I just read the sticky at the top of their page. They are discontinuing the use of the 'mormon apologetics and discussion board'. They are planning to create a new board. Their reasoning is very typically mormon. They want to control the 'debate' and focus on 'discussion'. Translation = We will delete anything we don't like.

To be fair, it is their board and they can do what they like. I will miss the entertainment though. It's not much fun if there isn't a lively discussion. I suggest they name it the 'mormon apologetics bore'.

I would post there except I've been banned. :)

Since I followed the wise path of strictly lurking...

And, to the best of my knowledge, the only time I was mentioned over there was by an RFM friend...

Seriously, they're just tired of being referred to as the MA&DHouse. I didn't invent that one (I did "Denial C. Peterson," however, as well as a couple that probably got FARMS to rename itself the Maxwell Institute), but I sure used it a lot since I know a good thing when I see it...

I'm waitng to see what their new secret temple name is, and I promise, I'll do my worst...

My old Mormon habits got the best of me over the holidays, and I laid in a year's supply of bullchip filters and helmets.

SL Cabbie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm waitng to see what their new secret temple
> name is, and I promise, I'll do my worst...
>

Someone already suggested a few for them there:


http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/52756-board-direction-change/page__view__findpost__p__1208959345

But I think they rejected the suggestions.

sounds like you were having fun stirring up a lot of chaos there. Stepping into the Lions Den, teasing them with raw meat, waving it in their faces and running away just to aggravate them. That's usually what goes down when someone gets banned. never heard of that forum though and don't know the full story. there's always two sides to a story. got a link?

experienceheals Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sounds like you were having fun stirring up a lot
> of chaos there. Stepping into the Lions Den,
> teasing them with raw meat, waving it in their
> faces and running away just to aggravate them.
> That's usually what goes down when someone gets
> banned. never heard of that forum though and don't
> know the full story. there's always two sides to a
> story. got a link?


Just use your search engine Mormon apologetic discussion. The heading is dark blue.

Don't google without the "apologetics" word. You might come up with some weird intellectuals. That heading is light blue and pinkish. :)

me Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Just use your search engine Mormon apologetic
> discussion. The heading is dark blue.
>
> Don't google without the "apologetics" word. You
> might come up with some weird intellectuals. That
> heading is light blue and pinkish. :)


already checked it out. looks like a place I'd rather not be. too good to be true, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and all that jazz

I was banned a long time ago. I don't think I was intentionally causing trouble but I didn't hold back either. They simply don't like perpectives other than their own. I think this latest act is proof of that. Honestly, I don't miss it much but I do occasionally lurk over there just to see what their views are on the hot topics of the day. Unlike most of the TBM posters over there, I am interested in other's perspectives.

Without knowing anything about that board, I have to disagree with your claim. People get banned from boards all the time for not agreeing with the groupthink, not necessarily just for purposefully causing trouble.

Asking tough questions, no matter how polite or respectful...

Of course MA&D's unwritten rule is such stuff is inherently disrespectful and probably sarcastic as well. I mean, if the church is true, then it has to be...

Number Two is telling the truth...

I was actually invited over there when I was posting some stuff on one of the Deseret News comments board, and they were claiming there wasn't sufficient space to reply to my claims. I believe one poster was Peterson himself, who guaranteed I wouldn't be banned if I remained respectful...

I was banned from the Deseret News comments shortly thereafter...

Any serious critic that attempts to 'discuss' church doctrine with the Mad Hatters at MADB is either whipped into submission or is banned in a heartbeat.

I know. I was banned there twice.

There was something going on about church finances and I had asked a question about why the LDS financial records were not open for members to examine. Someone responded asking why they would do that? To which I answered "To avoid the appearance that they are doing something wrong"

Poof, banned.

And they already limit access to certain parts for posting such as their 'Pundit Section'

Try to have an honest discussion over there and you get banned really fast.

I wasn't trying to be radical or controversial when I got banned. They just have NO TOLERANCE for any other view than...the Church is TRUE, anti-mormons bad.

Or they figured they were driving more people out of the church with their silly defenses than doing nothing.

I was banned when I took on Daniel Peterson. He openly said the ward (I guess a singles student ward) he was bishop at had a problem with 'self abuse'. I brought up the fact he was betraying their trust in confidentiality. I may not have said it so nicely though.

I just heard on the radio coming to work this morning that a boss was talking about a group of workers - no names - and he may be held accountable, legally for what he said because of privacy laws even though he did not mention them by individual names.

Any person, whether you agree with their religion or disagree, (disagree for the record) who betrays the trust of the group, should be tarred and feathered, shot mamed, stoned, whatever. This guy is scum of the earth.

For mentioning on facebook that a government agency was coming to do an inspection, and another coworker also on facebook reported it to the upper bosses.

This is the same type of mentality as the police Code of Silence that has existed in some police circles where brutality and excessive force is covered up – loyalty to the group is paramount. Similarly, this mentality can breed, support and nourish different forms of unethical actions in groups of people. A whistleblower is someone with a moral compass who betrays the trust of the group in order to do the right thing. Sometimes things need to be reported.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/30/2011 07:58PM by openeyes.

