[Washi]

To them, it’s a bias against mormons if they get banned for overtly and deliberately lying, calling FReepers Nazis, stalking, attempting to implicate FReepers in murder, etc.

I'm sure that somewhere, someone knows what in the heck you are talking about, but you lost me.

[SZonian]

(Again, courtesy ping to JR...until he tells me to stop.)

I guess it depends on what end of the spectrum you’re coming from when attempting to paint someone as an “anti”.

For a mormon, anyone who vocally disagrees with their dogma, doctrine, etc. is an “anti”. A slur by my definition based on the construct of the term. Instead of anti-mormonism. It’s an attempt to make it a personal bias against any who are mormon, not the dogma.

Some mormons and their devout defenders claim bias when it was demonstrably something else.

I haven’t seen JR go hunting down mormons to ban them because he’s “anti-mormon”.

So, pray tell, how does his questioning of the 2 men qualify him as an “anti-mormon”?

[Elsie]

I'm sure that somewhere, someone knows what in the heck you are talking about, but you lost me.

We ANTI's (as we are lovingly called) have a LOOOONG history of battle here with MORMONs who do not like anyone to buck up against them.

Both sides are well aware of the references given.

[reaganaut]

Mormons in the past (one who have been banned) have directly on this site (particularly those who speak out against Mormonism) of...overtly and deliberately lying, calling FReepers Nazis, stalking, attempting to implicate FReepers in murder and other things.

Its a pattern on the RF.