The thread about "Kolobians" closed before I could reply to honestone, who took exception to our discussion about terminology for Mormons and Christians.

Thread Reference:

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,199088

Jan, the OP, said:

"I LOVE the trend I see on the Board to referring to The Faithful as "Kolobians". Much more diverting than "TBM" although, admittedly, harder to type. And so scathingly accurate."

So, we're all sitting around here "mocking" Mormons by lately taking to referring to them as "Kolobians" (a term coined by the poster known as chulotc is snarky, I believe).

In a lighter spirit, just because it's a holiday weekend up here in Canada (and because my hockey team is one win away from the Stanley Cup finals!) I said:

"I'm waiting for chulotc to christen Christians with a new name to match his Kolobian zinger for the Mormons."

Discussion and suggestions ensued.

I didn't really have a higher purpose for my post and I was aware that I'd have to tread carefully or would perhaps be in danger of stepping well over the mock line, which could be tricky for a Christian. Just for once (or twice) in nearly a decade of posting at RfM, I wrote something without analyzing the heck out of it three ways from Sunday, and in a lighter vein than my usual heavy topics of polygamy, religion, attempts at being supportive to those enduring life crises, and all the vagaries of the dynamics of this busy, populous board. I even wrote "I'm not intending to mock", in case I was misunderstood. What other posters write I cannot control.

I was surprised that a Christian poster, honestone, has apparently seen the thread or at least some of the replies as "Christian bashing". Too, I am gobsmacked that she would label it as "bullying".

I know these are perennial topics around here - where does discussion end and "bullying" begin, how does RfM accommodate the diversity of posters and leave everybody feeling they've been heard and supported and respected, etc.

honestone wrote:

"I am sorry you [not sure who she is referring to here], nightengale, and others are choosing to go this route. If this board is going to turn to "pick on the Christians, ridicule the Christians," I shall find other places to spend my precious time. But you all enjoy your bullying. Just thought the moderators did not go for that sort of thing but perhaps I am wrong."

NG: This board isn't TURNING INTO "pick on the Christians" - it's always been this way! [jk]

You will have to explain how this lighthearted thread (absent any egregious "picking" imho) can be characterized as "bullying". I just don't see it.

The moderators will have to speak for themselves specifically on this one, if they wish, but they don't appear to have time on every occasion that someone queries how they walk the divide between Christians and non-Christians here. There was a recent thread about CZ's (Admin) explanation that RfM is "Christian-friendly, not Christian-safe".

I find the discussions and themes here go in cycles and at various seasons (eg: Christian holy days) it can veer off even the "friendly" side of things (or it feels that way to Christians).

I find that the biggest contributor to the clash is the expectation of many Christian posters that "respect" and "friendly" mean non-Christians are going to be stifled, either by themselves or by Admin. In fact, Eric (Board Founder) has stated just the opposite. He has explained that as non-Christians are so stifled, in his experience, (largely to do with the area where he lives) he is pleased to provide a venue where people can say what they like, within the bounds of his guidelines for the board.

If you think that someone really crosses the line (often it's obvious when that occurs but frequently it's subjective, thereby difficult to call, as I have observed through the years) you can report the post to Admin. If they leave it standing, it can help you to learn how they moderate and what is or is not acceptable here.

honestone continues:

"I prefer conversation that is adult in nature on such a serious topic as RfM. It appears that for some mocking all religion is what floats your boat. So if it's the way it is going to be day after day I shall pass. My daughter being Mormon is enough of the pain I wish to endure."

Yeah, but see, this board cannot cater to every individual's preferences. It has its own mandate and the guidelines are there to help to achieve that. It's up to board participants to find their own way through all the threads and posts and take what they want and need from it all, leaving what they're not interested in or don't like. The reason is that we're all different (unlike how Mormonism and other more fundamentalist-type religious groups treat us). For instance, you see bullying on that name thread, I see lighthearted banter. This entire huge diverse group is not usually going to agree unanimously on this type of question as it is just so subjective and up to individual tastes and sensitivities. No-one can possibly control that, or moderate it so that everyone is satisfied.

