Well, let's see, who have I "attacked" here?
I've called this Mormon dad a "perp" -- per the allegations of his daughters, whom I'm sure have thought of worst names than that for him.
(Does that make these female victims "anti-Mormon," too?)
ALL: We can see one thing here: PD feels the need to rise to the defense of this perpetrator? Why, PD?
Obviously, by labeling this as an "anti-Mormon" thread, you've already determined that you need to protect the group identity of this perpetrator.
Rather than choosing the angle of defense as "Well, he's just an isolated individual who claims he's 'Mormon,' you've obviously included him as part of the group that you apparently now concede that this story is about." (Otherwise, why rise to defend the group?)
Nobody else even need argue the point that this man's first identity is Mormon; PD has already established that concession of a foundation for us.
Well, let’s see, who have I “attacked” here?
Puleeze. Take the almost daily onslaught into account. I suspect you might think so but I assure you I am not stupid.
PD feels the need to rise to the defense of this perpetrator?
I did nothing of the sort. This time or the last time you accused me of it. Shame on you for such underhanded and blatant nasty tactics.
Your obsessiveness is glaring again.