Thoughts on Romney and his March?

[Palerider]

To answer your last question please refer back to my original post on this thread since the answer is already there if you had read just a little more carefully.

Hey, you're right, there it is:

I just wonder where Mitt's courage was when he could have called out his church leaders before 1978, when they practiced blatant discrimination. Maybe just got in line like the rest of us?

So what I see in the rest of the thread is you calling Romney out for not living up to a "standard" that you didn't live up to yourself.

Since I should't call that "non-sequitur," do you have another fancy name for it?


Once again: Ugh... I. Can't. Even...

Maybe now I can shut my fingers off.

And as Hagoth put it so well in another place, people do change over time and as they advance and mature their views change as well, hopefully for the better. In 1978 I was all of 23 years old and fairly fresh off my mission and newly married struggling to make a living.

Meanwhile the good Romney raised in a highly political and affluent home was already working in his father's political campaigns and being groomed for leadership and public office. He has since put himself forward as a man worthy of someone we should trust as our leader. A man of great integrity and a straight shooter. A man to whom truth is preeminent.

And yet he has never publicly (and I would bet privately) disavowed his church's racist teachings.

I on the other hand have told my church authorities the truth about the church's history not only regarding their racism but their misogyny, preaching for filthy lucre and various other false doctrines. Rather than await excommunication I chose to resign. I essentially excommunicated the church.

So yes, as I learned and evolved I did what I considered the right thing.

I guess Mitt is just a little slower. Or maybe he loves the honor of men in the church more than he cares to open the box that contains all the dirty little truths that would force him to make a decision between a love of truth and loyalty to a corrupt organization.

I appreciate your calling me out on my immaturity at 23 years of age. As I said, quite openly, I got in line on the priesthood restriction like everyone else, even when I had the nagging idea that it was wrong. I apologise.

Just out of curiosity I'm wondering (since we're being so honest here) have you had your name removed from the records of the church yet? You seem very brave.

On second thought, don't feel obligated to answer that. It's really not my concern.

[Reuben]

To answer your last question please refer back to my original post on this thread since the answer is already there if you had read just a little more carefully.

Hey, you're right, there it is:

I just wonder where Mitt's courage was when he could have called out his church leaders before 1978, when they practiced blatant discrimination. Maybe just got in line like the rest of us?

So what I see in the rest of the thread is you calling Romney out for not living up to a "standard" that you didn't live up to yourself.

Since I should't call that "non-sequitur," do you have another fancy name for it?


Once again: Ugh... I. Can't. Even...

Maybe now I can shut my fingers off.

And as Hagoth put it so well in another place, people do change over time and as they advance and mature their views change as well, hopefully for the better. In 1978 I was all of 23 years old and fairly fresh off my mission and newly married struggling to make a living.

Meanwhile the good Romney raised in a highly political and affluent home was already working in his father's political campaigns and being groomed for leadership and public office. He has since put himself forward as a man worthy of someone we should trust as our leader. A man of great integrity and a straight shooter. A man to whom truth is preeminent.

And yet he has never publicly (and I would bet privately) disavowed his church's racist teachings.

I on the other hand have told my church authorities the truth about the church's history not only regarding their racism but their misogyny, preaching for filthy lucre and various other false doctrines. Rather than await excommunication I chose to resign. I essentially excommunicated the church.

So yes, as I learned and evolved I did what I considered the right thing.

I guess Mitt is just a little slower. Or maybe he loves the honor of men in the church more than he cares to open the box that contains all the dirty little truths that would force him to make a decision between a love of truth and loyalty to a corrupt organization.

I appreciate your calling me out on my immaturity at 23 years of age. As I said, quite openly, I got in line on the priesthood restriction like everyone else, even when I had the nagging idea that it was wrong. I apologise.

Just out of curiosity I'm wondering (since we're being so honest here) have you had your name removed from the records of the church yet? You seem very brave.

On second thought, don't feel obligated to answer that. It's really not my concern.

wtfluff, you should probably not respond to this, bro.

Palerider, I love your passion and your love of truth. I rather dislike this... my kids would call it flexing... of your resignation. It's unlike you to do it.

