LDS Freedom Forum

Reluctant Watchman wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 6:05 am We are living in a world that thinks if you disagree w/ someone, you are being hateful, where calling sin a sin is frowned upon.

This becomes more true the younger a generation is. They call it hate-speech if you disagree with them. They try to shut you down or ban you.

When someone sees disagreement as being hate, cyberbullying or personal attacks, it is probably an indicator of the generation they grew up in. Older generations repeated the mantra "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." Younger generations have a difficult time accepting this mantra.

Cyberbullying and attacks are going on all around not just toward tbms. (Try being a woman with a bigger opinion than some of the men here. That will get you called names and harassed.) Two people have brought me to the point of changing my mind about blocking people. Unfortunately the Forum doesn't actually make it so you can block people and you still see every damn message they leave trolling and insulting you that everyone else can still read.
I still haven't figured out all the new rules and culture yet after being back for a year and a half. It's very different here than it was before. But the first thing I noticed when I came back is the Forum was a whole lot ruder than it used to be. I was expected to moderate all kinds of things that are okay today. (That being said there's a whole lot about the Forum that personally believe has improved since back then.) So, ok... A little bit more honesty and less pretentiousness is allowed now... Which means the intensity of the discussions here is a lot heavier. Some of the threads on the Forum today would be locked back then just because of the fighting.
You're not alone though Ed - you get bullied for all the other opinions too. Has nothing to do with you being a tbm. Has to do with people. You're in a forum full of a bunch of opinions and attitudes and backgrounds and beliefs - and the game here is to discuss it, and discuss all those different opinions and attitudes and backgrounds and beliefs. Some people have an easier time disagreeing. Some people think disagreeing means they have a right to be abusive.
You're going to have all kinds of people disagreeing with you and challenging you to uphold your position. That's the game here. If people are being abusive then report them - that's a different thing. And hopefully when you do report abuse or personal insults or unwarranted attacks, it will be taken care of. Everybody's opinion deserves respect. But nobody's abuse deserves respect.

JandD6572 wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 1:50 pm Well.....bye. You might want to jump over to the Avow forum, you would fit in much better.

"I need nothing from you, and am not interested in further communication with most of the active individuals on this board. Consider yourselves, almost all of you, basically banned from my personal existence"

Not exactly a way to win friends and influence people...

If you want to play the victim...then go find a group that will cry a river for you just by claiming victim status...

This is an interesting place, that let's anyone say almost anything they want...however...

As many a troll has learned...if you post BS...you get called out pretty quickly by an intelligent, knowledgeable, astute group of truth seekers.

Even if you're not a troll...if you post BS...you get called out pretty quickly by the same group.

Not all agree on any given topic...that's ok...because debate is how truth floats to the top.

Ignorance and tragedy occurs when one side presumptuously states..."the science is settled" or something ridiculous like that. Just look at how WRONG most leaders were on ALL things covid...and think of the death and damage it caused.

We can't afford to self censor, be afraid to speak what we believe to be true...because we might offend someone. Healthy debate is not only a good thing, it is essential.

I think essential attitudes to learn as one goes through life are encapsulated by the Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz. I've trotted these out before, but by following them one can save yourself a lot of grief and bother. And they actually partake of a strong element of common sense.

They are: : 1. Be impeccable with your word; i.e, hue to strict honesty, as best you can. 2. Don't take anything personally (this is a biggie, but tough to hold on to). 3. Don't make assumptions; another biggie, but saves sooo much personal anguish and grief by keeping you out of iffy pathways and attitudes. I.e., you can altogether avoid being caught up in 'mass formations' (after Mattias Desmet, and C.G. Jung), or black-and-white thinking, which is normally illogical. 4. Always do your best . . . which includes following the foregoing rules.

You can add to these by practicing: turning the other cheek, and trying to do good to those who spitefully use you. This concept is powerful, and is mirrored in the psychological ploy of 'cross-transactions' as described in transactional analysis. I've had quite amazing experiences with this (with my wife's help).

Practicing these things will certainly help you avoid being caught up in extreme anger.

