I particularly noticed the problem in the D-Day thread, but I see it every day multiple times. It's sad that smart posters use their intellects to constantly thwart the rules of the board and I feel sorry for admin constantly having to deal with the problem.

I suggest a little more self awareness perhaps when these kinds of posts are deleted again and again.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2019 02:31PM by Cheryl.

Sure.

You and your fellows can post anything political that you want and we on the other side can't respond. It is we, after all, and not your friends Elyse and Jordan who took the D-Day thread into politics.

I suggest a little more self awareness on your part.

Everybody,

If you see a political post, please report it rather than responding. Responding just makes it worse. And give us some time to work our magic. We're all volunteers and have other things that we need to do; we can't respond instantly.

If we have to hide political posts, that often requires us to lop off perfectly good stuff that is around it. Your best bet is to avoid politics in posts. Your second best bet is not to respond to political posts.

Thanks for helping us to help you,

CZ (admin)

"That's why I had to sock 'im in the belly."

Perhaps we all need to report more of these incidents because retorts on the board don't seem to help.

Sure, standing up against your racism and xenophobia is the same thing as hitting a child in the belly.

Everybody,

Cheryl is a pretty nice person. I've met her and I know.

Although I've never met Lot's Wife, I enjoy the thoughtfulness of her posts.

I hate to see this site bogged down in the partisan bickering and polarization that has infected the U.S. and much of the rest of the world. We're all human beings and we all have different opinions. Please treat each other with the kindness that they deserve as a fellow human being, and with which you would like others to treat you.

Take a deep breath, get centered and remember basic humanity before you type.

Thanks,

CZ

The problem is that arguing with posters like Jordan feeds their egos instead of changing their minds. They don't see your replies and think "Maybe I need to change myself to be less of a bigot," they think, "I'm right and Lot's Wife is wrong! I rule!"

Better to quietly report their posts to admin and let their egos starve.

What I post here is nothing to do with "my ego", thank you very much. If it was, I would post things that would be more likely to gain approval from most members. Instead I post things which sometimes go down well, and other times do not. But no bother, if there is any ego stimulation going on, it is that I state my opinion instead of trying to flatter others' egos.

I believe you've just done what is fashionably termed "gaslighting", i.e. tried to make me believe about myself what you wish me to believe, rather than what is the case.

The fact you immediately write me off as a bigot, only interested in my supposedly ever-so-fragile emotional core is an indication of your own inflexibility, and unwillingness to engage with ideas which challenge your own. Don't just take on board other people's ideas which are part of a manifactured consensus (to use a Chomskyian phrase), start building your own independent opinions. One day you might even work out that my ideas vary in merit, as all people's do, and find yourself agreeing with something.

p.s. Also complaining about bigots' inability to take on differing opinions and then appealing to censorship of differing opinions to your own... is not consistent behavior to put it in the politest possible terms.

Do you for a second think I fear you or your political views? Do you think I shrink from addressing your half-baked logic, your misunderstood Orwell, your scientifically ignorant views on race, your ill-informed views on Chinese philosophy or modern history?

You flatter yourself. This thread started with Cheryl, one of your partisans, implicitly asking that my opinions, and those of people like me, be suppressed. Later she explicitly urges the admins to censor people who disagree with her and, by extension, you. But you turn around and intimate that I want censorship to protect myself from you?

If Ziller or EOD or Wally had written that, I would have laughed at the irony. With you, however, irony is always unintentional and hence more sad than amusing.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/08/2019 03:55AM by Lot's Wife.

try looking in the mirror.

Aristotle called us the political animal. I think any forum will have this problem and it is a part of our nature.

What gets me is I respond to a post and a poster throws in some political stuff in their response that is only vaguely related.

I feel like my words are being used as a platform by them. And then they claim I'm just one of the herd on their political opposition when I didn't claim anything political.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2019 02:42PM by Elder Berry.

Well it isn't child's play, that's for sure.

I also wish posters didn't resort to playing sides as much as some of them do because we are individuals after all. Taking responsibility for one's own behavior, is preferential to trying to change someone else's.

Group behavior like ganging up on other posters is none other than bullish. And that is childish, not mature. Instead of belittling other people by name calling and casting blame, why not try keeping the focus on making things better instead?

I feel sorry for the extra time and work mods have to take to wade through any of the things that makes them work overtime to make RfM run smoothly. They are to be commended for a job well done against the odds.

I believe if every time each of us posted, we then looked deep into our own hearts, and were honest with ourselves regarding what we found, and then did the RIGHT THING, which would be to report ourselves and demand that our posts be removed, RfM would be so much, much less than we ever expected, but extremely peaceful.

