Tattoos and Other Things We Could Use More of at Church

[JohnsonJones]

10 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

You (generic) don't deserve a gold star for being against human trafficking. It's like saying "I deserve credit for not beating my children and lighting cigarettes out on my husbands tongue. "  You don't get a Nobel Peace Prize for being against things that 99.9% of people are against. 

I'm not trying to get a gold star, I'm trying not to get arrested by being associated with what is considered a crime in some nations that I occasionally visit.

[Guest MormonGator]

3 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

I'm not trying to get a gold star, I'm trying not to get arrested by being associated with what is considered a crime in some nations that I occasionally visit.

Um...then don't associate with human traffickers and don't behave like one.Problem solved. 

I travel a lot too-and never once have I ever worried about being associated with a group that I'm not a part of. 

Very odd of you to say that. 

[The Folk Prophet]

3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Two fold, firstly though, in some nations I visit, what you stated and how you stated it is considered a crime.  I cannot have any association to agreeing with you in that accord and must make it clear that not only do I disagree with what you stated, I do not condone it and condemn it in the harshest manner possible. 

I don't consider what is a crime in other countries of much worth...as in some countries it's legal for a husband to murder his wife for no reason whatsoever.

3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

If anything, this should make you happy you live in the US where you have freedom of speech. 

Your lack of freedom of speech and your need to explicitly state that you do not condone something as a disclaimer doesn't justify you in tossing reason and basic communication to the wind and declare that I am suspect of something for asking a rhetorical question. You could easily make such a disclaimer without implying that I am working to condone something. And you know, darned well, that I am not trying to condone it. You know darned well that I am a conservative Mormon. And you should be able to easily infer even within this thread how strictly I am against immoral abuses -- which I feel positive you have, and yet you continue thereafter to imply I might be involved in something horrifically immoral? What the honest crap dude?

3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

The second thing is, when you equate the Marriotts with that idea (and you did use them/him as a possible excuse of that)

I repeat. You don't seem to understand the meaning of the word "equate".

3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

what in the world is your thought process that would even bring such a thing to mind. 

I came up with a random extreme act that no one could argue was not a valid case for judgment by one's fellow-man. Replace it with murder, rape, pedophilia, or any other horrific thing if you want. The point is the same. Your inability to look past that says a lot more about your mind than it does mine.

3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

That's pretty disgusting to even consider...

And yet it happens all over the world. And the question remains...is it right to judge such things as "bad"? The answer is clearly "yes". Hence -- it is rhetorical.

3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

much less bringing it up as casually as you did out of what appeared to me to be nowhere..  Where does this come from?  What type of mind does someone have in order to so casually consider something like that?

I have to put that back on you, once again: What kind of mind takes a random rhetorical example of something and interprets it to come from a depraved place rather than as the OBVIOUS rhetorical point it is? I reiterate. Weird.

If I'd used rape or murder as my example instead would you assume I was a rapist or a murderer? 

Your response to me on this regard is so ludicrous that it hardly warrants defense.

Weird.

It is very plain to me that your intention is to smear me because you don't like me. No reasonable person would or could believe that a rhetorical question in cases like this implies what you are suggesting. Implying such of another with absolutely no foundational validity behind the matter is about the rudest thing I've ever witnessed in these forums, frankly.

If it weren't so ludicrous...I might consider actually being offended.

Edited November 1, 2017 by The Folk Prophet

[JohnsonJones]

14 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Um...then don't associate with human traffickers and don't behave like one.Problem solved. 

I travel a lot too-and never once have I ever worried about being associated with a group that I'm not a part of. 

Very odd of you to say that. 

It's an interesting thing that could be discussed, very off topic though.  There are nations that have VERY strict laws in this regards, especially if it has the item of children anywhere in it.  Anything that shows and indicates any acceptance, condoning, or anything of that manner or could be construed in that way is illegal (as well as many other things that Americans probably take for granted, and in some of the nations you get hands chopped off or executed for things some Americans might not even think twice about) and any association with those who do is also can have ramifications (entire families have gone to prison or worse simply for being related to individuals).

There are nations out there that can make one very grateful to be an American.  I do research (historian) in some areas where the laws can be quite harsh, and I try my best not to offend those as it's not just my research, but at times if I'm not careful, I could actually be endangered in other ways.

On the otherhand, I probably have some stories of some very exotic locales, and been blessed to brush shoulders with some LDS leadership at times as LDS membership in those places is excessively small.

[JohnsonJones]

2 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

came up with a random extreme act that no one could argue was not a valid case for judgment by one's fellow-man. Replace it with murder, rape, pedophilia, or any other horrific thing if you want. The point is the same. Your inability to look past that says a lot more about your mind than it does mine. Weird.

