ambushed, you're not the sharpest tack on the bulletin board, are you?

In some Mormon questions, you made the insane assertion that those undergoing a particular interview had to answer the question for someone’s gratification. Proof:

You then ranted on:

&

And then you posted this stunningly “enlightened” comment:

I’m wondering exactly how you know the very reason why someone who’s dead managed to convey to you the exact reason why he committed suicide. I’m sure the medical profession would also love to hear from you on that.

And then you added this malarkey:

So, basically, you’re saying that the crap you spout isn’t proveable.

And more crap:

&

Thus ignoring first that nobody’s forcibly raised LDS any more than anyone’s forcibly raised in the religion of their family and secondly that there are Catholic families (as well as families in other faith groups) who will distance themselves from members of their family who leave their faith group.

One of the moderators explicitly told you:

Which you basically ignored.

You further tried to defend the lies you posted as being true by stating that you just posted facts (I’m tired of quoting your crap–every one of your posts in that thread is full of falsehood), and then you finally posted where you were getting your “information”–ONE SITE! And that site is the pathetic exmormon website.

So, basically what we have here is:
[ul][li]You’re too stupid to realize what a reputable website is.[/li][li]You’re too stupid to understand that suicide, which the LDS Church isn’t too happy with either & is concerned about preventing–is a much more complex issue than you care to believe.[/ul][/li]Finally, we have this crap from you:

All of your false assertions were disproved AND not only by LDS posters in that thread!

You either are just a liar or you are too stupid to realize what a fact is and what an opinion is.

So, which is it, ambushed? Are you just incredibly stupid or do you like to lie? Or is it both?

Speculating: It likely to me that when one is bothered by something enough to commit suicide because of it, often the subject comes up in conversation. It seems likely to me that the friend had spoken at great length about it, and it being the cause of suicide would have been pretty obvious. Or perhaps he left a note.

Of course, this is speculation, ambushed would have to provide these details to confirm or deny this.

First, let me clear up an ambiguity in my posting. The adjective pathetic refers to the website, not to the people.

Second, revtim: Perhaps something comes up in conversation often and perhaps another contributing factor to the suicide doesn’t. I don’t know and I submit that all anyone can do is speculate. ambushed asserted his speculation as fact.

Monty, your complaint with ambushed seems to have two very distinct parts: one, that s/he was using personal experience (of others or him/herself, and emotionally charged material at that) on the incorrect board. That seems like a completely legitimate remark; the mods chastised him/her for not obeying the set rules of the board.

<breathes deeply, hoping I can say this right> But then you’re also quite upset because s/he is criticizing Mormonism. As the above quote seems to highlight, you view ex-Mormons with suspicion. That, of course, is your prerogative; but it seems like this issue, not that ambused was posting on the wrong board, is what really upsets you.
I’m not a Mormon, and I have no authority to say who’s claims are more veridical - what I can say, though FWIW, is that the stories ambushed told were not new to me (other than the suicide). There was the teenage girl that was grilled for explicit information about an affair she was having with a much older member of the church. I knew teenagers who got married at 17 and 18, and who didn’t go to college, largely in part because their families and church encouraged them to do so. I knew young people who were disowned by their families by breaking the rules of the church, or forced to not talk to anyone in the church for a year. When I went to college, it was common knowlege that I would have been better off getting married (at 17!). I knew (and I was) one of those young people that felt coerced into baptism- was it my choice to do so? Yes. But did I feel intense pressure from a parent and the church? Yes.

I was a Jehovah’s Witness, and those young people were my friends. We were explicitly told to ignore and deride ex-member websites and books; we believed that they were misled at best and heretical at worst. And I wholly did, when I was a member.

Monty, I don’t expect you to believe me; nor do I really have the authority to do so. But the events to which ambushed referred have happened; it makes sense to me that if they could happen in one church, they could happen in another. If you want to criticize ambushed for not following Board protocol, fine…stick to that - I don’t think there’s any argument that s/he erred. But, that’s not the same thing as as saying that all their posts were lies.

aurelian

ps…just saw your note on preview, and well, I don’t buy it. If a category of made up of people is ‘characteristic X’ than it only follows that a given member is ‘characteristic X’. I guess I don’t differentiate much between a person’s beliefs and who they are.

Monty, if the person is clearly in emotional agony about a particular subject, and they commit suicide, saying they committed suicide because of that subject may still technically be speculation, but it’s a pretty damn safe bet. Since it’s possible ambushed’s friend may have made his anguish and its cause obvious, his speculation-as-fact is no worse than your speculation that it was not obvious.

aurelian:

I honestly don’t care if someone criticizes my church. What I care about is the falsehoods tossed around such as the ones ambushed tossed around.