I have issue with two of the terms you use:
* Firstly, TBM. I am on our ward council. Does that make me a TBM? There are also no "M"s now and RMN is insistent on that. The goalposts are continually shifting.
* Secondly, cyberbullying. Like the word "trolling" this has come to cover a range of issues, from light to severe, and also been used to justify censorship. In some cases it just means disagreeing with someone.

Many of us feel the church's role has been perverted or distorted. We also feel our civil liberties are under threat. We do live in a strange and dangerous time.

Think you have it bad, think again as the most liberal member of these forums and a Democratic Socialist to boot, to say nothing of being a Freemason as well, I get all manner of abuse heaped onto me. I'm called a satanist, I've been told that I shouldn't even be in the Church and should be summarily excommunicated the list goes on and on. I have even had physical threats posted against me.

But I'm a big boy and can dish it out and take it.

gkearney wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 4:11 pm Think you have it bad, think again as the most liberal member of these forums and a Democratic Socialist to boot, to say nothing of being a Freemason as well, I get all manner of abuse heaped onto me. I'm called a satanist, I've been told that I shouldn't even be in the Church and should be summarily excommunicated the list goes on and on. I have even had physical threats posted against me.

But I'm a big boy and can dish it out and take it.

I take it you realise the words "liberal" and "socialist" are contradictory? Socialism is not liberal, it is statist or at least anti-liberal at the grassroots. I definitely don't agree with the American redefinition of the term.

I don't do personal attacks because that usually weakens or distracts from my position thus handing the person I'm debating a weapon to use against me in the right crowd. I realize some people may not even listen to my argument if I distract them with ugly words. I don't want to exclude myself and my ideas from consideration. In the right situation, I might actually welcome those attacks so I can use that to shift some to my side. I wouldn't appeal to others sympathy. I would point out how the attack shows the other side isn't able to challenge my position so they resort to name-calling. Name-calling is a crutch when you have nothing left or when you can't control emotion.

Besides the tactical position above I don't think my Savior would do that. Being able to walk away even if you have the evidence to prove a claim is a good skill. If I say, "RMN is a liar" and I can show proof that's the end for me. I won't show anyone hate for refusing to accept my evidence but that isn't the same as calling someone an idiot. Perhaps if I had an IQ test to back up that classification I might write it Saying someone is wrong and foolish for believing something isn't hateful. If I win a debate honestly respectfully I think there are still people who will tell the teacher. Everyone knows when the teller is exaggerating. I've noticed many people who are abused tend to suffer in silence which is sad. Perhaps there is a fear on the part of someone who has been abused that someone else is about to get abusive even before a line is crossed. Be nice. Be strong. Be able to use reason to reinforce your position. Be able to walk away.

If you'll excuse me I need to go tell my neighbor what I think of his Harley. Wish me luck

P.S. I like anything with an engine so don't come at me.
P.P.S. I like the earth and love plants so don't come at me.
P.P.P.S. I'm not vegan so don't come at me.

well, I have the same complaints, have stated them like others on this post have, and instead of being listened to or treated seriously then the master of the forum kicked me off. I also stated my reason for following this forum since I am interested in apostasy inside and outside of the church and the master didn't like it.

Not sure why I am able to post now cuz I still don't know the rules. Some posters are treated like the democrats in DC where the legal system is not applied equally. Two legal systems . . two different rules for posters. I really don't like the smugness, either cuz I have seen many attacks and I'm not talking about attacks on me. I've seen real cruelty towards other posters.

But if the gang wants to remove anyone then they just as well bully people off this forum. Usually the attacks on done on those who claim to be the open minded while actually they are the ones that can't stand anything that disagrees with them. or offends them. They then claim inocense. Small minds, small ideas with no expansion or thought.

been lurking . . not a lot of new stuff on here

I am worried big time about our world . . . and our church . . . and our future as followers of Christ . . . starting to lose a little hope
cuz I'm not real sure what Christ is expecting in repentence of his covenant children and his gentile children . . . and what that repentence would look like at this point . . .

