it and he ignored me.

[Guest]

I wanted to touch on something though, the word anti, specifically. It does ring harshly when said aloud. Tends to get people riled up and ready on the offensive side almost immediately. But considering the dictionary definition of the word, I'm anti Mormon and religion in general, I don't subscribe to it and I won't advocate any of it. But am I attacking and rude? I hope not, I don't think I have been, I tend to keep my thoughts to myself unless directly cornered and asked. So just a thought for everyone...maybe not all antis are butts? Anti just means you are opposed of something, it doesn't automatically equate to a jerk.

 

Oh! Cool!  A semantic argument.  Ok, here goes.

 

Bini,

 

Consider it this way.  You label yourself as an "agnostic" instead of "atheist".  Why?

 

The common way to take this is that agnostic means you're just not interested in the topic.  An atheist is very interested.  In fact, his atheism is his religion.  And theists are his enemies.  They are evil and the source of problems in this world.  It is his duty to stomp it out wherever he goes.

 

You can be someone who certainly doesn't agree with us, while not choosing to specifically oppose us.  

 

Example:  

 

I have a friend at work who is a really good Christian man.  We're very good friends and we can agree to disagree on a lot of stuff.  I asked him one day why all this anti-Mormon stuff (yes, I was very polite about it).  He said he didn't know.  I gave some often asked questions of Mormons.  He said "I really don't spend much time or energy thinking about any of that.  I'm just trying to have a personal relationship with my Savior".  

 

He was working on himself and letting his light shine.  Of course he would talk about his faith and perform acts of service.  But he just never got into the "fight".  In a way, he was fighting a different way.  The right way.

 

So, when you say you are "opposed" to anything religious, are you saying you personally don't believe any of it (maybe even think it's stupid, ignorant, and foolish)?  Or do you think it is evil and must be destroyed?

[omegaseamaster75]

 

 

This does not feel like friendly group.

It feels more like a social clique with a few core members

and I quickly learned that you must not disagree with that core.

 

 

Post of the year?

[jerome1232]

I don't agree Carb. What you are calling an atheist I'd call an anti-theist. Not all atheists are anti-theist but all anti-theists are atheists. Agnostics aren't sure if there's a God or not, atheists generally have made up their mind that there isn't one.

Edited November 3, 2015 by jerome1232

[The Folk Prophet]

I'm insulted she did not include me.

 

But I'm not old enough to grow algae (at least, not on this forum).  From what I gather, I'm around the average age of this forum.  Not old enough to be anyone's father (except for a few) but not young enough to be anyone's son.

 

Meh...what makes one "old" on the forum? Relative to many I'm a youngster. But for a year (when I had the time) I posted a LOT! Nowadays my posting frequency has diminished due to time constraints.

[Guest]

I don't agree Carb. What you are calling an atheist I'd call an Anti-theist. Not all atheists are Anti-theist but all Anti-theists are atheists. Agnostics aren't sure if there's a God or not, atheists generally have made up their mind that there isn't one.

Ok.

 

And the semantics continue...

[jerome1232]

Ok.

And the semantics continue...

Oh come on. I'm friends with a few atheists and some of them would be insulted by the anti-theist connection. Can I not give my input without offending?

[Guest]

I was in no way offended.  I was just being playful.

 

My meaning was that I can accept your correction.  (again it's semantics).  And the point would still be valid.  Just change some of the words or some of the definitions.  I'm ok with either as long as we agree on words and definitions.

 

Such is a semantic argument.  Once we agree on the words and definitions, then we can actually have a meaningful dialogue.

[The Folk Prophet]

I was in no way offended.  I was just being playful.

 

My meaning was that I can accept your correction.  (again it's semantics).  And the point would still be valid.  Just change some of the words or some of the definitions.  I'm ok with either as long as we agree on words and definitions.

 

Such is a semantic argument.  Once we agree on the words and definitions, then we can actually have a meaningful dialogue.

 

75% of the arguments here tend to be semantics.

[jerome1232]

Goes to show written word is so easy to read into! A little clarification goes a long way.

