Yes, you are being evasive. You posted a link to a story about a homosexual activist group that is critical of the LDS Church, then refused to say whether you agree with their criticisms. If you did not want to discuss the content of the article, why link to it?
You are the one denying shunning by mormons when it is practiced daily against anyone who leaves the mormon church . . . .
In a religious context, shunning has a definite meaning. According to ReligiousTolerance.org, shunning is
. . . a method of disciplining or punishing a member who strays from the group's expected behavior or belief. Other members --often including friends and family -- are expected to have no contact with the shunned individual. In a high intensity faith group where a believer's entire support network is composed of fellow members, this can have disastrous consequences; some have been moved to commit suicide. Various forms of shunning are practiced by Amish, Jehovah's Witnesses, and other conservative religious groups as a means of forcing conformity of belief and behavior. Glossary of religious and spiritual terms, ReligiousTolerance.org
Hence, shunning is more than merely the avoidance of persons whom one finds annoying, unpleasant, or disagreeable.
Discipline in the LDS church can take the form of informal probation, formal probation, disfellowshipment, or (in the most serious cases) excommunication. Most Church discipline is conducted in private; rarely are disciplinary cases discussed publicly by Church leaders.
LDS Church discipline does not involve shunning. Even excommunicated persons are invited to participate in our public meetings (so long as they are not disruptive.) We always hope that the excommunicated person will repent and rejoin the Church.
Interestingly, the article you posted regarding the homosexual group Affirmation does not support the idea that the Church practices shunning. Quite the contrary:
"Above all, keep your lines of communication open," Elder Jeffrey R. Holland, of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, urged in a 2007 Ensign article. "Open communication between parents and children is a clear expression of love, and pure love, generously expressed, can transform family ties."
Apparently, Affirmation believes that the Church should do more "to reach out to Mormon families -- and their clergy -- and provide clearer direction on how to respond when a daughter, husband, wife or brother comes out as gay." That is a far cry from accusing the Church of shunning homosexuals.
. . . and building your straw man to avoid admitting that you lied when you said that mormons do NOT shun.
It is bad form to accuse people of lying simply because they disagree with you.
As always, the fall-back mormon position of "it's not official, therefore it doesn't happen", along with the particular mormon definition .
Shunning is often used as a pejorative term to describe any organizationally mandated disassociation, and has acquired a connotation of abuse and relational aggression. This is due to the sometimes extreme damage caused by its disruption to normal relationships between individuals, such as friendships and family relations. Disruption of established relationships certainly causes pain, which is at least an unintended consequence of the practices described here, though it may also in many cases be an intended, coercive consequence. This pain, especially when seen as unjustly inflicted, can have secondary general psychological effects on self-worth and self-confidence, trust and trustworthiness, and can, as with other types of trauma, impair psychological function.
Shunning often involves implicit or explicit shame for a member who commits acts seen as wrong by the group or its leadership. Such shame may not be psychologically damaging if the membership is voluntary and the rules of behaviour clear before the person joined. However, if the rules are arbitrary, the group membership seen as essential for personal security, safety, or health, or if the application of the rules are inconsistent, such shame can be highly destructive. This can be especially damaging if perceptions are attacked or controlled, or various tools of psychological pressure applied. Extremes of this cross over the line into psychological torture and can be permanently scarring.
A key detrimental effect of some of the practices associated with shunning relate to their effect on relationships, especially family relationships. At its extremes, the practices may destroy marriages, break up families, and separate children and their parents.
This Link for personal stories of mormon shunning.
It is bad form to accuse people of being evasive simply because they do not accept your insinuations that one holds a position based upon your own interpretation of one's actions. Am I to expect your next question to be "Have you stopped beating your wife"?
As one who has personally experienced the mormon version of shunning, your rationalizing and apologetics are ridiculous.
One has to wonder at the vehement response if, in fact, mormons do NOT practice shunning. BTW, a Google search produces this result Results 1 - 10 of about 855,000 for mormon shunning.
Yup...
Can't have MORMONs actually FOLLOWING what GOD said in D&C 132!