The obvious answer is that each poster has to navigate their own way through and choose which threads are of interest or use to them and which ones they don't care for, for whatever variety of reasons. The answer is not for Admin to control us all with a heavy hand or for everyone to conform to just one idea of what is "right", as there is no "right" for 100% of us. After our experiences in repressive religions, like Mormonism but also some other Christian-based groups, many have come to learn the long, hard way that the world is chaotic, life is ever-changing and not much is 100% black or white. This board in ways is a microcosm of that life lesson and that is good for a lot of people who pass through here. Easy to say that life is full of colours, not just black/white, but hard to instantly accept and change if your background to date has denied the gray, never mind the variety of colours. RfM is not about the preferences of one individual or group and neither is community life. This reality is good to know, no?

honestone continues:

"Recovery from Mormonism doesn't mean BASH all Christians."

Except maybe for some people it does! Recovery includes learning, perhaps for the very first time, how to express one's own opinion, not the group speak of the repressive religious group that one has been a part of, for many RfMers since birth. It can be immensely healing and freeing to say what you really think about a subject, rather than what you were taught and expected to think or say. Think of former Mormons who were instructed by their leaders to think whatever they want (after having expressed doubts or questions) but just don't TELL anyone! How satisfying, how gratifying, how healthy to come here and tell us exactly what they think, however they wish to express it.

Again, Erik K has said he specifically wants to have an environment where people DO NOT have to squelch themselves, especially not due to Christian sensitivities about what we should talk about and how we should say it.

That is definitely a recovery need for many, many RfM posters. Christians are welcome here. A lot can be gleaned from interacting with a variety of people, I have found. But it is not a little coffee klatch where everybody makes nicey-nice, especially not to, about or for Christians. That is just a fact about this board that will not change. If someone can't accept that, then it is a good idea to go elsewhere, as many have, and as you have suggested you will. There are many other groups that discuss things differently, groups where people are at different stages of recovery (RfM tends to have a lot of newly exited folks, so the needs and topics and conversations are not the same as in other groups), and groups that are specifically for Christian ex-Mormons, etc. I think it's healthy to visit as many as you can find and get what you want and need from each one, without expecting one to be the answer to all that one may be looking for. Certainly, for Christian "fellowship", I'd look elsewhere than RfM, and that is not a weakness or flaw of RfM, just the reality of how things are.

honestone:

"Some people are as intolerant of religious believers as they are of gays and lesbians. So happy I am not."

I don't really understand this part. Do you mean that the "intolerant" person doesn't like believers or gays or lesbians or that "religious believers" are intolerant of gays and lesbians or ??

Again, I don't see the Christian/atheist discussions here as being "intolerant". I don't think that most posters intend to insult, mock or hurt anyone who may be reading their opinions (some do, it seems, but not a majority). I see plenty of understanding and support, despite differing beliefs. That is a beautiful thing.

If you are seeing or feeling "bashing" and "bullying" (and especially in the thread referenced, which was far more friendly than many I've seen) I respectfully suggest that it could be the filter through which you view the world (as is common with Christians) and your own sensitivities that are unknown to others and cannot realistically be catered for in this environment.

I'm not criticizing you. It's just that I have been through it, being so swaddled in a church environment for many years and going straight from there to here, thin skin 'n all. When I came here, as with many others, any disagreement, no matter how mild, seemed "contentious" and uncomfortable. One "rude" reply on a thread of 30 responses would seem unbearable, especially if it was directed at me.

Again, I suggest that it's up to each of us to find our own way through the garden, prickles 'n all. Find what works for you, ignore what doesn't, accept that it's impossible to legislate and govern the chosen behaviour of thousands of posters, even for Admin. That's what the board guidelines attempt to do and usually it works okay, but most of it is subjective, and you're never gonna make or keep everybody happy, especially as we come from so many different perspectives.

If you want Admin to make things happy for all Christians all of the time, you're definitely on the wrong board. There's nothing wrong with you or the board in that case; it's just not a good fit for you. It happens.

As for the thread that elicited your reply that I've tried to answer above, I did try to explain on that thread that it's just a little wordplay, at least on my part. People are gonna believe what they believe and they're not going to all agree with Christians. I don't like fighting, arguing, being at odds with people, or adopting the seemingly expected stance of disliking or disagreeing with people based on their religious beliefs or lack thereof. In fact, it's been a huge part of my necessary life lessons to learn to step outside the camp, to decline to engage in groupspeak, to say I agree with someone, if I do, whether they happen to be atheist, Christian or any variety of human between.

