posted
Is there a way to ignore Hitoshi? There is a one track mind that gets in the way of every single conversation on Mormonism (and I think every other conversation I have read) that exists. You don't like Mormons because of the position the Church holds on gays. WE GET IT ALREADY!
err....yes. You don't pay attention to them. Was this a trick question?
I think Hitoshi contributed to this and other threads, but if you disagree, you are certainly free to ignore him. It's not difficult.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I long and yearn for an "ignore" button that I could use for specific posters, but alas, there is presently no such function. Maybe in the new forum.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ignore functions would make controversial topics VERY hard to comprehend as people would wonder why theirs posts are being ignored or why certain people did not respond to a post directed to them.
I would be strongly against an ignore funtion.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would love an ignore button, too. I think it would work just fine, and improve the level of discourse greatly. One thing I've seen on hatrack for a long time, and the main reason I no longer participate much in serious threads, is that we start to discuss some interesting topic, then someone comes in and acts like a jerk. The thing that happens next is that the interesting respectful conversation get completely derailed by people responding to the jerkiness, even if respectfully, and then it's even worse if other people act jerky in response to the original jerkiness. I hate that.
Yet for some reason, people just aren't able to continue the high-level, respectful-even-though-deeply-opinionated, positive and fruitful exchange of ideas and feelings and thoughts. Instead it degnerates into lots of people acting jerky.
We've been able to do it sometimes over the years on hatrack. We've been able to discuss highly charged, deeply felt issues with consideration, respect, and a shared assumption that everyone has a right to their opinion, and that everyone's motives are good, and that we all are intelligent and mean well. Discussions like that are wonderful things, and the more wonderful for the fact that they're so rare.
I think an "ignore" button (ignore list) would be a great boon to intelligent, rational, sane, and high-level discourse on hatrack. I would love to give it a try. Is there any forum software that lets you do that?
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: How do you figure that? Most of his essays regarding social issues, such as gay marriage or abortion, seem quite heavily influenced by his religious views.
I should clarify that I am impressed that OSC is able to divorce "political affiliation" from religion. He makes a distinction that neither party does or should represent a religion. That impresses me because I am sick of hearing about the "Christian Right," and I disagree with the concept.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: I get the parallels but not the irony. Unless you consider that OSC speaks for all Mormons. He doesn't.
I suppose I have an odd sense of humor then. And yes, I know he doesn't.
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: Is there a way to ignore Hitoshi? There is a one track mind that gets in the way of every single conversation on Mormonism (and I think every other conversation I have read) that exists. You don't like Mormons because of the position the Church holds on gays. WE GET IT ALREADY! next . . .
I think it says more about you than it does about me that you explode into an annoyed anger because I focus my writing on a topic that's both personal and one tat I feel passionately about. And please stop putting words in my mouth. I don't "[dis]like Mormons because of the position the Church holds on gays." I dislike anyone, of any religion, that looks down on me because of who I am. You don't like people who write according to a single issue they are personally affected by. I get it. I suppose I should this means that because I don't write about a multitude of subjects I don't really care as much about, I'm a waste of space on this forum. Am I understanding your statement correctly?
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky:
quote:Is there a way to ignore Hitoshi?
err....yes. You don't pay attention to them. Was this a trick question? I think Hitoshi contributed to this and other threads, but if you disagree, you are certainly free to ignore him. It's not difficult.
Thank you, Squick. Occ, as Squick said, you're free to ignore anything I write. I'm not forcing, or even asking, that anyone read what I write. It's a public internet forum after all; it exists primarily as a discussion area in which anyone can throw in their two cents and have it ignored or discussed further. Of course, I disagree withthe idea of ignoring someone merely because they say soemthing that annoys us or goes against our beliefs. It may not be fun to read, but it's rather pointless to go to a discussion forum where you block out everyone you disagree with, eh?
quote:Originally posted by lem:
quote: How do you figure that? Most of his essays regarding social issues, such as gay marriage or abortion, seem quite heavily influenced by his religious views.
I should clarify that I am impressed that OSC is able to divorce "political affiliation" from religion. He makes a distinction that neither party does or should represent a religion. That impresses me because I am sick of hearing about the "Christian Right," and I disagree with the concept.
Ah, ok, thanks for the clarification. In that case, I do agree with you. Posts: 208 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:At any rate, the reason I said it in the first place was a generalization to make the point that Romney and some Mormons are trying to be accepted as a non-heretical religion by Evangelicals, and Romney as a competent person no matter his personal beliefs. I find this ironic because it's exactly what minorities, like gays, have been trying to do too.
Here's the thing: everyone already gets that gays can be competent people. It is not in dispute. It is possible to disagree with one activity that someone does without believing him or her to be incompetent. Where did that even come from?
The Romney/LDS thing is a good illustration. Romney's supporters (a group that is not the same as "Mormons") are not trying to convince evangelicals that LDS is not heretical by evangelical standards (it is, by those standards). They just want people to believe that he would be a good President. There is a difference between accepting everything about someone and hiring him, and a good thing too or none of us would have jobs.
