An opinion, if you don't mind.

Steve knows so much because he lived in the GA cliques. The organization that JS founded has always ran on the idea that some members are better than or more special than the ordinary members. Think of the Endowment and then the Second Anointing. The people in the inner circle always know stuff the plebes do not. From my experience in the leadership of another restoration church, its a whole different church up there.

It is apparent to me that Steve has also done a lot of reading and study in the history and doctrines of the church. Bottom line, he knows a lot of stuff.

The difference between Steve and other descendents of the power elete is that he is willing to share his insights. I have known of other progeny of those families who are ex and the difference is that Steve is willing to speak up and share. For that and his razor sharp whit and insights, I am most grateful.

What I do not understand is the harshness with which some posters attack Steve at every turn. Jealous? Lurking tbms? If you detractors are serious seekers and sharers here and you don't like what Steve has to say, don't read his posts!

Yeah, Steve, I've done it again and I do know you can take care of yourself, but I just can't let the bs stand without comment.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2012 07:09PM by Susan I/S.

I think that Steve's knowledge and being born in a GA royalty family really messes with the reptilian part of the brain for a lot of these TBMs who drop by. There is also some jealousy involved maybe, but having a grandson of the prophet know so much and cut to the quick threatens these people, hence the harshness.

Amen! You turn a good phrase. That is the other thing I enjoy about Steve's posts is that he can use the language so well. That ability is not a hallmark of the mo.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2012 02:15PM by steve benson.

I'm sure it was a royal pain in the ass. I'm so glad my family wasn't related to a long serving apostle and prophet.

Only from your view point and only from you. The other descendents I met doing Gay Pride parades and festivals were most certain to define their blood line.

I really enjoy reading Steve's posts. They are so insightful.

Agreed! I guess I should admit that in addition to all those reasons for enjoying his posts I think I have a chrush on him. Sight unseen, someone with that much wit has to be cute.

imalive Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I really enjoy reading Steve's posts. They are so
> insightful.


+1

I know I was shocked at some of the posts about steve. I quite enjoy his posts and witty subject lines

Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2012 02:22PM by steve benson.

Think of Dawkins, Hitchens...Steve is twice as bad of an Atheist.
I owe big part of Atheism to Him. He has no emotional compassion for Religion.
this is my take.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2012 02:13PM by steve benson.

Now, Steve, that is an oxymoron! No god? No heaven, no hell.
And by the way do you foam at the mouth and attempt to bite theists? When it comes to goring the pretensous, keep up the good work. Also you do a great job of hoisting them on theirown pitard.

I'm so agnostic at this point, you could label me atheist without fear of giving offence. I do not foam, however.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2012 05:10PM by slatheredtwice.

This is the biggest problem people have with Steve. Despite leaving mormonism, many people still cling tightly to some form of theism for whatever reason. Theism can become so personal and sensitive that any opposing views are immediately seen as uncaring and vicious.

Steve doesn't care. Reason and plain sense undermine theism. That's just the way it is - that's how many of us found our way out of mormonism. Steve won't hold back in explaining it, and if any theist has their sensitivities hurt about it, they can either find a way to accept reason or go find a quiet room alone to cry it over.

He does have a stubborn streak, and a driving need to have the last word in every discussion, as well as a tendency to overemphasize data that support his arguments (don't we all?), but atheist like me appreciate him.

. . . before Admin closes the thread--meaning that the last-worder is not always me.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2012 06:14PM by steve benson.

It's like having a bug planted in the Mo. I have never understood the Steve Benson haters.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2012 02:19PM by steve benson.

He gives to this community 'religiously' :)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2012 04:26PM by bignevermo.

"What I do not understand is the harshness with which some posters attack Steve at every turn. Jealous? Lurking tbms? If you detractors are serious seekers and sharers here and you don't like what Steve has to say, don't read his posts!'

Are you referring to me?

This is a reprint of an earlier thread 10 days ago...

so are leprechaun and unicorns ok Steve...that didnt seem to bother you at all in the last thread!

I like how you use Tom Flynn's quotes so much...he is a folkorist...not any expert in child development. yeah he wrote a book...so what...when he gets his PH.D in child psychology...then quote him...other that that he is just like the rest of us...he has his opinions! also here about TF>>>McGowan is a critc of Flynn's.

"Flynn argued that early immersion in the Santa myth predisposed children to accept absurd religious teachings in later life; McGowan argued that the discovery that the Santa myth was untrue prepared children to reject religious dogmas in later life. Both agreed that the subject demanded further research by the child-development community.[12]"

wow...just look at that last sentence. Even the author of most of your Citations agrees there should be more research by the experts...what about that Steve?

and what about another of your citations Steve? here...
“'Once they [children] start to question, you know they’re getting ready to want to hear the real answer.' . . . .

"Curry recommends to parents that '[w]hen the child starts to ask the practical questions, then throw it back to them and say, ‘Well, what do you think?’"

and here another citation...:
"Scheibe said it is best for an adult to confirm the truth only if a child has strong doubts after wrestling with the question of Santa Claus’ existence.