I try to keep in mind that whatever someone writes at RfM could be meaningful to them, sensitive, and therapeutic for THEM. It's not all about the reader; in fact, it's mostly about the writer. You may not agree with what they've said, or like it, but that doesn't change the fact that this is a space where they're free to say it.

And being free to express oneself is therapeutic for those who have flown out of a cage. It is music. It is balm. It is joy.

I realize that non-believers gore the fatted calves of believers here. But some fat cattle need goring.

Too, I agree with exmos who object to people scathingly criticizing Mormonism but insisting that their own sacred cows remain untouched. That is irrational, insensitive, and unfair.

In today's instance, for me it is "therapeutic" to goof off about religious stuff. I don't do it nearly often enough. There may be a lot more underlying what people write than others realize. It's worth thinking about.

I'm sorry, honestone, if you were offended by what I wrote. I am. But I won't take it back. I said what I wanted to say. It wasn't intended to be bashing or mocking, as I said in my original posts.

I'm a Christian, have been since before I joined the Mormon Church. I'm certainly not a Christian basher, as you have labelled me. I set out a long time ago to learn about Christianity and to find a church where I felt at home without having to squirm into a little box where I didn't really fit. Still looking. And as I've said here before, one of the most honest - and most enlightening - moments I've ever experienced was in speaking to my pastor after I had left Mormonism, when I said to him that all the questions (and hurts) are answered if there is no god - that answers every soul-searching angst-ridden question. He agreed with me! Many Christians I know would scourge me for saying that, without seeking to understand me at all. Why so afraid to engage with different folks and talk things over? Squelching, secrecy, sacred cows. They all make me very uncomfortable.

And I'm not going to stay silent any more. I'm not losing my mind. Just engaging my brain. Using my tongue and my typing fingers.

I can't promise it'll be pretty. But one thing I can guarantee. I won't hurt anybody in my voyage of discovery, unlike a significant number of Christians I've met along the way. When the resounding mantra floating around in my head for years now is "church hurts" (and not confined to Mormon Church either) there's something wrong.

And that's not my fault.

Getting judged after enjoying a few minutes of fun today (wordplay in other thread) is uncomfortably reminiscent for me of all the times that has happened to me in church, any church, where it's all too easy to feel inadequate, ashamed, unwanted, and screwed up.

As I said, church hurts.

Unless, perhaps, you toe the line, spout the party talk, stay under the radar, squelch everything about yourself and your thoughts and your questions, and then maybe you'll be accepted, not judged adversely, maybe even liked.

Blech.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2011 03:12AM by Nightingale.

On a recent thread about Christians feeling trampled on and which types of replies are acceptable on which threads, etc, Sus I/S reminded the crowd that it's allowable here to label your thread "Christian" or "Positive replies only" or "Support needed", etc, to try and direct how your own thread goes.

I have some suggestions for how that could work but I've written enough now for tonight. I was on my way to bed when I saw honestone's remarks and stopped to respond. I didn't realize I was going to write so much.

Sorry 'bout that...

I think the problem, Nighty, is we forgot to suggest nicknames for atheists as well, thereby leaving believers to feel singled out. Maybe call them the "Prove-its!" No doubt someone can *improve* on that! :-)

Yeah, along these lines atheists could also be called "Logicians" and x-ians called "Magicians."

This would be a fair dichotomy, don't you think?

One group depends on logic, the other necessarily depends on magic.

I feel for her "losing" a daughter to the morg. Honestone has been on the board for a long time and has received very little if any support for her plight. It's very hard to lose a child to a cult. I know because it happened to me and my daughter's life will never be the same although she did finally leave and is slowly regaining her personality and spunk.

It can be hurtful to kick someone when they're down. I recall some posters claiming that recovering converts have nothing much to recover from because they "chose" to be mormon and were in it as adults for varying shorter times than "real" exmos, meaning BICs.

The above idea is rather insulting and hurtful. It would be like my saying that no one on RfM understands "real" recovery unless they've been in a polygamy cult since that is more extreme than simply being exposed to a mild form of current day mainstream mormonism.

