The Daily Universe -- Defending Proposition 8

[wuapinmon]

Without referencing your wife, Tim, it's a common expectation that marriage will cause a guy to "settle down" and not be so uppity. Hell, it even happened to Y'zGuy, and that guy was completely Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.

BS. The clear implication from what EJ said is that Tim needs some sexual release. "Settle down" might be your couples term for whatever it is that you do, but I don't think that the meaning is the same as what EJ implied.

Besides, it's an asshole thing to say. "Tim, come back and talk to us after you've gotten laid."

[wuapinmon]

We (and yes I include myself in the collective "we") can be a pissy bunch at times can't we.

I'm a mill pond, Doc.

[Tim]

Whether or not Red Sox asked for compassion, your reaction to him was not very becoming, and I'm hardly the first person in this thread to point that out.

Tim, since you and I became internet friends 7 or 8 years ago, I've treated you with respect and honestly cared about you and tried to give you moral support through your struggles with work, family and relationships and tried to rejoice with you with your successes.

Somewhere a few years ago, you obviously took a disliking to me, for whatever reason, but I can't think for the life of me what I could have done personally to you to warrant that. For a long time, I've tried to look past all of the stuff you said to me and behind my back, but no longer.

I don't want you to leave the church, but what I want is irrelevant. Take ownership of your faith and stop looking to make it contingent on things out of your control.

I want to respond to this. Indy, you don't treat me with respect. You don't treat anyone with respect. You put your personal orthodoxies on a pedestal that's higher than anything else on this board, and you inject those orthodoxies every time someone says something that sets off your "unorthodox meter." Take this very thread, for example. There's a bit of banter, a bit of back and forth between LA Ute and Eddie Jones and myself about Prop 8, and the moment I mention I suggest that I've had personal struggles to maintain my interest in being part of this church culture, you drop a bombshell out of nowhere. It's like a magnet for you. Someone says something unorthodox and IN SWOOPS INDY to protect God! And you're just so condescending when you do it. I mean, is it really cool to jump into the end of a two-page thread and have this be your first post on the matter? http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showpo...1&postcount=55 . You disrespect me and everyone else when you post that kind of thing.

I might be a dick to some people, I admit it, but usually when I realize what I'm saying I'm overcome with guilt and quickly move to apologize, sometimes in public and sometimes in private, and change my opinion of that person. You, however, are a dick to EVERYONE and you don't even realize it. You think that your black and white view is welcome and necessary in every conversation you can get your hands on. And now you try and suggest that somehow I've taken a disliking to you? Really? That sounds like the guy in Jerry McGuire who goes around saying controversial things and pissing everyone off, then whenever they call him on it he gets a dumbfounded look on his face and says, "What'd I say?" as if to suggest that he hadn't said anything wrong.

It's not that I went from liking you to disliking you. I still like you, Indy. Always have. It just becomes more and more difficult over time to keep up the desire to interact with people who constantly crap all over everything anyone says, then throw their shoulders up when they get called on it as if to suggest that they haven't done anything wrong.

Tim

[Tim]

Without referencing your wife, Tim, it's a common expectation that marriage will cause a guy to "settle down" and not be so uppity. Hell, it even happened to Y'zGuy, and that guy was completely Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.

I don't think I'm uppity. I'm a happy, loving person. I have indeed calmed down as an adult, not just in marriage.

[Tim]

Pot. Meet. Kettle.

Sorry, couldn't resist. I do find it ironic, though, that you probably did more cyberscreaming here than anyone else.

It's a question of method, RedSox. It's one thing to make a comment in the context of a thread in which you're talking to people. It's another thing to just inject your abrasive viewpoint and your broken record every time anyone in any thread says anything you disagree with.

[Moliere]

BS. The clear implication from what EJ said is that Tim needs some sexual release. "Settle down" might be your couples term for whatever it is that you do, but I don't think that the meaning is the same as what EJ implied.

Besides, it's an asshole thing to say. "Tim, come back and talk to us after you've gotten laid."

It was a lame joke that played on a similar (if not exact) joke from earlier in the thread. Maybe I shouldn't have posted it, but I did. Apologies have been made and accepted.

Just be thankful I didn't post any of the other jokes that I was mulling around in my head (yes, I do have a personal standard on what I post I probably crossed it this time and thanks to Tim I didn't go any farther).

[Indy Coug]

I want to respond to this. Indy, you don't treat me with respect. You don't treat anyone with respect. You put your personal orthodoxies on a pedestal that's higher than anything else on this board, and you inject those orthodoxies every time someone says something that sets off your "unorthodox meter." Take this very thread, for example. There's a bit of banter, a bit of back and forth between LA Ute and Eddie Jones and myself about Prop 8, and the moment I mention I suggest that I've had personal struggles to maintain my interest in being part of this church culture, you drop a bombshell out of nowhere. It's like a magnet for you. Someone says something unorthodox and IN SWOOPS INDY to protect God! And you're just so condescending when you do it. I mean, is it really cool to jump into the end of a two-page thread and have this be your first post on the matter? http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showpo...1&postcount=55 . You disrespect me and everyone else when you post that kind of thing.