It is very plain to me that your intention is to smear me because you don't like me. No reasonable person would or could believe that a rhetorical question in cases like this implies what you are suggesting. Implying such of another with absolutely no foundational validity behind the matter is about rudest thing I've ever witnessed in these forums, frankly.

If it weren't so ludicrous...I might consider actually being offended.

Once again, I do not condone your discussions in this thread that advocated Human trafficking.  You can choose to be offended or not, you were the one who brought such despicable ideas into the thread to begin with.  You also included something that I won't even bring up, but does involve children in regards to Human trafficking, and that is what makes it excessively terrible.  In fact, two of the items above (and occasionally murder) go hand in hand with the idea that you tried to say could be justified.

It does not, in any way, shape or form.  The fact that you cannot see how offensive your original statement even was points to things much darker, because, frankly, that line of discussion is not just offensive, but is illegal in some areas of the world.  I do not condone Human trafficking of any sort, and especially of the sort you brought up. 

This is something I have seen first hand, and it is a terrible thing.  I can hope that it is due to naivety that you brought up such a reprehensible thing due to ignorance, because otherwise, I can't for the life of me imagine why you'd even think to bring it up so casually and in such a manner as you did. If you had the same experiences I did, not only would you not even try to bring it up, such suggestions would horrify you that someone could even think like that, much less attribute it as you did. 

Yes, it is terrible, and you were the one who brought it up.  We were talking about things that were legal, and then you came and brought some of the most illegal things into the thread.  What reason did you truly have to bring illegality into a thread that had nothing to do with crime or criminals as far as I could tell?

[The Folk Prophet]

7 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

... the idea that you tried to say could be justified.

You are either being intentionally dishonest or incredibly stupid. I won't engage on this matter further.

[zil]

14 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

Once again, I do not condone your discussions in this thread that advocated Human trafficking.

HE NEVER ADVOCATED HUMAN TRAFFICKING!!!!!!!

You need a new English dictionary.

[JohnsonJones]

12 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

You are either being intentionally dishonest or incredibly stupid. I won't engage on this matter further.

Thank you, that will make my life easier.

You can thank your naivety of some other nations laws as to why I need to disavow any connection to your statements and that I disapprove of the things that you advocated on it in any way, shape or fashion (or so I hope it is naivety).  I never condone nor approve of human trafficking nor commentary that may even appear to condone or excuse it in any way, shape, or form.

[The Folk Prophet]

[Vort]

1 hour ago, JohnsonJones said:

You should understand, I visit nations where what Folk Prophet stated is considered a crime.

We can do you one better. We who are responding to you don't merely visit such nations; we actually live in one.

[Vort]

1 hour ago, JohnsonJones said:

Once again, I do not condone your discussions in this thread that advocated Human trafficking.

Once again, you are being intentionally obtuse (or else you are actually too stupid to realize how unintentionally obtuse you are being).

[The Folk Prophet]

5 minutes ago, Vort said:

We can do you one better. We who are responding to you don't merely visit such nations; we actually live in one.

Well...except he's saying that my having said what I said would be a crime in some nations.

[Vort]

Just now, The Folk Prophet said:

Well...except he's saying that my having said what I said would be a crime in some nations.

Well, TFP, I guess that's what you get for openly CONDONING human trafficking by, you know, bringing it up as an example.

[Vort]

Perhaps it would be wise for JohnsonJones to change his username away from his actual name, so that when those oppressive, pedophile-hating countries go searching through MormonHub for posts under his name, they don't find the incriminating evidence tied so directly to him.

[zil]

Seriously, it's like JJ is running posts back and forth through the same translation engine Chinese manufacturers use to translate their assembly instructions...

[Guest MormonGator]

18 minutes ago, zil said:

Seriously, it's like JJ is running posts back and forth through the same translation engine Chinese manufacturers use to translate their assembly instructions...

In fairness to him it can be tough when you are feeling ganged up on-not saying people don't have reasons to take issue with what he said-but it can still be tough sometimes.  

 

[The Folk Prophet]

37 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

In fairness to him it can be tough when you are feeling ganged up on-not saying people don't have reasons to take issue with what he said-but it can still be tough sometimes.  

 

Ganged up on? Who is the one suggesting another might be a sex trafficker here?

Edited November 1, 2017 by The Folk Prophet

[NeuroTypical]

Been waiting for a chance to post this.  Now is as good a time as any.

