Sorry, I just blurted it out without thinking where I was.
Hey Diane,
You are again proof of Mormon ethics. I subscribe to City Weekly because I live in Southern Utah. I was signed up as part of an agreement they have with the organization I volunteer for. I am looking at a copy right now. It has my name on the white sticker. My address. a number in the left hand corner (00/12), and a area signifying the stamp which says: PRST STD US Postage PAID Midvale UT, Permit No. 9.
As usual Diane, you are the fool here. You typically pretend to know reality so well you can call others liars when it doesn’t fit your views. Phil didn’t prove anything of the sort that you suggest, everyone knows the song is what it is, it’s like those double drawings they have in psychology texts where you have to think hard to see both images from the same picture, you’re just too closeminded to see more than one even both. You were raised Mormon? So what? What is your point? The claims I posted earlier stand.
By the way, nothing anti-Mormon was ever printed in the Weekly, you are sorely mistaken, the paper occasionally covers issues, but overall is extremely neutral as not to offend people like you, which you proved with your two posts. But I guess DP Sorensen’s satire really offends you. Who is a dumbass?
[Moderator Hat ON]
You also should watch your step in this forum, Brian. Direct personal insults are not allowed here, and you definitely appear to be calling Diane a “fool” and “dumbass”. Please confine direct personal insults to the BBQ Pit (which is also the place for questions about moderator policies, as well, incidentally. 
)
[Moderator Hat OFF]
Sorry, Gaudere
Sorry, Diane,
vanilla, please join me here for a discussion of your comment: “WHy can;t you learn? Well, becasue youre mentally ill.”
I only wish that I’d thought to use the above quote as a the thread title.
Fenris
Well, for love of…?
How in hell did this ugly little clusterfuck of a thread escape my notice for so long? Oh, yeah, it’s because I’m an atheist so I don’t give a rat’s ass about Mormonism. But I’m here now.
Speaking as a firm atheist, I have to say something to all you anti-Mormons: the Mormons are kicking your asses!!!
Jesus Christ on a hockeystick, Mormonism is such a bizarre religion, you’d think your average chimp could make it look stupid. But YOU people make Mormons look brilliant! In fact, the only Mormon-basher who made any sense was, yes, it was Stoid for crying out loud! Stoid! There, I’ve said it. I’m not happy, I don’t like to have to admit it, but I’ve said it, since it’s the truth.
You Mormon-bashers ought to be ashamed of yourselves. Stoid is the only one who can write a grammatical english sentence, who can back up her assertions without sounding like a knee-jerk automaton.
And Mr. Bunnyhurt? Why did you deny that you’re an ex-Fundamentalist? OK, you’re an ex-Mormon. Big diff. Same old twisted crap to me. Perhaps you see a distinction.
Well, it’s nice to see you’re using your patented debate style here as well as in the Israel thread. Don’t worry, you’ve got that JDT award sewn up, so to speak. You might perhaps get over that free-floating rage and hostility once you’ve successfully restored your foreskin…
Oh, by the way, you’re wrong about “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds.” Everyone knows that Paul couldn’t have helped John write the song, since he was already dead by then…
Lemur866,
Everywhere you go, I know the thread is over. You’re like a vulture that swoops down on the losing side just to make yourself look good when you didn’t do any of the work. I don’t believe you are an atheist for one minute. Way too wrapped up in religious threads on the wrong side.
WTF?!?! Did BB just admit that he’s on the losing side?
Monty,
A vulture swooping on anything is roadkill. The attack was generally made on you, boastful of the fact that he could debunk you easier than I, which also implied that you were debunkable, so you must be missing something in his post. Bear in mind that Lemur is desperate to malign me as well from another thread. I was defending you to a degree by exposing him.
Full Disclosure: atheist, and have a low opinion of the Mormon church.
That being said, the OP of this thread was an attack on Mormonism. In debate, the attacking party bears the burden of proof.
But, back to more important topics - “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds.” 
Mr. Bunnyhurt - I strongly doubt that a band:
- Who’s members said: “We’re bigger than Jesus Christ.”
- Who were quite open about their drug use; and
- For whom LSD was legal, both in the U.S. and in their home country at the time the song was written;
had a great deal of fear about upsetting a bunch of rural fundamentalist hicks. Thus, they wouldn’t have hidden an LSD connection to their song.