Nor do I care if you buy what I’m saying or not. Unlike your “pal” ambushed, I actually did post citations of my assertions in the GQ thread, except of course where it was obvious that no citation was needed.

revtim: And I still maintain that all any of us can do is speculate if that’s the (as in “the only”) reason someone committed suicide.

p.s. to aurelian: I don’t view ex-mormons with suspicion. I view the ex-mormon.org website with suspicion because of the number of falsehoods posted on that site.

I don’t think that it is fair to blame a suicide on a particular influence in one’s life unless it there was coercion or violence.

From what I understand people can leave LDS or move without any horrific repercussions. I don’t know the facts here. Note previous sentence.

No matter what the input is, absent serious coercion or abuse, the output of suicide is inherently an intervening act of free will. I think an irrational one. It shows too much certitude in the value of death over other options available while you are alive.

This is true. I left the church four years ago and haven’t suffered any sort of rejection, persecution, gossip, or anything. I’ve been on good, friendly terms with a number of old church members, including my bishop as well as the new bishop there. I chat with them on a near-regular basis.

No, I’ve seen criticism of Mormonism. Hell, I criticize Mormonism. What Ambushed was doing wasn’t “criticism”, it was an attack.

Think of it this way: If you wanted to criticize, say, police officers, you would refer to an event like the Rodney King beating and say “A few police officers have gone over the line and broken the rules that cops are supposed to follow.” That would be a true statement, and resonable. If Ambushed were doing the same and utilizing the same tactics he used in the GQ thread in question, he would have said “COPS BEAT RODNEY! COPS ARE BAD! POLICE DISTRICTS ENCOURAGE THE COPS TO BEAT SUSPECTS! THEY JUST HAVE GOOD PR AND DON’T ADMIT IT!”

See the difference?

Boy have you ever had the wool pulled over your eyes, SPOOFE! Monty’s stupid strawmen, lies, and his blatant distortion and taking quotes out of context seems to have fooled you completely!

First, I recommend that you inform yourself of the FACTS by reading my post: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?postid=4014193#post4014193

Let’s look at your post and reasoning more carefully… You cited the statement:

Please note that I NEVER denied that, so it’s yet another of the specious, dishonest strawmen that have been so despicably used to attack me and the facts.

If Monty and his tiny smattering of disingenuous fans had a genuine interest in the truth, it would have been made perfectly clear here that I simply said that some Mormons face being shunned, disinherited, divorced, or are subject to other emotional blackmail when they try to leave the church. Not ALL, as the stupid strawman LIE that has apparently been bought hook, like, and sinker here. Where is your intellectual honesty, SPOOFE? Isn’t what I said the honest fact? I am good friends with many such Mormons, and I’ve read a considerable number of letters and posts of a great many other such Mormons. I TOLD THE TRUTH!

Only if you are so naive that you actually believe that simply telling the truth constitutes an attack!

That’s just what I did!! Absolutely NOWHERE did I EVER claim anything other than that this happens in SOME cases! Is your honesty and reading comprehension as disgracefully rotten through and through as is Monty’s?

Why do you have such low regard for the facts? If you were to have actually READ what I actually WROTE, you would KNOW that I never made any universal claims about the LDS Church! Everything I said was factual!

You really need to read my post that PROVES that Monty LIED over and over again about what I actually wrote. Either acknowledge that Monty lied or show us all exactly where I made a universal, no-exception claim about the LDS Church or ALL of its members. You CAN’T, because I never did it!

If you are possessed of genuine intellectual integrity, SPOOFE, you’ll find that the dim-witted Monty is lying through his forked tongue and crooked teeth and that my posts in that GQ thread were factual and honest, and I backed up those facts with perfectly legitimate proof from a sampling of real Mormons who have experienced just what I reported, regardless of the false, sub-moronic and highly self-interested assertion from dishonest Monty that exmormon.org is not a “reputable” source (no one should ever accept what someone as duped and dishonest as Monty says about what’s reputable!)

Boy have you ever had the wool pulled over your eyes, SPOOFE! Monty’s stupid strawmen, lies, and his blatant distortion and taking quotes out of context seems to have fooled you completely!

First, I recommend that you inform yourself of the FACTS by reading my post: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?postid=4014193#post4014193

Let’s look at your post and reasoning more carefully… You cited the statement:

Please note that I NEVER denied that, so it’s yet another of the specious, dishonest strawmen that have been so despicably used to attack me and the facts.

If Monty and his tiny smattering of disingenuous fans had a genuine interest in the truth, it would have been made perfectly clear here that I simply said that some Mormons face being shunned, disinherited, divorced, or are subject to other emotional blackmail when they try to leave the church. Not ALL, as the stupid strawman LIE that has apparently been bought hook, like, and sinker here. Where is your intellectual honesty, SPOOFE? Isn’t what I said the honest fact? I am good friends with many such Mormons, and I’ve read a considerable number of letters and posts of a great many other such Mormons. I TOLD THE TRUTH!