I say this in Jesus' name, amen.

Hit "Preview" instead of "Post Message."

Mainly, I'm looking for typos, spelling issues, or the sentence that can be phrased better. But oftentime, I notice I'm responding inappropriately for one reason or another. I think that through, rework the post, or simply hit "Message List" which takes me off that thread--deleting the prospective post.

Religion and politics are never ever to be discussed in polite society. Each subject by itself leads to arguments and dissension.

Maybe that is the recipe for disaster right there. We get off on the wrong foot by trying to discuss religion. "Put the right foot in, put the left foot out" only they get tangled up every time.

As for discussing Mormonism, it is near to impossible to try and have an honest discussion about Moism without it disintegrating at least at times into political discussions, because so much of it centers around politics. Separating the two is like trying to separate Siamese twins at birth. Yes, it can be done, but tis a most delicate operation and requires great care and diligence.

Amyjo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Religion and politics are never ever to be
> discussed in polite society. Each subject by
> itself leads to arguments and dissension.
>
> Maybe that is the recipe for disaster right there.
> We get off on the wrong foot by trying to discuss
> religion. "Put the right foot in, put the left
> foot out" only they get tangled up every time.
>
> As for discussing Mormonism, it is near to
> impossible to try and have an honest discussion
> about Moism without it disintegrating at least at
> times into political discussions, because so much
> of it centers around politics. Separating the two
> is like trying to separate Siamese twins at birth.
> Yes, it can be done, but tis a most delicate
> operation and requires great care and diligence.


Maybe you misunderstood the purpose for RFM? In case you did,

its all about recovery from mormonism. Mormonism is a religion

So when you assert that " we get off on the wrong foot by trying

to discuss religion" ... it is a good indication that perhaps

you didn't understand the topic of this post.

Pass the popcorn please.

The kind of posts I like deal with Mormonism and only Mormonism. The doctrinal and historical issues. The hypocrisy and dishonestly of individual leaders or the church as a whole. The stories of struggles against TSCC and its abusive leaders. My favorite posts are the ones that make the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints just look silly (I love loud laughter and “evil” speaking of the “Lord’s anointed.”

The kind of posts I don’t like are the ones that take a subject that is tangentially connected to Mormonism and use it to espouse a political opinion.

My least favorite posts are the times when someone perceives a political statement and immediately feels compelled to vigorously argue the opposing view (often belittling the prior poster).

Admins: I support and appreciate all that you do, and I support whatever decisions you make, but I’d like to see the policy for this board be “no partisan politics,” even if the politics have a religious connection.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2019 03:31PM by CrispingPin.

CrispingPin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Admins: I support and appreciate all that you do,
> and I support whatever decisions you make, but
> I’d like to see the policy for this board be
> “no partisan politics,” even if the politics
> have a religious connection.

My personal perspective:

In real life, literally "everything" is politics, including the air we breathe, the water we drink, the climate we exist in, the housing we live (or do not live) in, whether women and children (in particular) have practical access to the necessities of life, whether children have access to adequate education, whether we are allowed by law to express our sexuality in the ways personally innate to us, or whether we are equal under the law and in employment, and are equal when we go to (or are not able to go to) whatever medical facilities or personnel we might (or might not) have access to.

Literally: In the 21st century, and in most of the industrialized world, every breath any person inhales and exhales is political--and, therefore, is a political topic.

Add in the active, and extremely well financed, activities of the LDS church in every part of life (including, but not limited to, the above), in legislatures, in courts, in the press (includes all media), and in elections and the political process itself (Prop 8, the Equal Rights Amendment, etc.), and in the fundamental, integral, parts of life such as personal freedom, civil status, marriage, childbirth and adoption, and in the very legal definition of "non-profit"....the original issue is complicated well beyond any attempt to parse out the [purely] "political."

It cannot be done.

As someone who [along with my colleagues] spends a great deal of time and thought on exactly these issues every day, I know: It cannot be done.

In the year 2019, EVERYTHING is political.

We do the best we can--and often, we don't know the MOST "right" thing to do, and we talk it over amongst ourselves and try to figure out what, compared to the alternatives, is the "best" decision--even if that decision is not as good as we would, ideally, like it to be.

This would be a whole lot easier if the underlying religion to which this board was a recovery board would be something like Quakerism (even though the Quakers, AS Quakers, had strong opinions on political topics such as slavery and some of America's least widely-accepted wars--and these were the "hot [political] topics" of that time).