[Palerider]

wtfluff, you should probably not respond to this, bro.

Palerider, I love your passion and your love of truth. I rather dislike this... my kids would call it flexing... of your resignation. It's unlike you to do it.

Reuben, I respectfully disagree. When Wtfluff calls my integrity into question as he/she does in the following quote, I feel I have the right to defend myself:

"So what I see in the rest of the thread is you calling Romney out for not living up to a "standard" that you didn't live up to yourself." Wtfluff

How else would you manifest to someone that you did indeed stand up to the church when someone accuses you of cowardice?

Call it "flexing" or whatever you like, I don't care. But Wtfluff needs to know he/she won't be permitted to characterize me as a coward or hypocrite without some deserved blowback.

ETA: There are numerous people who frequent this website who for various reasons are unable to sever ties with the church. I have never inferred to them that they are cowards for not formally leaving the church.

[moksha]

I still feel bad that Governor George Romney was penalized for saying he had been brainwashed on Vietnam. Everyone had. The Pentagon and CIA were lying about the numbers and even why we were in the war. Imagine those Vietnamese sampans armed with Chinese whizbangs and bottle rockets attacking an America battle cruiser? What an absurd idea.

Anyway, this thread is about Mitt and his march, so are you trying to hijack it or something, Moksha?!!!

[Not Buying It]

Instead of doing something with real substance that might risk his church standing, he makes symbolic jestures that have no downside.

His other option was to sit on his ass and scowl at protesters along with his Republican colleagues. Marching in a rally is a symbolic gesture by everyone who participates and, regardless of past evils, I'm glad he made the gesture.

As I said earlier regarding Romney, better late than never.

I don't see any Republicans scowling at protesters. Peaceful protest is a God-given right which also is enumerated in our Constitution. I do see some significant consternation (and rightly so) over rioters and looters who look for any pretence to destroy and create havoc. It certainly doesn't help the cause that peaceful protesters are attempting to advance.

I've seen plenty of people of that political persuasion lumping all peaceful protestors in with the rioters and looters. I had a rather intense exchange over social media with one such individual who claimed that as soon as one person broke a store window a protest became a riot, everyone was guilty, and he was excited for federal troops to come in and bash heads in. Most I've encountered are less extreme, but yes, there has been scowling.

You are correct that the rioters and looters don't help the cause - but trust me, the scowling and tut-tutting over peaceful protesting is happening.

[wtfluff]

Sigh... Here I go again.

How else would you manifest to someone that you did indeed stand up to the church when someone accuses you of cowardice?

At no point anywhere in this thread did I accuse you of cowardice.

I simply spent way too much time politely hinting at what looks like bit of hypocrisy in your accusations of what Romney "should have done." And yes, eventually I just bluntly pointed out what I saw.

And no, at no point did I use the word hypocrisy, but there I go, sticking my foot in my mouth again.

Do you not see any hypocrisy at all in your statements?

ETA: There are numerous people who frequent this website who for various reasons are unable to sever ties with the church. I have never inferred to them that they are cowards for not formally leaving the church.

Have you not accused Romeny of being a coward?

That's OK because he doesn't "frequent this website?"

What am I not seeing here?

Why am I such an idiot?



EDIT: And while I'm continuing my idoicy: No, I have not resigned. I'd love to, but at this point, my resignation would cause massive amounts of damage to my believing family members, and basically no damage whatsoever to the Corporation™. How's that for cowardice?

wtfluff, you should probably not respond to this, bro.

Sorry Bro. I've failed, yet again. Cronus knows that's one thing I'm good at.

BLM-Yeah.jpg (7.81 KiB) Viewed 5287 times

[Palerider]

I've seen plenty of people of that political persuasion lumping all peaceful protestors in with the rioters and looters.

And it would be wrong to do so. Lumping them all together is just wrong.

However if one was in the midst of a peaceful protest and anarchists were in the mix, we would expect those who were there peaceably to condemn and discourage the rioters. If they just look on gleefully or as wet Willy's it would be difficult not to assume they consent to or approve of the behavior.

[Palerider]

What am I not seeing here?

Why am I such an idiot?

I can't help you here.


So I think I'm done.