And, we have another volunteer named Colofornian, who joins Elsie and Tennessee Nana in an anti-Mormon smear campaign. As this isn't a debate about the facts, but rather pointing that this behavior is loathsome, boorish and reprehensible; I have also pointed out, that such behavior could become even actionable.
I would be as delighted as the next person here to see Mitt Romney defeated quickly and handily, but this campaign of trashing Mormonism to trash him is below contempt, below our standards and has no place on FR. I am no stranger to religious intolerance, bigotry and libelous statements. If I expect folks to say no to words like Christ Killer, or crap like that, then letting you call people child rapists and then associate that with Glenn or Mitt as a reason to hate these people. It is not acceptable.
Calling me a liberal because I use words you don't like is laughable. That is ok, bizarre but what ever floats your boat. I leave it to the readers to make up their own mind whether using the word animus automatically makes a person a liberal. :)
It is not an ad hominem attack to state that someone is posting libelous attacks and expressing pure religious bigotry on this site. Or when people have a pattern of hijacking threads with inappropriate or off topic posts. Such as Glenn Beck is a Mormon, lets trash Mormons. This tread was about Presidential Candidates traveling to Israel to attend an event. There are other threads where a discussion like this may be appropriate, but here it was not, and under any circumstances, Tennessee Nana's post was inappropriate.
Please take time to read the rules of the road around here. They are posted on the very first page, the home page.
Please enjoy our forum, but also please remember to use common courtesy when posting and refrain from posting personal attacks, profanity, vulgarity, threats, racial or religious bigotry, or any other materials offensive or otherwise inappropriate for a conservative family audience. Free Republic is a non-commercial site. Please do not post advertising, solicitations, spam or any other commercial messages. Do not spam us with links to your own site. No one likes spam.
Free Republic is a site dedicated to the concerns of traditional grassroots conservative activists. We're here to discuss and advance our conservative causes in a more or less liberal-free environment. We're not here to debate liberals. We do not want our pages filled with their arrogant, obnoxious, repugnant bile. Liberals, usurpers, and other assorted malcontents are considered unwelcome trolls on FR and their accounts and or posts will be summarily dismissed at the convenience of the site administrators.
Free Republic does not advocate or condone racism, violence, rebellion, secession, or an overthrow of the government. Free Republic advocates a return to constitutionally limited government, reserving all government powers not expressly delegated by the constitution to the United States to the States respectively, or the people, emphasizing sovereign state governments, local government, self-government and self-rule, while restricting government powers to only those enumerated in the constitution and maximizing individual rights and liberty as originally envisioned and established by our Founding Fathers and secured and defended by the blood of patriots and statesmen for over two hundred years.
I would be as delighted as the next person here to see Mitt Romney defeated quickly
____________________________________________
Well lets see kid
Using your very own logic
Mitt Romney is a Mormon
Only a bigot would not vote for a Mormon
Only an anti-Mormon would not vote for a Mormon
Only someone who hated mormons would not vote for Mitt
Therefore....
BTW Gov Sarah Palin is NOT a Mormon
“We’re not here to debate liberals. We do not want our pages filled with their arrogant, obnoxious, repugnant bile. Liberals, usurpers, and other assorted malcontents are considered unwelcome trolls on FR and their accounts and or posts will be summarily dismissed at the convenience of the site administrators.”
I would think a second reading of this would be more than helpful to you. If it sounds like a duck sort of thingy....
AGAIN; you CHOOSE to personalize the perceived 'attack'.
It is mormonISM that gets 'smeared'; and that is done using it's OWN writings, teachings and Leaders.
That you CHOOSE to ignore the obvious, and FAIL to address the issue shows any lurkers that any basis for your claims are mighty tenuous at best.
Again; I really HATE when that happens!
52 And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, areceive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God.
53 For I am the Lord thy God, and ye shall obey my voice; and I give unto my servant Joseph that he shall be made ruler over many things; for he hath been afaithful over a few things, and from henceforth I will strengthen him.
54 And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and acleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be bdestroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law.
55 But if she will not abide this commandment, then shall my servant Joseph do all things for her, even as he hath said; and I will bless him and multiply him and give unto him an ahundredfold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children, and crowns of beternal lives in the eternal worlds.
56 And again, verily I say, let mine handmaid aforgive my servant Joseph his trespasses; and then shall she be forgiven her trespasses, wherein she has trespassed against me; and I, the Lord thy God, will bless her, and multiply her, and make her heart to brejoice.
I'm sure glad that MORMONism never had ANY of these things found about it!!!
Please take the time, dalight, to read the line right at the top of your ping page -- a line Elsie has also emphasized:
Welcome to Free Republic! America's exclusive site for GOD, Family, Country, LIFE & LIBERTY constitutional conservative activists!
First of all, wanna tell us why something our site hosts have emphasized as defining what this site is...stressing God...is somehow "out of bounds" per your opinion?
The way you tell it, people shouldn't focus on the one true God and identifying his rival false gods on a Web site billed as an "exclusive site" for Him!
