DAVEH: No Perry....As I have repeatedly explained, I do not consider
those who simply disagree with me to be anti-Mormons. It has more to
do in the way you emphasize your disagreement. There are many TTers
who disagree with my beliefs, but they have done nothing I know about
that would make me think they are anti-Mormons. You however have
specifically suggested that you are on a crusade against
Mormonism.....is that correct? If so, then you would be defined as an
anti-Mormons by LDS folks.
Do you really think I am using the term anti-Mormon to defame and
inflame you? If so, you are simply mistaken, Perry.
And no.....I did not say that LDS folks coined the anti-Mormon
term to describe those who simply disagree with our religion. Did you
read my below statement........
I believe one can disagree with my LDS theology,
and not be an anti-Mormon.
.........Why would you claim I said otherwise?
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
I see. When you disagree with Christians, it is not
anti-Christian, but when I disagree with mormons it is anti-mormon.
That is a double standard. You say I denigrate your religion. What do
you do when you deny the Trinity?
Politically motivated means that the term is meant more to defame and
inflame than to identify a trait. You admitted such yourself by saying
that mormons invented to term to refer to people that disagree with
their religion.
Perry
From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Anti-Christian
Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 22:34:52 -0700
DAVEH: Double standard!?!?!?! Do you sincerely believe that, Perry?
There are a lot of TTers who I do not consider to be anti-Mormon. At
least they have not exhibited any characteristics that would meet my
definition. I believe one can disagree with my
LDS theology, and not be an anti-Mormon. But when one actively
denigrates my beliefs, then I would view him as an anti-Mormon. That
is why I consider both you and Kevin to be anti-Mormons, as you have
both made a substantial effort to publicly denigrate the LDS Church.
Nor do I understand why you think it is politically motivated. I
think you are reading much more into this than is logical to assume.
By labeling you and Kevin as anti-Mormon, what political effects,
benefits or motivations do you see it having in TT? Do you think it is
going to sway other TTers one way or another from what they currently
believe? Just what do you perceive the political fallout to be?
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
From: Kevin Deegan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
LDS folks did coin the anti-Mormon term, and subsequently defined it in
effect as one who actively preaches against and denigrates LDS theology
Right so it is a defense/deflection mechanism to label those that are
engaged in any form of criticism of the church in an attempt to dismiss
ALL the Criticism since they are just ANTI's
Like I said before, it's use is politically motivated. Also, Dave, you
said "That I would disagree or even argue that another's Christian
based theology is misguided would not make me an anti-Christian". That
is a double standard to say that I am "anti-mormon" because I "disagree
or even argue that another's Christian based theology is misguided".
Perry
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.
|