Posts: 544 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:everyone already gets that gays can be competent people.
That's not true. OSC himself wrote that their dark secret is how many of them are victims of sexual abuse, trapped in a lifestyle that they hate by the consequences of this and has compared them wanting to obtain legal marriages as children playing dress up in their parents clothes and said that they want this because they have been deluded into thinking that it will gain them something.
That's a whole mess of acusations of incompetence in some important areas leveled at a whole group of people.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: Ignore functions would make controversial topics VERY hard to comprehend as people would wonder why theirs posts are being ignored or why certain people did not respond to a post directed to them.
I would be strongly against an ignore funtion.
[Done properly, I think this is avoidable. If a person on your ignore list posts, you would see:
with options to enable or disable your ignore list in a given thread or globally. That said, I'm not a fan of ignore lists because I've seen their use degenerate to "La la la la, we're ignoring you!" and other playground antics, but hey, it works in some places.]
quote:everyone already gets that gays can be competent people.
That's not true. OSC himself wrote that their dark secret is how many of them are victims of sexual abuse, trapped in a lifestyle that they hate by the consequences of this and has compared them wanting to obtain legal marriages as children playing dress up in their parents clothes and said that they want this because they have been deluded into thinking that it will gain them something.
That's a whole mess of acusations of incompetence in some important areas leveled at a whole group of people.
Perhaps so but that is not one of them. I did not read that article but what you quoted suggested that gay people have a problem, not that they are incompetent. It is possible to have a problem and be competent, and that is a good thing too, or we would all be incompetent.
Posts: 544 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
" It may not be fun to read, but it's rather pointless to go to a discussion forum where you block out everyone you disagree with, eh?"
Its not about disagreeing. It is about hearing a broken record that seems to send every discussion into the same track, even when it never was going in that direction. It comes close to trolling.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:everyone already gets that gays can be competent people.
That's not true. OSC himself wrote that their dark secret is how many of them are victims of sexual abuse, trapped in a lifestyle that they hate by the consequences of this and has compared them wanting to obtain legal marriages as children playing dress up in their parents clothes and said that they want this because they have been deluded into thinking that it will gain them something.
That's a whole mess of acusations of incompetence in some important areas leveled at a whole group of people.
Perhaps so but that is not one of them. I did not read that article but what you quoted suggested that gay people have a problem, not that they are incompetent. It is possible to have a problem and be competent, and that is a good thing too, or we would all be incompetent.
Ah, ok, I think I see your point. The only footnote is that any personal, non-mainstream beliefs do become qualifiers for one's competency in any political arena; a Muslim, woman, black, etc. person running for any office has that characteristic used to judge their competency when they run for office, but not as a regular human being.
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: " It may not be fun to read, but it's rather pointless to go to a discussion forum where you block out everyone you disagree with, eh?"
Its not about disagreeing. It is about hearing a broken record that seems to send every discussion into the same track, even when it never was going in that direction. It comes close to trolling.
I was pointing out a parallel I saw between minorities downplaying their minority status (you will notice I included other minorities, yes?) and the problems Romney faces with trying to downplay the importance of his Mormon beliefs in his ability to be a good President. This was still on topic. It's not as though I came into a topic about favorite colors and began ranting.
If it is trolling, then I leave it up to the mods to decide as they see fit how to handle it.
Posts: 208 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I noticed the group of minorities the first time you posted. Didn't comment on that. The second time you posted was a theme you have repeated often and noticed that was the direction you were going to take.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think an ignore function would be great although I would not use it for anyone posting on this thread so far.
Posts: 544 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Romney does have kind of a dilemma, because he belongs to a church that is not concerned about entering the Christian mainstream or advancing its views by getting people into political office. Romney knows he'll never receive any kind of official backing from the LDS church. And even if he did manage to get the majority of Mormons to vote for him, that wouldn't carry him very far. I imagine he wants to separate himself from the church a bit so he doesn't become a one-plank candidate, on a plank that won't get him very far.
All power to him if he can do that smoothly. But I sincerely hope he doesn't try to convince people that his religion isn't influencing how he thinks and acts as a politician.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by advice for robots: All power to him if he can do that smoothly. But I sincerely hope he doesn't try to convince people that his religion isn't influencing how he thinks and acts as a politician.
IMO, both his desire to double the size of Guantanamo Bay and endorsement of 'enhanced interrogation techniques' indicate that he is able to stop his religion from influencing his political positions.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think this media discussion with Richard Bushman is a must read! Him and Terryl Givens are my current Mormon intellectual heroes. I love reading and listening to them.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I think that Jack Chick summed up mormons pretty well. That man sure does have a handle on things! I wonder what he has to say about Catholicism.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Brian J. Hill: Trying to figure out what Romney believes based on what other Mormons have said in the past, or the present, is foolish.
Trying to figure out what Romeny believes based on what HE says in the past, or the present is foolish.
Posts: 87 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