The truth is that anyone who has been hurt by the morg needs support and recovery. That can include nevermos like my husband who've been harassed and marginalized for years. It means BICs with TBM families. It means those who never believed or officially joined but lived among mormons and were possibly shunned. It includes posters who vacationed in Utah and were smirked at or denied respectful service in a restaurant for ordering wine with dinner. I remember a poster who simply took an injured missionary to the hospital and was alternately threatened and harassed for doing a good deed.

The thread linked might not be the one that most bothered Honestone though I can't speak for her.

Yesterday, she was harshly accused of never having been a mormon as if that's a problem. She was told that her Christian church attendance was unacceptable because it is as laughable as mormonism. I was put in the same laughable catagory for defending her and accused of never being mormon and told that I'm intolerant for not accepting that Christians are as deluded as mormons.

Frankly, I don't care what people believe unless it means they are harmfully controlled by counter culture groups which isolate them from normal choices and participation in a diverse society. I'm sad that Honestone was personally insulted for not having been a mormon and because she attends a mainstream church, any church. She isn't here to defend general church attendance. Her need to here is to find ways to survive the hurt of "losing" a daughter and grandchild to mormonism.

(Wondering if any exmormon, every member's a missionary, feels regret for going after young people like Honestone's daughter.)

It's understandable that some atheists see Christianity as laughable and they want to sharpen their claws on believers. But Honestone isn't going to change her mind and is here for a different purpose. Her churchgoing gives her comfort and that's fine with me. Even though I'm an atheist, I understand that most people need and deserve comfort and support and it doesn't bother me if they want to go to a church for an hour a week.

Those who banded together to "bully" Honestone were using specialized mormon terminology which doesn't make a lot of sense to nevermos. They were accusing Honestone of misrepresenting mormon practices, saying that mormons "worship" Joseph Smith. The fact is that mormons DO worship him in the normal non-mormon ways. Mormons are taught that "worship" can only mean "pray to" when non-mormons use the term to mean giving high honor, to deeply admire, to love with religious fervor.

The quirky mormon misuse of this term causes considerable communication gaps among those with differing non-mo or limited mo experiences.

I think nicknames for atheists would be a good idea. Anyone who is comfortable with their beliefs isn't likely to mind.

I believe that this is the thread:

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,198756,198999#msg-198999

It was a thread that started out comparing Mormonism to mainstream Christianity and then went off in another direction altogether.

Regarding Mormon "worship" of Joseph Smith, member snb pointed out on that thread that "worship" (in the sense that it was being used) most likely meant veneration, or thinking highly of something. I would agree with that. The word was being used in the broadest sense.

Other posters have commented that when you go to a Mormon sacrament meeting, and keep a running tally of the number of times Joseph Smith is mentioned vs. Jesus (with the exception of the concluding, "in the name of Jesus Christ amen," Joseph Smith is the winner by a wide margin. So saying that Mormons worship (meaning venerate) Joseph Smith might be a very accurate remark. Do you remember in one of Stormy/Jake's recent threads how the young Mormon cousins noted that Joseph Smith's name never came up once in Mass? Why would they even notice that if it weren't drilled into their heads through repetition week after week?

I don't think Mormons realize that they worship Joseph Smith. In the same respect, I've met a lot of Catholics who "venerate" the Virgin Mary, while at the same time don't realize that their behavior falls under worship as well.

For Mormons, I think it is a question of their definition of worship. To them, worship means "pray to," while a lot of other people might consider putting up pictures of Joseph Smith or the prophet as a form of worship. I wonder what the mainstream, American, definition of the word would be and whether Mormons fall in line or just look at it weirdly.

Chulotc and Timothy are very gentle, even nurturing, with every child of god here in this safe and healing environment. They are two of my heroes, and often misunderstood, as in recent threads. But you can trust them to find a good nickname.

I am sure the new Christian name equivalent for Kolobian will be along the lines of "Super Wonderful Shiny People" or "Gods Chosen" perhaps Honestone will like a simple approach: "Your Majesty".

While admittedly, we sometimes have heard terms like "bat$#!t crazy" while discussing organized religion, we mean bat$#!t crazy in its loving and edifying biblical connotation.

In sorting out a painful experience where many of us have felt somewhat used, manipulated and judged, it is refreshing to have someone remind us that we still bear watching (so Nightengale watch your step!). We could run around believing our opinions had value or something.