 

[JoCa]

5 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Two fold, firstly though, in some nations I visit, what you stated and how you stated it is considered a crime.  I cannot have any association to agreeing with you in that accord and must make it clear that not only do I disagree with what you stated, I do not condone it and condemn it in the harshest manner possible. 

Dude . . .just wow man, wow.

You know as a side commentary, this comment here starts getting really 1984ish and is what the new modern age of social media, "virtue signaling", and liberal group think want.  Shoot, I mean if this is the way US society decides to go . . .it'll get real dang interesting.

Plenty of other countries in the history of the world have gone down this route (Mao, Stalin, he who shall not be named, Kim Jon Ill, etc.).  Once you start going down this thought process and start going down this route and either start advocating it for yourself (or for others), it's all gone man. 

Then how you "think" is really determined by the mob and how you "think" is defined only by what the mob wants you to think and don't you dare go outside the allowable opinion or you are damned.

[Guest MormonGator]

27 minutes ago, JoCa said:

Dude . . .just wow man, wow.

You know as a side commentary, this comment here starts getting really 1984ish and is what the new modern age of social media, "virtue signaling", and liberal group think want.  Shoot, I mean if this is the way US society decides to go . . .it'll get real dang interesting.

Plenty of other countries in the history of the world have gone down this route (Mao, Stalin, he who shall not be named, Kim Jon Ill, etc.).  Once you start going down this thought process and start going down this route and either start advocating it for yourself (or for others), it's all gone man. 

Then how you "think" is really determined by the mob and how you "think" is defined only by what the mob wants you to think and don't you dare go outside the allowable opinion or you are damned.

As a side commentary, you are so far to the right that the John Birch Society would throw you out for being "too extreme". 

Edited November 2, 2017 by MormonGator

[JoCa]

8 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

As a side commentary, you are so far to the right that the John Birch Society would throw you out for being "too extreme". 

Lol.  I take that as a compliment.  Thank you very much :-).

Oh and if I were that concerned about my words having ill effect on me a la JJ; I probably wouldn't be posting on a message board or if I were I'd have my anonymizer IP address going, going through like 4 tor nodes, 3 fake e-mail addresses, etc.  I'd go full tilt man.

Edited November 2, 2017 by JoCa

[Guest MormonGator]

Just now, JoCa said:

Lol.  I take that as a compliment.  Thank you very much :-).

Anytime. It was a joke, nothing personal. 

[JoCa]

Just now, MormonGator said:

Anytime. It was a joke, nothing personal. 

No worries, I understand you're a cool gator man.

[Guest MormonGator]

Just now, JoCa said:

No worries, I understand you're a cool gator man.

You forgot rich, happy, and handsome-but I'll take cool. After all, it's obvious. 

[JohnsonJones]

5 hours ago, MormonGator said:

In fairness to him it can be tough when you are feeling ganged up on-not saying people don't have reasons to take issue with what he said-but it can still be tough sometimes.  

 

I suppose partly, TFP IS a internet bully and I did finally have enough of his bully tactics.  So, while he made broad accusations repeatedly in various places against anyone who wasn't conservative or was a prime example of someone who would drive people from the church, I decided to pursue his aggression as aggressively as he has done.  I probably went a little too aggressively, but his own medicine is a pretty screwed up thing that he dishes out. 

I suppose I should have yet accepted the higher ground, but I had had it with his bullying and for once decided to fight back against it by acting similar to him.  No one would defend me, or any of the others he bullies, because I am NOT the "in-crowd" for this site and so I fought back for once.  Normally I will simply step back and say, is what I'm going to type nice or not...and if it isn't simply leave the thread.  If temptation comes to strike back, I'll even stay away from the thread or even the forums for a few days.  However, he has had his tendency to directly attack those in a very aggressive manner that really leaves a bad taste.  I was sick of self banning because other individuals couldn't stop being a little overbearing.  Still, utilizing his own tactics is probably something I shouldn't have done.  It was lowering me to his level for once, which doesn't paint me in a good light. 

It doesn't end quite there though...

In several countries which I visit, the freedoms people have in the US are not prevalent there, and indeed, not even given.  Those laws forbid many things, including any connection to certain activities.  I found it ironic that while he has accused others of serious sin for doing things that really aren't sins, he actually committed what would be considered a crime in some of those places I visit.  So, while he makes accusations based on really stupid stuff, I bit down as depending on the nation, he actually committed a pretty bad crime (though, if he hadn't included minors in his inclusion, ironically, it would be more iffy, the inclusion of certain terms is what sealed it) if he were in other nations.

NOW, in all truth and fairness, I normally do NOT browse forums while on site or in those nations for multiple reasons.  In this case though, yes I also covered my rear end rather quickly in my statements (though I probably could have done it without being quite so obnoxious, that was my push back against the bullying). 