Instead of a relatively "easy" religion like Quakerism, however, the LDS Church has (certainly for all of my lifetime) involved itself (and often to a major extent which has often
been outright offensive to non-Mormons) in most of the "hot topic" issues of any given moment in time--meaning: they continually, issue after issue, involve themselves in politics (while holding out, on a p.r. basis, that they are somehow "above the [messy] on-the-ground" hostilities).

The LDS Church IS politics, and although Admin efforts are made to keep partisanship here to a minimum, politics cannot be completely avoided on a board which exists as a result of Mormonism--a religious movement which continually involves itself in some of the most divisive political topics of any given moment in time.

This is my personal opinion as (by this time) a fairly experienced moderator.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2019 09:23PM by Tevai.

Yeah, my desire for no politics probably isn't realistic. As you said "Mormonism--a religious movement which continually involves itself in some of the most divisive political topics of any given moment in time."

Bottom line: I personally support, and very much appreciate, the admins of this board.

> Bottom line: I personally support, and very much
> appreciate, the admins of this board.

I second that even if, in this thread, I am indirectly taking issue with some admin policies and their enforcement.

The trouble with heavier censorship, Mrs Lot, is that it is only enjoyable when it happens to the people you disagree with. One day you'll find there are a lot of things you can't post, because you wanted people like me and their horrible opinions out of the way. Censorship has a tendency to backfire that way.

Removing politics entirely off this board? Bad bad idea. We wouldn't be able to discuss polygamy, 1978, abortion, and LDS opposition to gay marriage legislation if properly and evenly enforced. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Mitt, Orrin and Jacinda are all out of the discussion too as politicians with LDS backgrounds. Dozens of other subjects I could think of. And ones I can't just now.

I don't want you censored. I want you to post at will. The beauty of freedom of speech, from a functional perspective, is it exposes bigotry and ignorance for what they are. I have NOTHING to fear from you and your benighted views.

Thank you, CrispingPin.

Thank you, Lot's Wife.

:)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2019 04:54PM by Tevai.

The D-Day thread is a good example of the problem as I see it.

It was political from the very first post. Jordan began with a swipe at MSNBC and Joe Scarborough--which was unnecessary to the topic. Later he wrote "this thread is about National Socialism." So it really wasn't a case of my intervening to take the discussion in a political direction that offends Cheryl and others: it was that I changed the politics from a direction they favored to one they disfavored.

Later Elyse ranted about the German threat today, about the importance of tariffs and about the superiority of the present US government and president. She even decried Harvard's decision to ask "Kanzler" Merkel to deliver the annual commencement address. Are those messages apolitical? Are they about Mormonism or religion? Did I post them?

Then someone, caffiend I believe, brought in China and later Bolshevism. Were those apolitical or related to religion? To be clear, I agree with both his argument that China is a major problem and his argument about Soviet history; and in my view the Soviet angle shed light on early Mormon history. But the notion that I derailed an apolitical thread is inaccurate.

A few years ago the United States took a sharp turn to the right and people like me, who used to count as centrists or even liberal Republicans, found ourselves standing in what is now left field. The other ex-mo sites managed to avoid the rightward swing, but RfM did not. There is a strong contingent of people here who dislike minorities, Muslims, people south of the US border, free trade, liberals, feminists, and women. They post things that are overtly hostile and things that are covertly so--rants about fist bumps, threads about race being a real thing, random and superfluous statements about feminists, asides about socialism or cultural Marxism--and then get angry when someone calls them out on their bigotry. Sometimes someone from the reactionary side appeals to Mommy, saying that it is "political" to challenge the rightist messages that are already on the board.

I find that curious. As Dogzilla implied earlier today, echoing sentiments she has expressed over the years, RfM allows a level of explicit and implicit racism and sexism that makes this place uncomfortable for a lot of people. If that is site policy, so be it. But please don't act as if criticism of implicitly or explicitly political posts is less acceptable than the posts themselves.

And please don't argue that a thread that starts with an oblique attack on MSNBC is apolitical or was intended as such.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2019 05:20PM by Lot's Wife.

..."Music is the healing force of the universe."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TJ6mfBbcTQ

As pointed out, many of us have a personal link to D Day of some kind. I do.

I am no fan of Joe Scarborough, I think the man is a slimeball. He sucks. I did not find his presence reverent for such an event. But I also think the same of many other TV presenters, newscasters and that is *not* a political comment at all. Cronkite was by no means perfect, but he at least had gravitas. I'm not a fan of either Alex Jones or Ellen Degeneres, because I can't stand how either of them present their shows (and their presentation styles are completely different than one another). Alex Jones is a bully who intimidates others using his physical size, whereas I find DeGeneres comes across as self-righteous and full of herself - neither of these criticisms are related to their politics, which they claim are different. I can't stand most of these top level American talkshow hosts either who I consider (largely) talentless, unfunny hacks and/or sellouts.

