[DelphiUser]

I'm a little confused since your post is not addressed to delphi user.

I was very careful in my speech.

How about this? "if you had such a revelation, you would be encouraging others to read it also and know it to be false. Hence your actions are not the same as your word"

Or this "Anyone who thinks I have called them a liar is deluded", or "If you think I am wrong you are." or even "Anti Mormons are often lairs and just don't know it."

This rule often results in wars of obfuscation, which can actually be quite fun for the linguistically gifted, whoever they are, the linguistically challenged however are often frustrated to the point of making gaffes and getting banned. (Run-on sentences help in keeping "it" impersonal.)

[Pan_Yans Wife]

DU

When someone sees something as personal, isn’t it up to that person to process what you say, and then they determine how they react to it?

Like your constant use of “anti’s”. You don’t see that as a slam, but it most definitely comes across as one. Many “anti’s” would retort in response that they aren’t “anti’s”; they are Christians.

Often on these threads the “saints” complain about being called Mormon and it is their processing of the emotional connotation that makes them claim it is a derogatory term.

When in fact, most Americans only know the term Mormon as in a member of the Mormon church... and they don’t know that you’d prefer to be called a “Latter-Day Saint”.

It appears that you want to have it both ways. You want to determine what is derogatory for you and not let another determine that for themselves.

[Elsie]

This rule often results in wars of obfuscation, which can actually be quite fun for the linguistically gifted, whoever they are, the linguistically challenged however are often frustrated to the point of making gaffes and getting banned.

Don't pick on poor, ol' R$&#^$%# now!