How grateful I am that a new and holy oracle has appeared to put us all in our place, and I pray that a new and enlightened movement above all reproach (you better d@$%&ed well believe that) and utterly un mockable has arrived.

Oh yeah! Kolobian is cool though, right Honestone? Just checking, because I fear your wrath you see because I have been conditioned by a mind controlling manipulative cult to suck up to pretended authority. You know a person could find a group of people like me that are disaffected by one religion and join them in bashing that one and then lead them towards a new one and, hey, wait a second...



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2011 08:38AM by roflmao.

a Christian basher! she is one of the more articulate and succinct writers here without an axe to grind or an agenda to promote!! course that is MY opinion and perhaps not Honestones!
and this is NOT x-stian safe haven.....your beliefs may(will) be challenged here... and maybe Postmormon may be a better place for Honestone..... not that i want her to not post here...but maybe checking out that site would be beneficial!
just sayin
and i just reread the whole thread that nighty posted!!
ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? That was a TAME thread!! i thought it was funny!! coming from the Mod Squad era i vote for the moniker of "The God Squad"!!
thanks whoever posted that!!
Honestone definitely has thin skin where this is concerned....kinda has the "God shall not be mocked" attitude! that thread could have gone WAY "worse"!!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2011 08:55AM by bignevermo.

Honestone is having fun remarking on holy Kolobian underwear on another thread, but that is not bashing, see because it's about Kolobians. That's the point.

We all love Nightengale, but she has to be made to understand that while Kolobian humor is well and good, we must show respect for Honestones specific creed, whatever that may be, we don't have guidelines yet. Is it protestant Christianity, or Progressive?

Are there ANY Christians we can bash other than Kolobians (they say they are Christian)? Do we believe them?

Tell us who to bash, oh sensitive one!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2011 08:57AM by roflmao.

Ideas are generally both worthy of being presented and worthy of being criticized.

When posters claim that they don't feel welcome here, perhaps they are just insecure about their own beliefs. Good!

I think we welcome most people here who have had issues with Mormonism, but I know I personally have little respect for someone who criticizes the irrationality of Mormondumb by pointing out their irrational beliefs that Xian theology is a more rational path.

That would be "trolling" yeah?

+1

brian-the-christ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ideas are generally both worthy of being presented
> and worthy of being criticized.
>
> When posters claim that they don't feel welcome
> here, perhaps they are just insecure about their
> own beliefs. Good!
>
> I think we welcome most people here who have had
> issues with Mormonism, but I know I personally
> have little respect for someone who criticizes the
> irrationality of Mormondumb by pointing out their
> irrational beliefs that Xian theology is a more
> rational path.

People *do* feel unwelcome when it isn't only that their ideas are challenged but when the posters themselves are *ridiculed.* That happens often enough here. I read Nighty as poking gentle fun, all the more gentle, when you know Nighty's background.

Still, it is no surprise that Honstone feels unwelcome because it happens often enough that believers' ideas are not only criticized, but the ideas and those attached to them are made fun of and treated with disrespect. While the *ideal* may be that ideas are evaluated, discussed, and critiqued, our actual comments are a good deal more emotional and stinging than that.

If I say you're a fool, robert (and I absolutely do not believe this about you or honestone, btw) it may be that I don't mean it in any other way than saying "I think you got tripped up on this one, robert!"

And I'm absolutely sure that I have had to ask for clarification many times when people have made similar statements to me.

Saying things "the right way" is very hard, not that it doesn't deserve our serious consideration, but some people do make stupid claims and should be called out on them.

Even doing it as nicely as we can, it can still hurt someone's feelings and cause them to feel unwelcome.

Different cultural backgrounds can contribute to the harsh interpretations, too.

"I personally have little respect for someone who criticizes the irrationality of Mormondumb by pointing out their irrational beliefs that Xian theology is a more rational path."

This is my main issue as well. I don't care if someone decides to become Christian, and finds strength or warmth in that. I will, however, speak up if they assert that one religion is better than another.

snb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> This is my main issue as well. I don't care if
> someone decides to become Christian, and finds
> strength or warmth in that. I will, however,
> speak up if they assert that one religion is
> better than another.

Depending on what you are using as a measure, some religions *are* better than others. In regard to social justice, for example, the more liberal churches are better (from my perspective). On the other hand, conservative church are better at creating group unity. Also, you may believe the foundational religious doctrines of both are irrational, but even in that, their different interpretations may lead to different behaviors.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2011 11:22AM by robertb.