I might be a dick to some people, I admit it, but usually when I realize what I'm saying I'm overcome with guilt and quickly move to apologize, sometimes in public and sometimes in private, and change my opinion of that person. You, however, are a dick to EVERYONE and you don't even realize it. You think that your black and white view is welcome and necessary in every conversation you can get your hands on. And now you try and suggest that somehow I've taken a disliking to you? Really? That sounds like the guy in Jerry McGuire who goes around saying controversial things and pissing everyone off, then whenever they call him on it he gets a dumbfounded look on his face and says, "What'd I say?" as if to suggest that he hadn't said anything wrong.

It's not that I went from liking you to disliking you. I still like you, Indy. Always have. It just becomes more and more difficult over time to keep up the desire to interact with people who constantly crap all over everything anyone says, then throw their shoulders up when they get called on it as if to suggest that they haven't done anything wrong.

Tim

The issue I take with isn't orthodoxy vs unorthodoxy, it's the repeated tactic that several members on this board take where if anyone has the temerity to disagree with their position that might be construed as anti-church then that disagreement is tantamount to 'pushing them out of the church'.

There is a certain level of hypocrisy on this board that people are free to disagree with what the church says and does (real or imagined), but that freedom of expression is not reciprocated -- at least not without being accused of trying to purge the membership.

The church that allows a few members in good standing to overstep the bounds of their stewardship is also the same church that allows members in good standing to congregate on the internet and openly mock the church and the level of their fellow members faith in it and its leadership.

[Tim]

The issue I take with isn't orthodoxy vs unorthodoxy, it's the repeated tactic that several members on this board take where if anyone has the temerity to disagree with their position that might be construed as anti-church then that disagreement is tantamount to 'pushing them out of the church'.

There is a certain level of hypocrisy on this board that people are free to disagree with what the church says and does (real or imagined), but that freedom of expression is not reciprocated -- at least not without being accused of trying to purge the membership.

The church that allows a few members in good standing to overstep the bounds of their stewardship is also the same church that allows members in good standing to congregate on the internet and openly mock the church and the level of their fellow members faith in it and its leadership.

You're suggesting in your paragraph, though, that what you're not being allowed to do is reciprocate. But what you do isn't reciprocate, Indy. You berate. This would be reciprocation:

Person A: I have an issue with the church along the lines of _____ and ____.
Person B: I don't have that issue. In fact, I have a strong testimony because of ___ and ___.

That would be reciprocation. Here's what you do, though:

Person A: I have a doubt with the church, and I struggle with members who make me feel guilty about that doubt.
Indy Coug: You're a pussy and you should just leave the church if you don't want to be here.

Do you see the difference? You talk about reciprocation of freedom of expression, but there's an incredible difference between freedom of expression of my religious beliefs and freedom of expression of how big of a pussy I think you are since I disagree with you. You only exercise the latter, but you think you're exercising the former.

And to suggest that it's only a "few" people overstepping the bounds of their stewardship shows how little you really know about your church and its members.

[Non Sequitur]

The issue I take with isn't orthodoxy vs unorthodoxy, it's the repeated tactic that several members on this board take where if anyone has the temerity to disagree with their position that might be construed as anti-church then that disagreement is tantamount to 'pushing them out of the church'.

There is a certain level of hypocrisy on this board that people are free to disagree with what the church says and does (real or imagined), but that freedom of expression is not reciprocated -- at least not without being accused of trying to purge the membership.

The church that allows a few members in good standing to overstep the bounds of their stewardship is also the same church that allows members in good standing to congregate on the internet and openly mock the church and the level of their fellow members faith in it and its leadership.

Who has ever denied your freedom of expression? When have you ever been censored? When people disagree with you they are not infringing on your freedom of expression, and when people disagree with the Church they are not necessarily mocking it.

[Indy Coug]

Person A: I have a doubt with the church, and I struggle with members who make me feel guilty about that doubt.

Indy Coug: You're a pussy and you should just leave the church if you don't want to be here.

Wrong. I have made it clear that you are in charge of your own spirituality and if you leave, it's because of decisions you have made. Whipping out the "you're trying to push me out the door" tactic is both transparently manipulative and patently false.

I don't have any interest in pushing you or anyone else out the door. It benefits neither me nor yourself.

[wally]

Hug it out bitches.

HUG IT OUT BITCHES!!!

[scottie]

I can't pull up the link anymore. I pulled it up last night. I'm wondering if the letter was pulled from the website.

The PDF version still has it (page 3): http://newnewsnet.byu.edu/pdf/du20100907.pdf

[LiveCoug]

Holy cow.. What the hell happened to this thread????

[Indy Coug]

And to suggest that it's only a "few" people overstepping the bounds of their stewardship shows how little you really know about your church and its members.

And I'm sure you have your finger on the pulse of the church well enough from Japan/Raleigh to know how many it really is?

[Jeff Lebowski]

I agree that I'm not above being corrected, but what makes you think you're in a position to correct me? Do you what the word is for people who think it's their place to correct/change/influence people who don't want to be corrected/changed/influenced by them? It's "bully."

Given the language you used as you went after RedSox earlier in this thread, you obviously have zero sense of irony.