(IOW, the Ultimate ONE God...not the man-became-god...getting the "god-job" of Mormonism after having been appointed by a "council of gods"...as part of a belief system where all True-believing temple Mormons join the swelling god ranks)
Also, note the word "life." Physical life, yes. But simple existence alone isn't the to-be-embraced "life" as heaven sees it. Jesus said in John 10 that the purpose He came for was so that we might have life -- and to have it abundantly. He also told a man who wanted to bury his father in Luke 9 to "let the dead bury the dead." IOW, to let the spiritually dead bury the physical dead.
And then, of course, liberty. Why create a land of liberty like America, only for people to become bogged down in slavery to porn, lust, gambling addictions, entitlement addictions, etc. Jesus came to deliver people from their bondage to sin, bondage to fears, bondage to Satan, etc.
We will eventually want the real Dalight to stand up.
Is it the Dalight of post #39?
Bigotry is when you lose ALL perspective between understanding a person's character and lump them into a group. (Dalight, post #39)
Or, is it the Dalight of post #92, when she lumped several posters together into a group as having made certain statements:
If I expect folks to say no to words like Christ Killer, or crap like that, then letting YOU CALL people child rapists and then associate that with Glenn or Mitt as a reason to hate these people. (Dalight, post #92)
More ad hominen...this type using your "lumping several posters into a group" tactic, which you earlier defined as "bigotry."
(Is this more of your "bigotry for thee but not for me" approach?)
Since when have I labeled anybody a "child rapist?" But don't let that stop you from using the "you" word in referencing me to that comment.
This latest comment shows your twisted two-facedness again:
(a) Posts #39 & #92: If you perceive a poster "lumping" people "into a group"...they've supposedly failed to distinguish "a person's character" and the group -- and have apparently lost "ALL perspective" and are therefore guilty of "bigotry."
By your own admission you have failed to distinguish character among individual posters and see fit to lump us into an "anti-Mormon" group based upon statements not made by the group!
But when you do this exact same thing, no self-confessions arise from your keyboard that you are that "bigot" you've self-defined!
(b) Post #33:
You claimed there that "When someone attacks folks based on the criteria that they are a Mormon or a Jew or even a Muslim alone we call that bigotry. This is not part of rational discussion."
Yet what have your ongoing attacks vs. Tennessee Nana on this thread revealed?
It seems your attacks against Nana have been based upon one thing: Her religious comments about Mormons. So you've launched your "attacks...based on the criteria that they are" perceived anti-"Mormon."
If somebody is using solo criteria to critique, it seems you are saying...that's intolerable ("bigotry"). Yet it seems you likewise are using solo criteria -- only instead of "anti-Mormonism" it's your "anti-anti-Mormonism"...(Once again, you define yourself as being guilty of bigotry -- by your very own personal standards)
Wanna explain your religious license to be intolerant (bigoted) toward Tennessee Nana's (& other posters') religious beliefs? Why are you accorded freedom to exercise a solo criteria of an "anti-anti" position???...but an "anti" position comes under your condemnation?
Why isn't that so obvious to you (& all) that you are being two-faced on this?
(c) Then you claimed in post #33 that "I will not do it by BASHING someone for their faith. And, you shouldn't either." And yet what have you been doing throughout this entire thread but to bash & critique the deeply held religious beliefs of others? TN Nana's comments are religiously-based, are they not? And you've openly criticized her...and now you've criticized my religious beliefs as well. (May I remind you that "criticize," is another for "bash?") Which means you've bashed her and others. You've bashed our religious views.
I'll say it again: I always love it when a religious elitist comes on board these threads, gives "thou shalt" edicts like "Thou shalt not bash somebody else's faith" -- all after they've just bashed comments from other poster's religious faith.
So what do we do? Believe your "thou shalt" pulpit edicts? Or what you actually practice?
(d) And then we have yet another angle on this same comment you made above in post #39...further reinforcing your ripe inconsistencies: Bigotry is when you lose all perspective between understanding a person's character and lump them into a group. We are reasonably cautious about folks who belong to faiths like Mormonism especially when you consider some of the things in their teachings.
Why...we would think that if you don't like lumping religious folks into a group that you would have been even more prevalent on FR over the past decade, playing Superman to the Muslims due to the constant posts that tend to lump all Muslims into one group. Right?
Wrong-o, boy-o.
Here we might expect some consistency on this. Yet when asked, "On how many of those threads did you enter therein, and proceed to accuse 1-2 posters of being "bigoted?"
Thousands of such threads?
Hundreds?
Dozens?
A handful?
None? (Except this thread?)...
(I rec'd no response from you on this Q)
Rather inconsistent, aren't you? Here you've had a vast array of FREEPER posters at your very disposal that you could have elected to lecture re: your "thou shalts" about lumping a religious group together. Right? But no. Once again, it seems you utterly fail to apply evenly your lecture circuit tour.
Tell you what: I think right now you are tied for setting the FREEPER Religion section record for most two-faced comments in a single thread! (We just need one more from you to own the record all by yourself!)
(Jim, is this what we really want @ FR? Instead of sound debate, we have posters like dalight implying going after FREEPERS with "actionable" legal action. Post #162 & others have mentioned "libel.")
Is this what FR is becoming with certain posters? They'll muscle into Romney threads...start dropping legal action hints and implied threats left and right in an attempt to get posters to not say anything negative long run about Mitt Romney?
Do we want such trollish posters trying to put such a squeeze on FR posters? (I don't think so)