"'If kids come to the conclusion on their own, they feel a sense of accomplishment,' she said.

“'It’s sort of a rite of passage.'”

Neither of them suggest that it is wrong to have a Santa fantasy...they seem to be saying tell the truth when appropriate!

...very few parents try and keep the lie going like your parents did...perhaps you need counseling for your recovery from santa! Ya know this is too easy Steve...maybe you should not cite any more of your experts!! :)

I see also you were referring yesterday to my "losing" the argument...LOLOLOL...losing /winning?

so who was the judge i was "debating" in front of?

sorry i gotta leave...<<sigh>> I have to go down to the Florida Keys and pick up a friend...I may not be back for a couple hours...and even then i will be busy tonite...have fun with your "winning: Steve!



Options: Reply•Quote•Follow Topic•Report
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: May 22, 2012 05:56PM

thread:http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,508315,508786#msg-508786

Then SB posted: "ignored, (n/t)"...the first one...

this post was after SB had addressed me without the ignore... even though i had used the "Fantasy Nazi" phrase...also in reference to above... please note the name "Curry"...that is one of SB's citations as is Scheibe...this is just one example of SB's citations not matching his assertions...

NEXT is:http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,508315,508763#msg-508763

My "dastardly" post where SB claims i have called him a Nazi...i was referencing the soup nazi character from Sienfelds show...i even have a smiley face to show comedy.

This my post(untouched) on the "Santa subject" and subsequent "ignore" policy that is now SB's "mantra"

According to a tradition which can be traced to the 1820s, Santa Claus lives at the North Pole, with a large number of magical elves, and nine (originally eight) flying reindeer. Since the 20th century, in an idea popularized by the 1934 song "Santa Claus Is Coming to Town", Santa Claus has been believed to make a list of children throughout the world, categorizing them according to their behavior ("naughty" or "nice") and to deliver presents, including toys, and candy to all of the well-behaved children in the world, and sometimes coal to the naughty children, on the single night of Christmas Eve. He accomplishes this feat with the aid of the elves who make the toys in the workshop and the reindeer who pull his sleigh.[6][7]

from wiki of course!
just sayin!

Hey look it is SB...his premise is in the Virginia letters:


"The eternal light with which childhood fills the world would be extinguished."

thats what SB wants...hr wants children right out of the womb to start training in critical thinking...SB is the "Fantasy Nazi"...NO FANATSY FOR YOU!!

the big Grinch!!! :)

end of prior posts:

so i guess that makes me an SB kicker...not in my view though.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2012 04:35PM by bignevermo.

Puerile? That was quite a rant! Good going. It helps to get it all out.

You must come to understand that we, The Friends of Dorothy, simply can't be bothered with such drivil.

drivel? which part my posts or Steve's?

Oh thats right...you are one of Sb's supporter...did you happen to read those threads?
you sure did not post anything in them...s'ok eveyone has their opinions! :)

Without getting into personal attacks that would close this thread & cause it to disappear, SINCE IT WAS ESSENTIALLY ASKED:

On occasion, over-sharing, excessive wordiness, repetition, re-cycling, and an apparent opinion that anybody & everybody who left the Mormon corporation is either mentally deficient or morally reprehensible for not following the same path into atheism, along with an equally apparent obsession with a mission to constantly batter the corporation & religion in general that appears fully the equal in reverse to the highest levels of individual corporate missionary zeal, tend to overshadow some other aspects of personality & contributions for some observers.

Overkill, comes to mind.

I worded the above as innocuously as possible, apologies for the long sentence.
Inside source or not, he is no demi-god & does not have to be venerated by all.
Everybody who posts here is subject at best, and vulnerable at worst, to critical analysis and diverging opinion, he is no different in that respect.

Horsefeathers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>...he is no demi-god & does not have to be venerated by all.

Who here "venerates" Steve Benson?

That is the type of skewed view that I don't get. If you don't like him, fine. Don't agree with him, fine. Why mischaracterize him and/or the "board", which is a body of individual posters? I take the mischaracterizations as a negative comment against other posters as much as against Steve. As if we're bowing down to Benson? Give me a break!


> Everybody who posts here is subject at best, and vulnerable at worst, to critical analysis and diverging opinion, he is no different in that respect.

And did anybody say he was? Or should be?

Oh, and the reason that threads like this get shut down or disappear, as far as I have gathered from long observation, is that in general it's against board rules to "gang up" against a specific named poster. Of course, that is subjective, which means we're never gonna agree on what constitutes ganging up and which posts or threads should go or stay.

... he's a fairly decent cartoonist!

Is that so wrong?

Timothy



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2012 04:11PM by Timothy.

I don't venerate him, but I do enjoy his wit, information and delight in his viewpoint.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2012 06:09PM by steve benson.

Sure, let's. It's a dull Friday, weather and activity-wise. :)

Also for the record, I'd like to submit that the detractors are often exmo, not just mo drive-bys. Some, in particular, seem to blame Steve for his Mormon relatives, a little irrational as despite mo doctrine to the contrary, we can't choose our relatives! Didn't like ETB? Taking it out on Steve is irrational!