BUT
pldennison, I don’t think we can discount the possibility that Julian was on LSD when he drew the picture. It is pretty freaky.
Sua
Mr. Bunnyhurt:
If you don’t believe I’m an atheist, take a look at some of the other threads I’ve posted to:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=57016
or:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=56928
Now, why would I pretend to be an atheist? You think I MUST be a christian because I support our Alliance with Israel? Or that only a christian would defend Mormonism?
If I was really a Christian, don’t you think I’d be worried about getting YHWH angry with all my comments through many threads on how stupid christianity was? Why would I trash my own religion, just to make rhetorical points? I’ve got 500+ posts on this message board. I defy you to search through them all and find ANYTHING that supports your theory that I’m not an Atheist. Hint: check around for threads about souls, free will, atheism, evolution, etc.
Now, I suppose it’s possible that I’ve been PRETENDING to be an atheist for the last 7 months, just so that I could build up a cover identity so I could attack you today. But don’t christians usually think they must preach the word? I’ve never heard of a christian who pretended not to be a christian, unless they were afraid for some reason.
Besides, if I were going to attack you on a theistic basis there’d be plenty of room, believe me. But, it just so happens that there is no such entity as God, there is no such thing as a soul, Jesus was just another guy who lived 2000 years ago, Moses did not really part the Red Sea, etc. etc. Why would I deny my core beliefs just to score points? Please.
Mr. Bunnyhurt, I suggest you improve your debating skills. See, everything here on this message board is written down, and can be looked up later. So, if I really was a christian I would expect you to be able to prove it quite easily. But you can’t. So I didn’t. Get it now?
Please bear with me, I am not attacking Lemur in this post; however, I am showing BB’s irrationality in his description of this post.
Doesn’t sound like a vulture swooping in to me. Is this what I missed, BB?
BB, didn’t you say the vulture was coming in on the losing side? Looks to me that “the Mormons are kicking your asses” means he thinks it’s the other guys (i.e., not the Mormons) not on the ass-kicking side.
Yet again, Lemur shows he considers you to be on the “losing side” and thus, this post is really an “attack” (actually it’s a logical argument (debate) technically) describing you.
This bit was to exclude Stoid from the intellectual cess-pit which you apparently occupy, BB.
If this post is an attack on the Mormons, why does the appendage “-bashers” appear here?
Again excluding Stoid from the BBCP.
I, for one, don’t count on BB seeing any distinction between fact and his fantasy.
BB seems to think that an accurate description of his “debating” techniques is an attack on me? WTF? FTR, I have not posted as Brian Bunnyhurt. Feel free to check with the other staff members to check on the veracity of this statement.
Can’t be an attack on me, seeing as I did not enter the discussion about either the Beatles or the particular song.
{fixed coding --Gaudere}
[Edited by Gaudere on 01-28-2001 at 12:57 AM]
You are right Lemur, the religion is bizarre.
But it isn’t Christianity, as anyone who has checked out my links has found out.
I do expect vitrol and have always gotten it, when I point out the inconsistencies in their religion.
Should’ve known better.
We’ve always had our suspicions, Lemur. That’s why we never invite you to the DSMB Atheist Club meetings :D.
Sua
Sua,
I, for one, don’t think the song in question contains a hidden theme about LSD, it was fairly obvious to me and friends who grew up with it, and more than likely they were trying to hide it after the fact. However, the song likely contains a hidden theme if one is not familiar with LSD, I suppose, so both assertions are valid. As for LSD, it being legal was merely by virtue of being relatively new and untested, it was demonized nonetheless as soon as kids, including Beatles fans, got into it (read Storming Heaven by Jay Stevens).
Sua, permit me a criticism here if you can take it. That we don’t get along is obvious, but we don’t really have to because we have different interests, so I’ve learned, and besides, I hate the sandbox. You think I’m presumptuous about enshrined foreign policy, fine, but I think your over-reaching style of quotational analysis totally breaks down in art, philosophy, and religion, and can even ruin the experience, or worse, place one in disalignment with counter-arguments (I was never physically or emotionally abused to learn anything in school and I don’t want to start now). I also think most psychologists (a territory that often uses creative reasoning as per behavior) would disagree with any stodgy limitations of interpretation, it would be like searching a dream dictionary for its meaning (and now I’m going to have to defend that comment to people with dream dictionaries for a whole page). And don’t take my word for any of it, get a second opinion.