In my opinion, all churches promote magical thinking. This in turn leads to poor decision making abilities, unrealistic views of the world and denial of the basic human condition.

Worst of all, in my opinion, is that this tendency leads to a terrible political situation in the US. The fact that we have to spend so much money paying our politicians to argue about things like abortion or stem cell research, and argue about them for decades, means that religion in general creates a huge deficit of money and progress in our nation.

I'm sure there are Christians who have no problem with abortion, or who are quite intelligent. I've met many of them myself. My problem is with the general promotion of magical thinking and I don't think there is a single religion out there that doesn't inculcate it onto its members.

So, that is my basic definition of "better," and how I don't believe that any religion is better than another. Sorry it was so long :)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2011 11:37AM by snb.

...than others.

My experience with Unitarianism leads me to believe they are more a public service group than a religion.

And I've attended one particular Church of Christ congregation whose minister barely mentioned Christ during any of her homilies, and when she did it was in a very secular, historical way.

But my "x-ian bashing" is 100% just outlining what x-ians actually believe, which people like honestone don't like, because in their hearts they've morphed x-ianity into something useful to them, but when scrutinized, doesn't really resemble biblical x-ianity at all. (this is chulotc by the way. I like this name better)

I'm just saying, if telling the truth about someone's religion is "bashing" that doesn't say much for their religion, does it? And I think honestone protests too much. She may have lost a daughter to the kolobians, but she's much too apologetic when it comes to her religion.

For many of us (and I would contend all of us if we're honest with ourselves) leaving kolobianism is a path to leaving all religion in the dust. Some people never make it all the way out, and that's ok. But for those of us that do, it's just as crazy to see people being recruited to x-ianity as it is to see them being recruited to kolobianism.

I try not to "bash" I guess... protecting freedom of belief also means protecting my freedom to not believe, or think freely.

But I 100% agree about outlining what they believe! You can be a cafeteria Christian if it makes you feel better about it, but like any belief system you do not get a free pass on the crazy parts of your faith because you don't like it! I don't hear many Christians giving other faiths a pass on their crazy parts- but you won't own up to yours?? I'm only poking fun at YOUR leaders and YOUR crazy scriptures and usually their hypocrisy... not stuff I made up to make you look bad!

I'm an atheist and sometimes I do bash Christianity, but I find that I get accused the most when I'm being the most conciliatory. It seems to me as if neutral ground for Christians is so far into their territory that I'm unwilling to meet them there.

As far as giving atheists cute names like we give Mormons in order to make the Christians feel better, I'm okay with that. It can't be worse than the names Christians often give to atheists. I would probably own the name and start calling myself that. Please, don't call me a "Bright" though. God.

I don't think the point is to ever make someone feel that way.

What I think a lot of Christians don't understand is that their beliefs openly challenge my realities as much as my realities challenge their beliefs.

For example: I was a Christian for most of my life. By this, I mean that I was a Mormon and I worshiped Jesus Christ with my entire being. Jesus was the only savior for me and I tried my hardest to follow his teachings from the Bible. I read the Bible multiple times in multiple languages during my time as a Christian.

Now, if some person wants to come on this board and talk about how Mormons aren't Christians, I rarely jump into that thread and hijack it. They are full of shit, and offensive, but I'm not so sensitive that I have to challenge this constantly.

I only involve myself in Christian threads in specific instances where they compare themselves to Mormons and decide that they are the better of the two. This is damaging thinking, in my opinion.

My point is that perhaps honestone shouldn't be so sensitive, and shouldn't label everybody who disagrees with her as a "Christian basher." There are a lot of differing opinions in this forum, and we should all talk about them.

...except for politics, because then the admins get angry at us. :)

As far as the "bullying" claim, I think that is ridiculous. honestone was dishing it out just as much as she was getting it. Not only was she making claims that Mormons don't worship Jesus Christ, she was belittling everybody elses claims by saying "believe what you wish," and telling people that they don't know anything about Christianity. Nobody followed her around, nobody picked on her specifically.

It wasn't habitual, or repeated, and there was no targetting of any kind. It wasn't bullying.

Oh wow...sorry again for the long post :)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2011 12:35PM by snb.

