The folks apparently behind the British law suit against President Monson

 

The mask drops

 

 

Print Friendly

  • ClintonKing

    Right on.

  • mike

    Ding ding ding!

    • mike

      But shouldn’t you have used a photo of Gene Wilder during the creepy boat scene instead?

  • kiwi57

    Yes indeed; tell us more about that.

  • MsJack

    Does the fact that I created that graphic mean Mormon apologists like me again?

    • DanielPeterson

      I didn’t know that you created that graphic. Good work.

      Do Mormon apologists dislike you?

      • MsJack

        That is what my spies occasionally report. Do you dislike me, Dan? ;)

        Long story short, I learned some number of years ago that MT editors intentionally select topics based on how likely it is that said topics will cause members to doubt and leave the church, and that other topics are passed by if they aren’t likely to instill doubt and disbelief. I am very reserved about the use of the term “anti-Mormon,” and believe the term is frequently abused by Mormons, but trying to lead people out of the LDS church for the sake of leading them out of the LDS church is pretty much the epitome of the term.

        (Note that it is possible to distinguish between trying to lead Mormons out of the church and trying to convert them to one’s own religion, but MormonThink is definitely the former without being the latter.)

        There’s really nothing wrong with being critical of the LDS church, and arguably there isn’t anything wrong with being anti-Mormon. As anti-Mormon sites go, MT is one of the best on the net. But if that’s what someone wants to be, s/he should own it, admit it, be proud of it. The front page of MT should say, “A site by ex-Mormons and disaffected current members geared towards asking believers and prospective converts to reconsider faith in the Mormon church.” Not a site that “has been produced primarily by members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who are interested in the historical accuracy of the church and how it is being taught to its members and portrayed in the media. There is a lot of misinformation on the LDS Church that is presented by both critics and defenders of the faith – particularly on the Internet. We present both viewpoints fairly and let the reader decide.”

        That’s as deceptive as anything the LDS church can be accused of, and far more fraudulent than Mormons believing in the gold plates or in young earth creationism.

        So yes, I created this graphic a few mornings ago when Tom Phillips’ summons began hitting the press. I’ve been criticizing MT in this vein for some time, though I’ve grown increasingly disappointed with MT as the years have gone by.

        http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=637145#p637145

        http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=665961#p665961

        • DanielPeterson

          No, I don’t dislike you.

          • Brock Lesnar

            Dan,

            (Brock, wiping away a tear) I can almost feel the love. I can’t help but think of this:

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoEwR9_Sy_M

          • DanielPeterson

            Feel free to be emotional, Mr. Lesnar. We allow emotions here.

          • Brock Lesnar

            Dan,

            Please, no need to be so formal. You can call me Brock, or if you prefer, Schecky Moskowitz.

          • MsJack

            Yay. Lupercalia comes early this year!

        • Roger Nicholson

          MormonThink’s last two managing editors have done more to publicly brand the site as “anti-Mormon” in the mainstream media than any apologist could have ever hoped to do. They seem oblivious to any effort to preserve or maintain their own brand, insisting that they are unbiased and balanced despite the fact that their managing editor is openly trying to destroy the Church. Yeah…and the President of the United States doesn’t let any of his own personal views influence the way he runs the country either.

      • Brock Lesnar

        Dan wrote,”Do Mormon apologists dislike you?”

        It’s unfortunate, but yes, there are clearly Mormon apologists who dislike MsJack. Some of these Mormon apologists have even been quite public about their disdain for her.

        It’s even more disheartening when one considers what these individuals are supposed to represent.

        Oh well….Life goes on I suppose.

        • kiwi57

          What’s amusing is when those who claim to want to undo the “damage” are found stirring the pot and bringing up old disputes.

          One has to wonder what those “individuals are supposed to represent.”

  • Kenngo1969

    I think it’s important to recognize a crucial distinction that some are missing (I even mischaracterized this action when I first heard of it because the idea that President Monson would be subject to a criminal charge seemed so cuckoo-for-Cocoa-Puffs). This is not a civil suit. Although it was commenced by private individuals, it is a criminal prosecution. (I think that also speaks volumes about the motives of the people involved. This isn’t about simply recouping tax money paid to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as a result of gift aid. If it were, a civil suit would be perfectly adequate to achieve that objective.)

  • Ray Agostini

    Ms. Jack’s finest moment: http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/58537-the-calculated-suppression-of-mormon-apologetics-the-case-of-william-schryver/

    On a well-known Mormon-bashing board.

    The “show” and the anticipated accolades from her anti-Mormon friends were just too great to resist.

    There’s always repentance.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X