Semantics shmantics

[jerome1232]

Meh...what makes one "old" on the forum? Relative to many I'm a youngster. But for a year (when I had the time) I posted a LOT! Nowadays my posting frequency has diminished due to time constraints.

You used to be church right? Yeah you are an old timer. Admit it.

[The Folk Prophet]

You used to be church right? Yeah you are an old timer. Admit it.

 

Compared to whom?

[Guest]

Well, I've only been on here a few weeks, myself.

 

In real life I've probably got you beat by a decade or more.

[Guest Godless]

It's possible the people you are tagging as "anti-Mormon" are truly seeking the truth.

 

Here I go with another personal story.

A little scary after my first experience.

Hopefully it will be taken in the spirit offered.

 

I was brought to the Church by an anti-LDS crusader.

She was the wife of my husband's co-worker.

She was very friendly to me, and called one day and asked if I would host a meeting with some missionaries.

I said sure, sounded like fun, having no idea what she had planned.

I just thought some missionaries were coming to visit.

When the LDS missionaries showed up, I thought their talk was interesting.

And then she began attacking them.

I was mortified!

When they finally left, I told her I did not appreciate being used that way,

and I asked the missionaries back - to talk to ME.

 

I DID ask them a lot of these questions, because they were in the anti-LDS literature she had left,

and I wanted to know the answers. Some of these feel like serious questions when you're seeking.

It's scary to think you might be getting into what others are telling you is "a cult."

 

So just know, not all people who come here are looking for trouble.

Some really ARE looking for answers.

That's why I asked Byron if he wanted the missionaries to visit.

He didn't respond - but that doesn't mean anything either.

 

Just the mean spiritedness of some of the responses turned him away, according to his goodbye.

 

This does not feel like friendly group.

It feels more like a social clique with a few core members

and I quickly learned that you must not disagree with that core.

 

My feeling now is that I'll never be accepted on this forum.

I'll keep poking around for a while, though.

Some of the posts are interesting.

Maybe I'll find some kindred spirits here.

 

I do like Pam's advice about being kinder to new-comers.

I hope people read it and consider the message.

 

They accepted me (and I was fairly abrasive when I first came here), which leads me to believe that they can accept pretty much anyone who gives this forum a fair shot. Things get a little rough in here from time to time, but such is the nature of the internet.

[Guest]

I was in no way offended.  I was just being playful.

 

My meaning was that I can accept your correction.  (again it's semantics).  And the point would still be valid.  Just change some of the words or some of the definitions.  I'm ok with either as long as we agree on words and definitions.

 

Such is a semantic argument.  Once we agree on the words and definitions, then we can actually have a meaningful dialogue.

 

 

Oh come on. I'm friends with a few atheists and some of them would be insulted by the anti-theist connection. Can I not give my input without offending?

 

 

So... let me interrupt this discussion to share my experience with a 15-year-old self-described atheist.  I found out that he is an atheist because he has studied the Bible thoroughly from cover to cover (he is quite well-versed in it!) and the Q'uran and decided that it is all hogwash.  And because of this, he believes that man is trying their hardest at making people believe there is a God by writing all this philosophical fiction so they can make their lives more meaningful.  He then says that he doesn't need to have a belief in a God to find his life meaningful.  So, he is an atheist.

[The Folk Prophet]

Well, I've only been on here a few weeks, myself.

 

In real life I've probably got you beat by a decade or more.

 

Assuming you're talking to me...I wonder where you draw that conclusion from? It may be true I suppose...just wondering.

[jerome1232]

So... let me interrupt this discussion to share my experience with a 15-year-old self-described atheist. I found out that he is an atheist because he has studied the Bible thoroughly from cover to cover (he is quite well-versed in it!) and the Q'uran and decided that it is all hogwash. And because of this, he believes that man is trying their hardest at making people believe there is a God by writing all this philosophical fiction so they can make their lives more meaningful. He then says that he doesn't need to have a belief in a God to find his life meaningful. So, he is an atheist.

If he went around actively seeking to convince others that religion, diety, and the whole lot is rubbish I'd label him anti-theist. If he only brought it up if the situation was one of sharing beliefs I'd still call him just an atheist.