I don't think the point is to ever make someone feel that way.

BUT SOME POSTERS HERE HAVE NO COMPUNCTION ABOUT RIDICULING THE PERSON ALSO! sometimes it is hard to separate the person and their beliefs!
just sayin!

On my way out of Mormonism, not only did I deconstruct Mormonism but I deconstructed Christianity as well. As well as Judaism and all other religions. Many Christians that I have met over the past number of years get just as defensive as Mormons when someone questions the veracity of their religion.

Why is Christianity right and no other religion is right?

What if your religion isn't unique?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i82tsObovvU&feature=player_embedded



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2011 12:09PM by Gwylym.

In the same way I have been called a mormon basher.

if you point out facts that go against someone's belief, you tend to get called as a basher, a hater or other such names.

It's an easy way to dismiss reality

But here's the rub. While it might be good to deconstruct, bash, and mock a religion, believers do have a right to think any dumb (in my view) thing that suits them.

It crosses the line when a recovering person is bashed for thinking something they have a right to think. No one has a right to insist others believe it or take it seriously, but they do have a right to say they go to a church without being assaulted by a gang of bullies. People can go to church as much as they please in my opinion, as long as they don't tell me I must go or that I must believe as they do.

In my opinion, no one must justify their beliefs unless they're imposing them on someone else.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2011 01:46PM by Cheryl.

If they have a "right" to believe what they want, then I have a "right" to say anything I want about it.

Crosses what line? Who draws the line? You?

You're really going to pull out the "bully card?" Weak.

that if:

If they have a "right" to believe what they want, then I have a "right" to say anything I want about it.
would it not be more logical to say:
if they have a right to believe what they want..... i do too?

The only issue I have with that (and I don't necessarily disagree with you) is that I don't "believe" anything. I'm not superstitious.

For example: a x-ian might post something along the lines of "my religion is just so great, it's really the bees knees. jesus is so loving and caring and he's really got a super-duper sense of humor too. I'm so grateful he created me!"

My response would be: "according to your theology, your super-duper god suffers from split personality disorder, creates abritrary laws for no good reason, then creates beings he knows in advance (before creating them) will not be capable of obeying, then he creates a torture chamber as a means of punishment (no chance of rehabilitation).

The ones who played make-believe that a flying jewish zombie killed himself on a cross as a sacrifice to himself to satisfy the law he knew they wouldn't obey get to worship this god for the rest of eternity."

Everything I said was accurate according to the bible. But x-ians think this is bashing because it exposes their beliefs for what they really are.

Note that I didn't assert anything or profess a belief in anything else. This is why I framed my response as "if they have a right to believe, I have a right to say what I want about it."

But I get what you're saying. I just never miss a chance to put x-ians on blast :P, that's all.

I didn't see the posters bashing any particular person on that thread. They made a joke about the cross. That isn't a personal attack. If someone reads a joke about the cross and takes it personally, that is their responsibility. Not the speaker's.

I have professed a faith in God on here before. I have spoken of going to church. I rarely feel attacked. Every day, someone puts up a post that mocks one of my beliefs. So what? That shouldn't affect me. They are entitled to their opinion. I have to be secure enough to listen. And, perhaps more importantly, open enough to jettisoning useless traditions.

I try not to be a jerk about it. Other's don't try so hard. Se la vie!

However, when someone does, it is not the poster that should look at their post, but the offended who should step back,

no sometimes it is the poster who may be being rude and not the offended!!

in Nighty's instance i think that hone was being abit thinskinned...Jhmo!

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2011 02:57PM by bignevermo.

I LIKE THIS SITE! Never a dull moment.

I like this site because we can say what we want and goof around, do word play, vent, rant, rave, laugh, and cry, and comfort those who were affected in one way or another by Kolobianism. (Formerly known as Mormonism or TSCC.)

I like this site because, for the most part, people do not take offense. However, when someone does, it is not the poster that should look at their post, but the offended who should step back, take a breath, and think about if it is really that important to say a word in protest. If I don't like a post, I just move along to a new one.

I like this site because everyone here has something to say and is not afraid to hold back.

I would not like this site if we had to make everything friendly for everyone. If so, we would see the following : " ". Yes, nothing.

Nightingale, rock on!

Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2011 02:50PM by steve benson.