So much pain right now . . so many thousands have died of this poison shot made from aborted fetal cells . . so many people handicapped and unable to work now

and then, a few days ago, I find out that the CEOs and a lot of bosses and church leaders and important people took this shot. . . . all of them deceived and now worried sick as they watch people die and get handicapped all around them . .

this evil makes me cry . . .time to build Zion a place of safety

correction:::: the attacks are done BY those who claim to be open minded

gues we can correct ourselves by asking what the purpose is of the post we just voiced . . before we hit the submit button

Niemand wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 4:19 pm

gkearney wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 4:11 pm Think you have it bad, think again as the most liberal member of these forums and a Democratic Socialist to boot, to say nothing of being a Freemason as well, I get all manner of abuse heaped onto me. I'm called a satanist, I've been told that I shouldn't even be in the Church and should be summarily excommunicated the list goes on and on. I have even had physical threats posted against me.

But I'm a big boy and can dish it out and take it.

I take it you realise the words "liberal" and "socialist" are contradictory? Socialism is not liberal, it is statist or at least anti-liberal at the grassroots. I definitely don't agree with the American redefinition of the term.

I’m the United States the classical use of the word “liberal” is all but unknown. We also have the bad habit of employing the term socialist as if it were some kind of generic insult with little understanding as to its meaning. When I say Democratic Socialist I am referring to a political approach once known a being a labor Democrat, which was focused on economic issues of the working class.

@gkearney

Just to be clear here, despite all of those things you stated about yourself which I may agree or disagree with, you have been by far one of the more dignified and respectable people posting regularly on this forum. Your contributions have been valuable to me for many reasons and have taught me much. So regardless of abuse heaped upon you, you have walked well and given a great perspective of your views as well as being willing to share and educate and having an open mind on many subjects that just surprised me. Anyhow, it is shameful for people to heap abuse on anyone, but for whatever reason it irks me that you have been subjected to that behavior.

@everyone else

. Remember that Satan is an accuser of his brethren. Lets not become satans ourselves. Reasoning together is not accusation.

FearlessFixxer wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 11:57 am This is not an airport

Reluctant Watchman wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 6:05 am We are living in a world that thinks if you disagree w/ someone, you are being hateful, where calling sin a sin is frowned upon.

HereWeGo wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 2:06 pm This becomes more true the younger a generation is. They call it hate-speech if you disagree with them. They try to shut you down or ban you.

When someone sees disagreement as being hate, cyberbullying or personal attacks, it is probably an indicator of the generation they grew up in. Older generations repeated the mantra "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." Younger generations have a difficult time accepting this mantra.

Mormon's letter to his son about the Nephites:

And now behold, my son, I fear lest the Lamanites shall destroy this people; for they do not repent, and Satan stirreth them up continually to anger one with another. Behold, I am laboring with them continually; and when I speak the word of God with sharpness they tremble and anger against me; and when I use no sharpness they harden their hearts against it; wherefore, I fear lest the Spirit of the Lord hath ceased striving with them. For so exceedingly do they anger that it seemeth me that they have no fear of death; and they have lost their love, one towards another; and they thirst after blood and revenge continually. And now, my beloved son, notwithstanding their hardness, let us labor diligently; for if we should cease to labor, we should be brought under condemnation; for we have a labor to perform whilst in this tabernacle of clay, that we may conquer the enemy of all righteousness, and rest our souls in the kingdom of God.
Moroni 9:3-6

General Note: This is not directed against any particular side of any argument. It is the scripture that the above posts reminded me of.

larsenb wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 3:11 pm I think essential attitudes to learn as one goes through life are encapsulated by the Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz. I've trotted these out before, but by following them one can save yourself a lot of grief and bother. And they actually partake of a strong element of common sense.

They are: : 1. Be impeccable with your word; i.e, hue to strict honesty, as best you can. 2. Don't take anything personally (this is a biggie, but tough to hold on to). 3. Don't make assumptions; another biggie, but saves sooo much personal anguish and grief by keeping you out of iffy pathways and attitudes. I.e., you can altogether avoid being caught up in 'mass formations' (after Mattias Desmet, and C.G. Jung), or black-and-white thinking, which is normally illogical. 4. Always do your best . . . which includes following the foregoing rules.

You can add to these by practicing: turning the other cheek, and trying to do good to those who spitefully use you. This concept is powerful, and is mirrored in the psychological ploy of 'cross-transactions' as described in transactional analysis. I've had quite amazing experiences with this (with my wife's help).

Practicing these things will certainly help you avoid being caught up in extreme anger.