[Guest Godless]

 

The common way to take this is that agnostic means you're just not interested in the topic.  An atheist is very interested.  In fact, his atheism is his religion.  And theists are his enemies.  They are evil and the source of problems in this world.  It is his duty to stomp it out wherever he goes.

 

You can be someone who certainly doesn't agree with us, while not choosing to specifically oppose us.  

 

 

 

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

Seriously though, agnostics and atheists both come in varying forms of "interest" in the topic of religion. Interestingly enough, my wife (who was a devout Catholic when we started dating) sometimes comes off as more "militant" than me despite the fact that I'm an atheist and she's agnostic. She won't commit to an answer when it comes to the existence of a deity, but she is very much anti-religion. 

[prisonchaplain]

Yeah. That Prison Chaplain is a real jerk isn't he.

 

 

 

 

I guess it's better to be feared than ignored. 

[Guest]

 

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

Seriously though, agnostics and atheists both come in varying forms of "interest" in the topic of religion. Interestingly enough, my wife (who was a devout Catholic when we started dating) sometimes comes off as more "militant" than me despite the fact that I'm an atheist and she's agnostic. She won't commit to an answer when it comes to the existence of a deity, but she is very much anti-religion. 

  LOVED the graphic!!

 

 

Now comes another word to define:  Anti-religion vs. Anti-theist.  There are many who believe in God but refuse to accept the idea of organized religion  or even a formal "set of beliefs" that are His.

 

Emo Phillips: "I believe the entire concept of mono-theism was a gift from the Gods."

 

BTW: Jay Leno once pointed out that there were these phone surveys that actually cost money to participate in.  Yet, there was always a small percentage of individuals who would call in, pay money, and vote: undecided.

 

Leno's jocular reaction:"I feel so strongly that I want everyone to know that I haven't decided."

Edited November 3, 2015 by Guest

[Guest]

Assuming you're talking to me...I wonder where you draw that conclusion from? It may be true I suppose...just wondering.

 

Just the nature of your posts.  The tone, the vocabulary, the phrasing, the references, etc.  It's just a feeling.  I wouldn't dwell too much on it.  It was just a passing comment.  And I openly admit I could be dead wrong.

Edited November 3, 2015 by Guest

[Guest]

If he went around actively seeking to convince others that religion, diety, and the whole lot is rubbish I'd label him anti-theist. If he only brought it up if the situation was one of sharing beliefs I'd still call him just an atheist.

 

He debates my son on an almost daily basis.  My son is learning the Old Testament in seminary this year, so my son likes talking to him because it kinda brings home his seminary lessons and gives him lots of perspective.  So, they argue but then they're best friends... and they argue through text message in-between classes (they go to the same high school) so they're not in-your-face about it.  But the atheist kid is also in a Bible Study club at school... he just likes to rattle the cages over there.  My son doesn't like the Bible Study group because they like to look down on people who don't believe the Bible the same way they do... and that's not to mention that every once in a while they state that Mormons are the soldiers of the anti-Christ because they know the atheist member is best friends with a Mormon.

 

So, I guess it's more of like an "interest" for him rather than a militant objective.

 

By the way, just to put a little more history to this, he started questioning the Bible when his mom brought home her partner to become his... dad?  second mom?  I'm not really sure what they call them.  He doesn't know what to call her either.  He actually asked me what she is called.  I just told him just stick with referring to her as your mom's partner and calling her by her first name until they insist you call her something else.  I don't know why he didn't just ask his mom, so I didn't just tell him to ask his mom either.

Edited November 3, 2015 by anatess

[The Folk Prophet]

Just the nature of your posts.  The tone, the vocabulary, the phrasing, the references, etc.  It's just a feeling.  I wouldn't dwell too much on it.  It was just a passing comment.

 

I'm not dwelling on it (...as I dwell on it...) just morbidly curious. I tend to get labeled as younger than I am. People presume 30s. And they're a decade off. Of course that tends to be in person because I look younger than I am. But does my tone also read as 10 years less mature than I ought to be? :)

[Guest]

I always thought you were probably in your 40's. 

 

I'm older than all of you.

[Vort]

I'm 26.