I somewhat understand the mo/exmo tendency to expect something of Steve that, not delivered, may give rise to some disgruntlement. I don't agree with it but I can see how it originates.

I don't understand the misrepresentation of how this "board" treats Steve. I see no special treatment from Admin or the body of posters, as is so often alleged.

Too, if I were called a "Nazi", as Steve has been here in the past and apparently was again fairly recently, I would react, as Steve has, and has every right to do.

If one's name (especially when using their IRL name as Steve unfailingly does) is smeared, obviously they will speak up, even if it's "only" a board name, in order to protect their reputation. In online communities, even a board name can be valuable and worth protecting. It's a well established principle that a person will (and should) protect their name and their reputation, two of our more precious commodities.

Treating other posters with respect, including Steve, doesn't mean we agree with them 100%. We can disagree in a hearty debate but still be respectful, of every poster for their inherent worth, not for some imagined status position in a non-existent hierarchy.

I happen to agree with Steve on his views re Santa Claus. We don't seem to agree on the whole God thing. Even so, the only name I call him is Steve or occasionally Benson. It works for me.

Not to be piling on....

I didn't say there's preferential treatment by the board's admin.
I will say, though, that contrary opinions I've noticed frequently result in sarcastic responses by him and immediate defenses by other posters.
It gives me, at least, the impression that he doesn't think he should be opposed, and that a good percentage of other posters agree.

When I first started on this forum a while back, he did use an alias.
I had a post removed for violating the privacy requirement when I addressed him by name.

At the time, I was using my real name & got so many cheap shots about it from a couple posters, who didn't appreciate me stating that they were exhibiting very LDS-like behaviors in certain areas, that I resolved not to use it again.

Names seem to come & go here.

... that would be horsefeathers.

I've been around since 1998 which predates Benson's arrival on RFM.

Can't recall a time he ever used an alias.

I've also used the same moniker since my arrival.

Timothy



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2012 05:16PM by Timothy.

Tim,
When I first started here a few years back, I interacted with another poster.
He was not going by Steve Benson.
I was advised by another well-known name here that the poster was Benson.
I addressed him by name in a post.
The post was removed.
I was told by two different longtime names here privately that I shouldn't take the removal personally. Even though it was something of an open secret addressing someone by a real name instead of an alias was a violation of the privacy policy.

If that information's erroneous, I'll apologize.
But- that's what's behind my statement re his use of names here.

I'm still smellin' horsefeathers.

Timothy

Tim,
I genuinely do have better things to do in life than make up stories for you or anybody else on this board. :)

If you have to doubt, have at it.
What I said was the truth. I distinctly recall being quite angry over the post being deleted & initially thought it was some form of favoritism, since I was new here.

I felt much better about it when it was kindly explained that it was own fault for not knowing the rules.

Your first problem was talking to another poster instead of admin. Another poster may THINK/GUESS but would have no way to know if ANYONE was using two names. Admin does. Benson has never used any name except his own. You were wrong, the other poster was wrong. As to why the post was pulled, at this point who knows. In future, ask admin at the time and we would be happy to help you.

Bring something good to the table and you too can be a polarizing figure in RFM.

He's not a scholar, and has never claimed to be one. He's a journalist and calls them like he sees 'em.

The way he sees 'em may be different than others, which is fine. We are not all going to agree on everything.

I happen to like his sense of humor, and the fact that he was gutsy enough to enouh to have gone straight to the top with his questions and complaints bf leaving Mormonism and then go public with them, without fear of what it might do to him either professionally or personally. That's tough stuff in my books.

All I am saying is that anyone can bring information to the table and become just as loved and reviled as Steve.

It should also be noted that Benson, unlike his detractors, doesn't use an alias.

Timothy

Goodness gracious, y'all. Whatever.

I got my butt kicked by Mr. Benson for having a serious difference of opinion over something so silly as a song. But his side of the argument was so clear and concise . . .

My point is, my opinion of the lyrics of said song was not changed. But I did go back and look up much of Steve Benson's (prolific!) writing.

He is intelligent and exacting and demands no less of his readers. This is not a bad thing, even if you do not agree with him.

So, kick him around all you want. But agree that you have to admire his wit, his intelligence, his grit, his determination, and most of all the spirit he brings to the work he does.

I can easily respect his work, it takes great ability for which I give him full credit.

His work isn't the issue here.... :)

I don't agree with the attacks on Steve, though I have had my share of misunderstandings with him. However, I do think I know what is happening. A lot of people have a hard time dealing with the fact that they were taken in by the church so easily. To deal with this, they often have to build the church into this massive specter type secret organization that probably has its true headquarters beneath a volcano in the shape of Joseph Smiths head, on some unknown island. Steve has the gull to tell us that instead of evil geniuses, the church is instead lead by a bunch of ignorant old men. It's hard to admit you were fooled by a bunch of ignorant old men. Church is still evil though.