I like that book. Its advice is good. I ought to read it again.

1- Be impeccable with your word
2- Don't take anything personally
3- Don't make assumptions
4- Always do your best

If I recall there's a fifth one at the end, but I don't recall what it is.

Guest wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 6:31 pm well, I have the same complaints, have stated them like others on this post have, and instead of being listened to or treated seriously then the master of the forum kicked me off. I also stated my reason for following this forum since I am interested in apostasy inside and outside of the church and the master didn't like it.

Not sure why I am able to post now cuz I still don't know the rules. Some posters are treated like the democrats in DC where the legal system is not applied equally. Two legal systems . . two different rules for posters. I really don't like the smugness, either cuz I have seen many attacks and I'm not talking about attacks on me. I've seen real cruelty towards other posters.

It was a temporary glitch in the Matrix.

There isn't a double-standard. Unfortunately most banned users aren't willing to accept the reality of why they were banned (98.6% of the time it's for personal attacks). Like a true justice system should be, administration and moderation here is done reactively. This is not a police state.

I'm not sure who you are (what username you used to post under) but I'm always willing to reconsider and give someone a second chance after banning them. I would need to look at the past circumstances but you're welcome to contact me.


#GlitchInTheMatrix
#Times&Seasons

I've tangoed with lots of people. But in general, I'm pretty quick to forget arguments or attacks I've had with others or that they have had with me. I've never blocked a user and I've very rarely (if ever) reported posts.

I guess I figure I'm a big boy and I've gotten served pretty good before and I've dished it out pretty good too. I guess for me while I get into it from time to time, get heated from time to time, I don't hold it against anyone on a public forum.

Things are different when it's being typed out for the world to see anonymously. It's a different dynamic. A huge part of it is because everyone knows we aren't just talking to the person we are responding to, but we are talking to a much larger audience. Who exactly that is we don't know . . . but it most certainly ain't a private conversation. And so because there is an "audience" so-to-speak we are all "performers" on a "stage" to some extent as well. And being a "performer" on a "stage" with an "audience" is a totally different dynamic than having a one-on-one conversation with someone . . .or even having a small group conversation.

So in many ways, knowing that I'm a "performer", sometimes I do a good bit of "acting". And that is way, way different than trolling. It's just an understanding that everyone else here is a "performer" too . . .and this isn't an intentional or a bad thing-it's just the nature of how this works.

So while yes I can definitely contribute my fair share to attacks-there is always a purpose behind it and most of the time it is to really, really see what is there. In other words, if I dig hard enough-do you really believe what you are saying or do you wilt under pressure? Part of it is a testing of your (whoever your is) beliefs and part of it is testing of my beliefs. I am not afraid to admit fault, apologize, and move on.

Seed Starter wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 5:18 pm Name-calling is a crutch when you have nothing left or when you can't control emotion.

In general I agree, but empirically speaking name-calling is EXTREMELY effective when used properly. Call someone a "racist" and that is a extremely effective. Now it is getting overplayed so it has been losing it's effectiveness.

Even Christ name-called. Name-calling is a tactic and it's one that Christ used. The appropriateness of name-calling is actually in the intent rather than the tactic. And it can be extremely, extremely effective.

And this is exactly why Christianity is dying in the West; an unwillingness to use the full use of all the weapons God has given b/c the Western view of Christ is just false. The modern view of Christ is this rainbow, unicorns, cotton-candy, "just love everyone and always say nice things".

spiritMan wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 10:36 pmIn general I agree, but empirically speaking name-calling is EXTREMELY effective when used properly. Call someone a "racist" and that is a extremely effective. Now it is getting overplayed so it has been losing it's effectiveness.

Even Christ name-called. Name-calling is a tactic and it's one that Christ used. The appropriateness of name-calling is actually in the intent rather than the tactic. And it can be extremely, extremely effective.

There is some truth to this, but 98.6% of the time it is done on the forum inappropriately; such as people calling someone an idiot just because they have different opinions and beliefs.

spiritMan wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 10:36 pm...and this is exactly why Christianity is dying in the West; an unwillingness to use the full use of all the weapons God has given b/c the Western view of Christ is just false. The modern view of Christ is this rainbow, unicorns, cotton-candy, "just love everyone and always say nice things".

