Re: [TruthTalk] Dispersions

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH:   Thanx for your reply, Perry.  Apparently we have a difference of definitions.  Anti-Mormon is a term defined primarily by Mormons to describe people like you and Kevin, so I'm curious to know why you would want to change the definition to exclude yourself.  A pretty good definition is detailed at..... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Mormon .......By that definition, would you not be properly labeled as an anti-Mormon?  If not, how do you define anti-Mormon, Perry? Charles Perry Locke wrote: It would not, since I am not against mormons, per se. I am against mormoniISM. Not the poor deceived messengers of satan that promote it. Call me anti-statan, or more specifically, anti-mormonism. You can continue to call me anti-mormon if you want to disperse me :-), but that is not accurate. From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Dispersions Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 07:04:42 -0700 DAVEH:  Why would you consider me anti-Christian, Kevin?  Have I been attacking Jesus?    Perry on the other hand has admitted to attacking Mormonism, so the anti-Mormon label would be appropriate, would it not? Kevin Deegan wrote: You are very perceptive, I am a very sensitive guy : )  I have no problems with labels a wear a few. I do have a problem when it is a manuever to discredit the messenger without dealing with the issues. By the way I believe most of the labels I have posted are of a theological bent (liberal) not such as emotional (ANGRY) or psychological (mental) So if Perry is ANTI Mormon then you qualify on the same grounds as ANTI Christian! -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.