While I am there, even though it's work, as an American typically all my communication and interaction are monitored on the internet (and it's a little odd, as even more phone conversations are intercepted and listened to, you can identify a bad tap on the line and in some ways it can be humorous if you tell them they have a bad tap as you can hear them and then you hear a click or other item).  IF, for some odd reason I did come to these forums, I could be guaranteed that anything under this user name would be read, and utilized.  So, yes, even this comment that I know that they'd read this.  I think I've made it abundantly clear in the above portions of the thread my stance though, but who knows what would happen.

The other reason is the same places with these rules have very harsh rules normally in regards to many various things we take for granted in the US.  Now, in some ways this is a very good thing, as in some areas of morality people are far better than the US.  In other ways, it means if you really don't watch what you do or participate in, you will be punished severely. That's the other reason I typically don't browse the internet except for official business reasons while there, it's better to be safe than sorry. 

But I used the opportunity to point out that TFP himself is not as sinless as he made himself out to be, and in fact should reflect on his OWN beam in his eye then the mote he repeatedly tries to put on others.  Was this wrong of me, maybe...and I apologize for going down to his level in doing this.  I didn't see any other way of doing it other than accepting the abuse he normally dishes out, or fighting back like in the same manner he does to others.  Probably not the best decision I made though.

Many Americans live in their own little bubble and think the rest of the world and it's laws are just like the US.  Sometimes they are very similar, but in some instances, they are very different.  It can also be very hazardous.  I knew of one Minister that went to minister (imagine that) to congregants and was kicked out of the nation.  That's normally the least punishment one can expect and the best outcome.  He wasn't kicked out for something he actually stated, nor was he kicked out for anything he did.  He wasn't even kicked out for a direct association, but because of the opinion that he was of the attitude that he condoned certain things (that I talked about in this thread) in relation to certain groups that I won't mention to explicitly here.  It was a clear warning that there are certain areas we were not to even come close to threatening though.

In another nation we have TPN's (third party nationals) which in many ways could reflect human trafficking in some cases.  However, when you include any discussion of minors in that regards, it quickly becomes an illegal item to be anywhere close to condoning and you must make it clear that you do NOT condone or agree with such things.  They have crackdowns occasionally which have led to life sentences.  Luckily I'm an American and normally they will just send them home with a stern warning never to return if we violate the law, but in the worst cases they do have prison sentences (and those prisons are NOT places you want to be, they are nothing like American prisons which are like palaces in comparison).

So laws are different in other nations, some much more restrictive than the US.  I don't expect any to wake up from the bubble they live in, but if possible I would hope that they realize that those in free nations should feel VERY grateful that they live in those nations.  I've been to several places where the freedoms we take for granted are not available.

What I did was probably not the best way to approach it, but then, letting Folk Prophet bully without regard isn't exactly the best thing either.  So, yes, I fought back against the bullying on his part, instead of letting it go like I normally do.  And yes, it was a pile on me because of it, but that's okay, I asked for it in part...and unlike some who we discussed who have been chased or shunned out of the church and accepted it, I kept coming back despite not being welcome.  I do think this is something we do at the church at times though, we find our group and ignore some of those actions that we like, while we ostracize those who are not part of the in-crowd.  Expecting me to ban myself every time a bully comes on the scene though, because I'm trying not to be as confrontational as they are, is asking a bit much I would say.  I fought back because if I did not fight for myself, no one else would.  That said, I'm not for more restrictive rules on these forums, I appreciate the free speech, but a little more consideration for others would be NICE at times.

I myself could have taken a better slant at it, but I think that would have caused TFP to double down on bullying in his continuation of more and more excessive and ridiculous parallels into criminal justifications which made NO sense at all to me on why he pursued that matter, so to me it appeared for no other purpose than to be a bully (IMO). 

However, I'll try to be more my considerate self from now on, I apologize for the angst and upset feelings I may have caused others. 

However, the examples of relating criminal activities and asking if they are allowed because legal activities which you do not agree with is a pretty far reach and shows an excess of allowance in and of itself.  Once again, I don't want to abridge free speech at all, and want the forum rules as they are, I just don't like being attacked mercilessly (and it wasn't just this thread) at times because someone's own perceptions to be able to slam into someone with no regard to what they think or even are talking about.

And yes, JohnsonJones isn't my actual name (though if I browsed these forums in an area where my internet browsing is monitored, they wouldn't need to know my name, they'd have the moniker from my own activity honestly).  It is a conglomeration of several names of which are directly part of my name or relatives.

Edited November 2, 2017 by JohnsonJones