Right, there's a problem with the new age false love rainbows-and-unicorns approach you describe, but on the other hand you're somewhat describing the Jesuitic view of Christ, one that is not Christlike at all. The Jesuits twisted Christianity and were much too materialistic, and not enough focus on the spiritual, focusing on building a temporal kingdom as soldiers of Christ.

spiritMan wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 10:36 pm

Seed Starter wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 5:18 pm Name-calling is a crutch when you have nothing left or when you can't control emotion.

In general I agree, but empirically speaking name-calling is EXTREMELY effective when used properly. Call someone a "racist" and that is a extremely effective. Now it is getting overplayed so it has been losing it's effectiveness.

Even Christ name-called. Name-calling is a tactic and it's one that Christ used. The appropriateness of name-calling is actually in the intent rather than the tactic. And it can be extremely, extremely effective.

And this is exactly why Christianity is dying in the West; an unwillingness to use the full use of all the weapons God has given b/c the Western view of Christ is just false. The modern view of Christ is this rainbow, unicorns, cotton-candy, "just love everyone and always say nice things".

I see your point. If someone is a racist I will call them that. I guess I was referring to more subjective name-calling. It's hard to prove someone is a (insert swear) word. Labeling someone as a liar when you can show they lied is quite different from dropping f bombs and expecting results. Calling evil evil is not something I would shy away from. I think it's obvious when a debate of ideas stops being a debate of ideas. I mostly agree with you. My goal here is to listen to ideas and hopefully have some of mine considered and even adopted. I don't think I even have a chance with some people. I don't want to let my attitude keep anyone from the truth. I think some people feel entitled to have their ideas respected and even adopted.

gkearney wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 6:40 pm

Niemand wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 4:19 pm

gkearney wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 4:11 pm Think you have it bad, think again as the most liberal member of these forums and a Democratic Socialist to boot, to say nothing of being a Freemason as well, I get all manner of abuse heaped onto me. I'm called a satanist, I've been told that I shouldn't even be in the Church and should be summarily excommunicated the list goes on and on. I have even had physical threats posted against me.

But I'm a big boy and can dish it out and take it.

I take it you realise the words "liberal" and "socialist" are contradictory? Socialism is not liberal, it is statist or at least anti-liberal at the grassroots. I definitely don't agree with the American redefinition of the term.

I’m the United States the classical use of the word “liberal” is all but unknown. We also have the bad habit of employing the term socialist as if it were some kind of generic insult with little understanding as to its meaning. When I say Democratic Socialist I am referring to a political approach once known a being a labor Democrat, which was focused on economic issues of the working class.

The two really aren't the same. "Liberal" implies laisser faire, and "socialist" implies intervention. Modern American liberalism has a bit of laisser faire left in it when it comes to sexual matters but not economics.

I take it you mean that you are what is known in these parts as "social democratic".

Personally I feel the choice between left and right these days is whether one wants to dominated and controlled by the government or robber barons/big corporation... or a combination of the two. (Which we seem to have.)

I think the abusive nature of government in recent times worldwide shows that we should be very careful of them micromanaging every aspect of our lives. We shouldn't have to scan a QR code/check in with them every time we go to a restaurant, ask their permission for church services or have our activities checked to see if they comply with carbon regulations. Government should stick to things like maintaining roads and a fire service.

Hey everyone. Mr. pot called, asking for Mrs. Kettle. He says she’s black.

Seed Starter wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 5:18 pm P.S. I like anything with an engine so don't come at me.
P.P.S. I like the earth and love plants so don't come at me.
P.P.P.S. I'm not vegan so don't come at me.

There goes most of my personal jibes. Thanks a bunch, pal.

Only joking...

I think Ed may feel more comfortable within the safe haven of his home field. Which is apparently not this forum. One of the things I love most here is the freedom to discuss the tough stuff. The hard questions. Sometimes debate can go too far, but anyone willing enough to engage in debate better have thick enough skin to take it when you lose an argument or are called out. Happens every day on this forum in one thread or another. Generally people can reach a point in which they can agree to disagree. Lack of emotional control isn't a good character trait to bring to a debate.

I would hope that the intent of both parties in a discussion is a desire for truth above all else, and not to defend tradition.