[Mormon] Bishop’s handling of Vernon incest case was correct

More accurately - when someone “new” refuses to get caught up into the “We Hate Mormonism” arguement, they are beset upon by the likes of you, who enjoy picking at folks with obscure, or unrelated references. When the newbie objects to being made sport of, he is branded “thin skinned” and a “whiner”.

This was made about me by YOU and your cult. I have tried several times to take this thread back on topic - please point out a SINGLE time that you have posted anything relevant to the original topic of this thread....I’m waiting....

Just trying to grasp the obscure cult rules here:
1) Assuming a person is a Mormon defender is OK.
2) Avoiding the “Mormonism is evil” sub-thread by pointing out an obvious anti-mormon bias is NOT OK.
3) Defending oneself from mistatement and attack - NOT OK
4) Asking that oblique references to oneself be clarified or discontinued - DEFINITELY NOT OK!!!!!
5) Asking for clarification of the “rules” - Thin skinned and whining.
6) Making obscure jokes at another’s expense, calling them thin skinned and a whiner - DEFINITELY OK - especially when said whiner was the ONLY poster trying to discuss the original article, because...
7) THIS forum is all and always about how we hate Mormons, and nobody can ride through this valley safely if they don’t openly and often preach about HOW MUCH THEY HATE MORMONISM!

Do I have the rules down?

Please go back through this thread - who is the person trying to address the headlining article? ME! And I’m the one you pull when a little terrier starts nipping at me and linking a post of mine FROM 4 YEARS AGO!!!!?????

I asked for relevance, and I’m sneered at - THAT is acceptable? When I ask to be excluded, and give my bill off particulars for that request - somehow THAT is out of line!!!

Also - asking “Are you a heritic?” is OK????? That is weasel-wording. Much like asking if you still beat your wife. There is no real difference (except honesty) between attack by question mark and a direct statement based on the tone and tenor of a referenced post (which mine were, and my characterization was truthful an accurate).

Your “rules” reward the weasel who puts a question mark at the end of their perjoritive statement, and punishes the honest man who calls the tool digging dirt a spade.

Look back through this thread - you have allowed all manner of folks to post off-topic in an attempt to rope me into some other discussion, and slap me when I call them on it.

I am ridiculed for something? You let those totally off-topic posts stand, but pull my post, which you reference here - I stand by the words you highlight - they are a correct and accurate description of what was taking place; SHAME on you for taking mine down and letting those stand.

This thread has been hijacked - not by me, but by those trying to turn it into a discussion of the evils of Mormonism - and I get slapped because I strongly resist those efforts.

I am an honest poster on FR. I speak my mind - but I will strongly resist those who try to put words in my mouth to further their own agenda, or draw me into some other argument. I don’t play well with others, in that situation.

You have allowed me to be lambasted and personally attacked, while holding a strict line on what I post - even when my words are demonstrably true and accurate - that is petty and unworthy of a moderator. That I object to such treatment is called “whining”????

I am not impressed with this particular community on FR.

svcw - I include you only because the (don’t you think he’s) disgusting?(see the question mark RM?) greyfox included you on his previous post. You and I have made our peace, and I respect that.

Hmmmm:
Hidden agenda revealed - check
Personal attack - check
Unnwarranted (and wrong) assumptions - check
Silly juvenile graphic - check
My repeated contentions validated - check

RM - I believe I have been vindicated.
gf - are you an unmitigated fool? (The all important question mark protects me!)

Take your pleasure as you will - but poking sticks then calling names when the target of your stupid, childish taunts reacts is, well, stupid and childish, isn’t it? (I’m catching on here!)

GOOD JOB RM!!!!! You really managed this one well! You certainly reprimanded the evil doer, didn’t you????????? And you definitly maintained an atmosphere of open, honest debate without personal attacks, didn’t you? Had you been more discerning, and even-handed in your admonishments, this would have likely been avoided. But since you chose me as your newbie target, and ignored the sh!t-flinging child in the room (because he is a “regular” and above reproach)....you got more sh!t!

BRAVO for the denizens of this forum - you are certainly the folks I would rush to to discuss religion. OH, P-Marlowe - I most certainly should be eager to discuss very personal events of my life relating to my beliefs, past and present now, shouldn’t I??? I can hardly wait to display my most innermost thoughts and feelings before you all...and here, let me cast before you the few precious pearls that I have. You are ALL so thoughtful, wise, considerate, welcoming - brimming with Christian brotherhood and goodness! If you are not Christian, you still promote the foundational tenets of your faith by your actions here. YOU ARE ALL TO BE CONGRATULATED!!! You certainly did your part in keeping this forum free of subversive ideas! And you did it with such love and kindness - aren’t you proud???

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.