Only if you are so naive that you actually believe that simply telling the truth constitutes an attack!

That’s just what I did!! Absolutely NOWHERE did I EVER claim anything other than that this happens in SOME cases! Is your honesty and reading comprehension as disgracefully rotten through and through as is Monty’s?

Why do you have such low regard for the facts? If you were to have actually READ what I actually WROTE, you would KNOW that I never made any universal claims about the LDS Church! Everything I said was factual!

You really need to read my post that PROVES that Monty LIED over and over again about what I actually wrote. Either acknowledge that Monty lied or show us all exactly where I made a universal, no-exception claim about the LDS Church or ALL of its members. You CAN’T, because I never did it!

If you are possessed of genuine intellectual integrity, SPOOFE, you’ll find that the dim-witted Monty is lying through his forked tongue and crooked teeth and that my posts in that GQ thread were factual and honest and I backed up those facts with perfectly legitimate proof from perfectly legitimate and reputable sources (contrary to the contemptible liar Monty’s despicable calumnies).

ambushed, with all due respect, you are being a jerk by publicly calling someone a liar. We try not to be jerks on this board, it has sad consequences. Try to calm down and reason in a rational manner, and people may take you seiously.

That’s seriously! :smack:

Baker: He’s being a jerk by incorrectly calling someone a liar. I, OTOH, correctly called ambushed one.

My opinion is my own, formed based on YOUR words and actions, rather than Monty’s.

Read it, couldn’t believe you could be so stupid, so I read it again. I was wrong. You really ARE that stupid.

Point #1: You didn’t quote MY post. You quoted Beagle.

Point #2: I never claimed that you denied that a person could easily leave the church without threat of persecution. Your labelling it as a strawman is indicative of your dishonesty. It couldn’t possibly be an attack against YOU if it was never even REFERRING to you, could it?

My intellectual honesty is laughing at your delusional idiocy, jizzcrust. I never claimed that you had made the argument that you outlined above, nor did I ever hint, imply, or insinuate that you had done so. So drop the martyr act and cease your verbal frothing, psycho.

Cite?

Let’s go down the list:

-You accuse the Church of “hatred”, despite the fact that it is the fault of a minority of the members that are guilty of such.

-You accuse the Church of “Inquisition-type interrogation”, ignoring that those so-called “interrogations” are voluntary.

-You claimed that the Church told your now-deceased friend (God rest his soul) “how wretchedly evil and God-hating” he is.

-You all but accuse the Mormon Church of conspiracy, deliberately keeping certain detestable acts out of their official policy but secretly harboring hatred.

-You claim that few Mormons can leave the church without losing the love of their friends and family, with zero evidence to support that claim.

Note that, through all this, you have repetitively said “the Church”, not “some Church members”. Clearly, you are claiming that these problems are widespread and represent the majority of instances of LDS behavior, rather than being a small yet prominent minority of unfortunate instances involving assholes acting of their own discretion.

See above. Your posts have continually and consistently accused “the Church” or “the Mormon Church” of the abhorrent acts that you outlined. Who’s being dishonest now, dipshit?

Outline where I show low regard for facts.

Monty QUOTED you in the OP. I just OUTLINED the comments you have made. YOU ARE A LIAR. And a whiny one, at that. Is your first name Luke, by any chance?

Cite his lies, as he has cited yours.

Certainly. SPOOFE lives to please.

The LDS Church’s hatred of homosexuals and homosexuality is truly contemptible!” (not “The hatred some members of the LDS church…”)

“I had a close gay Mormon friend who KILLED HIMSELF after the Church once again told him how wretchedly evil and God-hating he was merely by being gay!” (not “…Some members of the Church…”)

Need I continue?

But I just did, because you did it.

Monty pointed out precise instances of you being dishonest. You have NOT pointed out precise instances of Monty being dishonest. You are the one that used enough exclamation points in your psychotic rant to make Denis Leary say “Whoa, there, that’s enough anger, pal!”

Umm, Monty, you do realize I was just talking to ambushed in that post of mine, don’t you? I know it’s hard right now, but try not to be so touchy to people who are trying to be on your side, and bring a little rationality into this thread. Assuming you are correct about the veracity of statements by ambushed, it’s still ugly to say in public.

Baker: I realize that. & I appreciate your support. {Sorry I don’t have any Bartles & James around since I quit drinking a couple of years ago.}

I didn’t even realize they still made B&J! Oh well, it’s too late for a drink now anyway, but a cold Sam Adams sure does sound good. Cheers!

Eh, what’s another hijack? Baker: When I did drink, I preferred Hank’s (officially: Henry Weinhard’s Private Reserve) to Sam Adams. Ever have it?

Nope, but I’ll make a note of the name. Maybe that’s what we all need here, a few brews, relax, put the feet up, and so on. "Twas my sister who turned me on to dark beers, and I’ve come to prefer them.