Those losers and their "Mormon smartypants club: boyz only, gurlz not alowd" thing imploded a long time ago. The only airtime they get is when one of you reports on some inanity they've posted and everyone here rushes over there for a look-see.

And banned? Being banned from THAT website is only marginally worse than being banned from the Mormon church. In short, isn't it rather more an honor than not to be banned by them?

geneticerror Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I just read the sticky at the top of their page.
> They are discontinuing the use of the 'mormon
> apologetics and discussion board'. They are
> planning to create a new board. Their reasoning is
> very typically mormon. They want to control the
> 'debate' and focus on 'discussion'. Translation =
> We will delete anything we don't like.
>
> To be fair, it is their board and they can do what
> they like. I will miss the entertainment though.
> It's not much fun if there isn't a lively
> discussion. I suggest they name it the 'mormon
> apologetics bore'.
>
> I would post there except I've been banned. :)

ROTFLMAO

Those guys know a lot of big words. No really! But even a tool like me was able to figure out a couple of big words my own little self. I use them to describe MADB. “Obfuscation” and “Deflection”. They will now preach to a smaller more well censored choir, just like Steve said.

I have never seen any group of people put that much work and that many citations in to a paper just to say nothing, except anything that turns out to be disproved later was said when a church leader was speaking as a man.

Anything you were taught in Sunday School was not official doctrine. Nothing is doctrine. And since you don't have the manual from when you were 10, you're just making it up. You, in your childish misunderstanding, made poor decisions that are now affecting your eternal salvation. In other words, those who left didn't really "get it."

The funny thing is, many exmos have the same memories of being told really ridiculous things about "the" church - at church by teachers who had been set apart and selected through prayer by the bishopric.

I have posted there before, and there are some genuine people who want to understand the world outside Provo. But there are some real fanatic guys who become condescending and nasty if you dare say that life goes on after Mormonism. They just can't imagine that anybody could live a happy, joyous, and free life without their religion. Very narrow-minded.

But that's not everybody. I have sent private messages back and forth with DCP and we got along great. When I sent him a PM to say I was taking a break, he wrote back and said, "OK, see you in church someday." I got a chuckle, as I'm sure he did.

In the end, apologists are just a distraction. You have to write people like them off, just as they have probably written off the majority of RfM regulars. The real work to be done, if that's your thing, is with members who are wondering and are capable of being honest with themselves enough to leave after they figure it out.

Their goal as apologists should be those members who are trying to convince themselves to stay in, not RfM posters or exmos. Of course, this goes both ways. It's when we forget this that we end up frustrated.

T-Bone

They are simply a distraction and they don't seem to represent the mormons I know IRL very well. The people that find that place valuable are a special breed.

Thanks for the perspective guys! I really appreciate y'all.

I sounds like they should have chagrined, sheepish looks on their faces as they write for their board, apologizing for how silly the "doctrine" is.

I do hope they include it in their new name.

It's as if the word means, "I'm really smart and could do great things with my intellect, but sorry, I only want to say that the chuhch is twoo. Sorry."

keep the Book of Mormon safe from archived criticism at approved online Mo zones

---
Take a look at #41 & 42 and note the words "arbitrary" and "intentional". That about sums up MADB in a sentence.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/52756-board-direction-change/page__view__findpost__p__1208959531



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/06/2011 12:31PM by Jesus Smith.

It appears that anything but morg tries to do is generally ending up in failure. I thought I had no social skills, but is obvious that the heads of the cult has no contact with realiity. Internet has has greater than the devil to destroy the morg. If there is a Jesus I think he invented the Internet to stop out the cult disease called mormonism. The only people I ever see joining the mormon church, are the illiterate and those that have no connection to the Wordwide Internet System.

I tried to conceptualize the need for "Prebyterian apologists, " or "Methodist apologists." It makes no sense. It's amusing that when you go to the link "Mormon Cult Amazon.com" ad is on the right. I found a thread defending the "overnight" decision to allow black people into the priesthood in 1978, whining about why they get picked on about it. How about stating it the way it was? It was an overnight REVELATION, NOT A DECISION. Damn, the farther away I get, weirder it all seems. I was not BIC -brief convert. It's too creepy to even lurk there.

LongOut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I tried to conceptualize the need for "Prebyterian apologists, " or "Methodist apologists." It makes no sense.

I think it's because a range of thought is tolerated in mainstream Christian churches. It's not necessary to take everything in the bible literally. You can have a different opinion about things and still be a member in good standing.

Also, should you leave a mainstream church, no one is going to hunt you down or make you feel badly about leaving. They won't shun you for leaving nor think you are a bad person for doing so.

People can freely move between denominations should they so desire. You can leave the Presbyterian Church and join the Methodist church, or vice-versa. It's not a big deal.

So I guess the mainstream denominations don't feel a need to be so defensive. If you believe, fine, they will be glad to have you. If you don't believe, that's fine too.

It's only after having left Morg, that I begun
to see Morg like a commune of Soviet communists!

Every LDS is constantly being monitored by TBM
Home teachers. How I hate myself for being one of them
'super' Home teacher.

A member's time is like belonging to Morg, with all sorts
of 'compulsory' activities thoughout the week, throughout the years.

The purpose of which is to physically bind everyone into a bunch of yes men - and mentally switched off zombies.