So yes, one can take a swipe at a presenter without being political.

As for the thread being (partly) about National Socialism, well, of course it was. If it hadn't arisen, then there would probably be no need to liberate France, and a more moderate but warlike German government (such as that during WWI) would have negotiated a peace long before the Red Army entered Berlin.

"There is a strong contingent of people here who dislike minorities"

That's the biggest fallacy of modern times - ALL humans are in at least one minority of some description. I don't exactly keep count, but I am a member of several minorities myself, and I can't exactly opt out of them all. (Although obviously this is possible to an extent with Mormonism, but I would still have a post-Mormon experience.) I can even say that one or two of these minority statuses have affected how people treat me (and not all in a positive way either), and that is something I've had to work around. But hey, some minorities are more equal than others...

p.s. For what it's worth, I agree with Lot's Wife's comparison of BY to Stalin, and thought that was a worthwhile diversion. There are parallels - how neither was particularly notable in the early days of their movements, grabbed power when the founding father died, and were willing to use force and terror. And both, arguably, took their movements off in very different sirections from perhaps what was originally intended.

...what happened regarding the death of his intern staffer??...

Lori Klausutis?? Believe the narrative......................

ConcernedCitizen 2.0 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...what happened regarding the death of his intern
> staffer??...
>
> Lori Klausutis?? Believe the
> narrative......................

I haven't heard of this woman before, and don't know the facts of the case, so can't comment on it specifically.

But what I don't like is the constant use of unpaid workers (presumably she was unpaid) to do work that people ahould be paid for. Most of the corporations, government offices and politicians endorse this kind of arrangement, wben in fact it sucks value out of the economy. The LDS are of course prime movers in the field of unpaid work.

Voluntary work is sometimes a good thing, but to have armies of unpaid workers just there to save someone like Scarborough money is wrong.

...look. As much as this board is interesting.....It doesn't require us to explain and justify the facts and information which is available to the public. Most of this is public domain material. It just requires a cogent mind and the willingness to research...plus, the idea that we? have to produce evidence to the intellectual class is nonsense. Let them do their own due diligence..............just like they did in their college classes....Would hate to have that debt burden hanging over me.

ditto

CrispingPin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I’d like to see the policy for this board be
> “no partisan politics,” even if the politics
> have a religious connection.

That is the very rule I believe already exists. "No partisan politics".

If politics has to do with how the world is run, then I will stick with my approach: I don't fret about politics. The world, as best I can see, is run by the people and organizations who can afford to purchase those who run for office.

Trying to fight City Hall, and those who run City Hall, may be an excellent mental exercise, but I think it always results in the vested interests winning.

But I endorse having favorite politicians and behaving joyfully whenever your politician scores a goal. Anyone know the score right now?

According to the rules, political threads are allowed if they tie into Mormonism. A thread about a bunch of guys dying on a beach for political reasons has to be political. The Mormon tie in wasn’t explicit enough so people had to read between the lines. I don’t understand walking into the kitchen and complaining about the heat.

Well, if one isn't a very good cook. . .

I think the issue needs to be simplified as much as possible.

Saying everything is politics touches on reality, but it overly complicates the situation.

For many years we were not allowed to discuss "politics" here on RfM. We understood that to mean issues, candidates, and news items which were of primary concern to any one political party.

It seems that there are increasingly more issues that fall into that category.

Some in society and on the board consider opinions and words about them to be evil including when there action related to them. This is a common point of view which might have some validity which isn't the point I'm working toward.

I think most of us can see which points of view will be seen as dark, dank and sinful. What might be a good idea would be to tread lightly and avoid them as much as possible.

Then readers could use some self discipline to move on and not inflame the discussion by claiming someone is saying something they haven't said or are thinking something they might not have fathomed.

If it's discussed with fire and extreme verve on political panel shows or talk radio, it's likely a subject that doesn't belong in polite conversation unless everyone agrees to disagree in the end and everyone is happy with discussion which would be political discussion sites.

Occasionally, mormonism is an obvious topic closely related to current events and then RfM might be a place to take it up unless it causes a firestorm of controversy and that's when I'd suggest it be shut down.

Those who break the rules purposely and often need be be asked to take a break so we can talk about recovering from mormonism which used to be quite a full time goal at RfM.

That's how I see it.

This board is about recovery from mormonism. The purpose is not to force everyone to believe what is the one true way of thinking. The thinking has not been done. we each have a right to do it for ourselves. That is recovery.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2019 10:44PM by Cheryl.