That statement along with “...lying anti-mormons...” is considered appropriate whilst the following will surely be deleted again...
Instead of using more accurate terms or words like “church critic”, the word “anti-” is used as it relates to the mormons as a people, “anti-mormon”. That it is a personal prejudice. To draw parallels to many “anti-” [such as anti-semitism] pogroms from the past and unfortunately, in some areas of the world today.
It’s an incendiary word that is already loaded with negative connotations that arouses in people a reflexive response that is neither necessary or relevant, almost feral in nature.
To elicit a sympathy response from an outsider who may or may not understand what has actually been said in previous discussions, only reflexive outrage.
“Propaganda”, “attacker”, “misrepresent”, “twist”, etc. all fall into the same category.
The obstinate and childish nature becomes evident when the poster is confronted. The projection begins, the revision of comments and quotes, the “lols”, etc. All in an attempt to present himself as above the “fray”, better than the opposition because he’s attempting to claim the moral high ground.