As for the OP, it was not attacking, but inviting viewpoints. I was attacking Mormonism for being false, and I made my critical points, which are unprovable to faith-based Mormon logic. As for my comment to Vanilla, it stands alone or in context. It is a general observation as it pertains to her argument with others here, and as I have stated previous to it, I do not involve myself in quoting scripture. Also, I usually stick to the implied assumptions, not casual comments (which implies insecurity to do so), therefore you are mistaking me for someone else, and possibly much more. But, alas, we are really talking about persuasion here, aren’t we?
Monty,
We have a serious disconnect here.
Lemur,
I thought you were Jewish, seriously. Anyway, I wouldn’t bother looking up your posts, sorry, just the way it is, I don’t doubt your substance, which I now know and not doubt, just your style. And I don’t doubt you’re here on this thread to pester me, but if you would like to help debunk Mormonism, I would appreciate it, otherwise, taking their side against me will be very interesting indeed.
In re: your LSD comments. All your points are likely true. My point is that the Beatles were very public advocates of recreational drug use. Hell, Lennon did interviews (with photographs) while he was smoking joints. Thus, it would make no sense for the Beatles to falsely deny the song was about LSD, when at the same time they were saying “drugs are cool”
I know you’re going to hate this, but hell, I think it’s easier for all involved if I am clear about exactly what we are talking about. So:
We don’t know what each other’s interests are. FTR, I have strong qualms about U.S. policy towards the Middle East, and I think that Israel should not have been established in the first place. I also think that the establishment of Israel cannot be reversed at this point. On Mormonism, I strongly dislike the religion and, if I didn’t believe in religious freedom, I would like it to be one of the first up against the wall. So, you see, to some extent we agree on these issues.
My problem with your debating style is that you make incorrect assertions, refuse to provide evidence to support your assertions, and accuse people like me who challenge your assertions of having a secret (usually fundamentalist Christian) agenda.
Further, you confuse people who are trying to correct your inaccurate factual assertions with people who are disagreeing with your premise. This is simply untrue - the two are not related.
In my discussions with you, I have never engaged in analysis. Instead, I have used quotations of your writings here to point out where you are factually incorrect.
You may be right about this. I interpreted the OP as that of a recent ex-Mormon asserting that the Mormon faith is fundamentally flawed. Your interpretation may be the valid one. As I may be incorrect, I withdraw my comment, permanently.
However, as for your refusal to quote scripture, you simply cannot assert that someone’s scripture is wrong without pointing out where the error is in the scripture. Ironically, I have a similar situation right now IRL. We are seeking attorneys’ fees from the other side in a case we won. In support of that, we submitted all of our time records. The other side claims that we spent too much time on the case, but haven’t pointed to any particular bit of time and said “they claim they spent 5 hours doing this, but it should have only taken them 2.” Because they didn’t point to any particular times that were allegedly excessive, they lost the argument, and have to pay all of our fees.
Maybe they were right, and we did spend too much time on the case. But their failure to provide evidence doomed their argument.
Not sure what you are talking about here. The only thing I am sure of is that I have been talking about you and not mistaking you for someone else.
Sua
{fixed coding. --Gaudere}
[Edited by Gaudere on 01-28-2001 at 12:54 AM]
Got a mouse in your pocket? There’s no “we” involved in the disconnect from reality, BB; only you.
Let me quote Lemur just so’s you’ll know at least one fact:
You will notice that this thread appeared in the 1st posting on page six of this thread and that it was addressed to BB.
Well, someone is mistaken.
On the City Weekly web site ( http://www.avenews.com/index.html ) right now is a story about Orrin Hatch “Blowing Holy Smoke” and his intent to “strong-arms religious protection bills into law again and again – the Constitution be damned.”
The article concerns Hatch, with the support of LDS officials, pushing for legislation that the writer of the article clearly thinks is a bad idea (whether it is a bad idea or not is outside this discussion, as the claim was that “nothing anti-Mormon was ever printed in the Weekly”. This seems to pretty conclusively refute that.
Care to try again, Brian? Actually, on second thought, never mind. I’ve seen two threads from you, and both seem to be nothing more than a chance to spout off about your pre-occupation with religious groups (LDS and Judaism, so far) and to accuse everyone who calls you on your factual mistakes and lack of knowledge on the subjects as being part of some christian apologist cult. My response from this point on will be DNFTT.
Ugly