(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

lottelita
2007-06-21 05:16 am UTC (link)

The reading comprehension is not strong here tonight.

FLDS != LDS. But pretending that FLDS doesn't exist because LALALALALA THE NICE MORMONS DON'T WANT IT TO is absurd. Is it separate from the mainline Church? Of course it is. But it does exist, and it is part of Joseph Smith's legacy.

Regarding the Gibsons -- unless the Pope excommunicates someone, that person is Catholic. And millions of practicing Catholics have major issues with Vatican II and still receive communion. Sounds pretty Catholic to me.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	mindset 2007-06-21 05:54 am UTC (link)
	you're doing this on purpose, aren't you. :( (Reply to this)(Parent)

puipui
2007-06-21 06:05 am UTC (link)

So... if I just went out and bought some communion wafers, and then rented out a big building and hired somebody to feed me said wafers every Sunday while throwing some Latin around, and I called myself Catholic, then I would be Catholic? Even though I wouldn't be affiliated with the actual really-and-truly Roman Catholic church at all? Because that's essentially what Mel Gibson has done, and it sounds pretty Catholic to you. And you are, of course, the final arbiter of that kind of thing, as opposed to the actual people who are actually part of the actual religion.

I understand what you're trying to get at, here, I think, something along the lines of the "you don't get to call other people not Christian just because they do something you don't like" argument, it sounds like, and that's a totally valid argument when used correctly, but I don't think you quite understand that what you're saying sounds more like "you don't get to call other people not Amish just because they drive sports cars and wear lots of bling and like to play first-person shooter games".

Torturing Jews and burning witches are part of Catholicism's legacy, as you put it, but I can pretty much guarantee that if a group came to light that called themselves Fundamentalist Catholic that encouraged Jew-torturing and witch-burning just like in the olden days, the Roman Catholic church would be the first to yell "Not Catholic!" and anyone who disagreed with them would be idiots to do so. It's this thing that religion does where it grows and evolves and changes over time, obviously you haven't heard of it.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	puipui 2007-06-21 06:10 am UTC (link)
	if a group came to light that called themselves Fundamentalist Catholic that encouraged Jew-torturing and witch-burning just like in the olden days Note: This may, in fact, be exactly what Mel Gibson's wacky cult thingie does, I'm not entirely sure. Are they sedevacantists? Conclavists? I have no idea. (Reply to this)(Parent)

lottelita
2007-06-21 06:23 am UTC (link)

And you are, of course, the final arbiter of that kind of thing, as opposed to the actual people who are actually part of the actual religion.

The people who actually part of the actual religion -- like, you know, the Vatican -- hasn't excommunicated Mel Gibson. Sounds like he's Catholic to them, so it sounds like he's Catholic to me.

I don't think you quite understand that what you're saying sounds more like "you don't get to call other people not Amish just because they drive sports cars and wear lots of bling and like to play first-person shooter games".

I don't think it sounds like that at all. That's the lovely thing about communication, though: I say one thing, you hear another, we pretend we're sixth-graders, fun for the whole family.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

puipui
2007-06-21 06:41 am UTC (link)

The people who actually part of the actual religion -- like, you know, the Vatican -- hasn't excommunicated Mel Gibson. Sounds like he's Catholic to them, so it sounds like he's Catholic to me.

Actually, if you had even bothered looking into the "Traditionalist Catholic" issue at all, you... oh, fuck it. Clearly you are going to be at this all night, because you are just that stupid, and you truly believe that everyone else has all the reading comprehension and communication problems here, when, in fact, it all comes down to you. I would be better off trying to explain this shit to my cat's ass that to you, as it would make more of an attempt to understand.

Are you always this much of a douche? No, really, be honest, are you?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

lottelita
2007-06-21 06:47 am UTC (link)

Yes, I'm a douche because I'm responding specifically to your arguments. I'm fully aware of the issues of excommunication surrounding the Traditionalist Catholics, but you're the one who insists on name-dropping Mel Gibson every other sentence, so I'm playing along and talking about him. But if you'd prefer to pretend you said something else, so you look smarter and I look dumber, be my guest. I hear comment deletion helps that along quite nicely.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	puipui 2007-06-21 06:49 am UTC (link)
	so you look smarter and I look dumber That's not hard. I hear comment deletion helps that along quite nicely. Something got deleted during this conversation? Or was that the imaginary conversation in your head that's apparently moving in ways that are entirely different than this one? (Reply to this)(Parent)

	puipui 2007-06-21 06:45 am UTC (link)
	PS: MORMONS HAVE BEEN EXCOMMUNICATING PEOPLE WHO PRACTICE POLYGAMY SINCE FUCKING 1904, YOU MORON. Even your fucking excommunication argument fails, you twat. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	lottelita 2007-06-21 06:48 am UTC (link)
	You're the one conflating the Catholicism issue with the Mormon one. I've said from minute one that polygamist FLDS sects are distinct from the mainline LDS church. Continue to mischaracterize my points at your leisure. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	puipui 2007-06-21 06:59 am UTC (link)
	I've said from minute one that polygamist FLDS sects are distinct from the mainline LDS church. And yet you say that they're still Mormon, and then go on to say that if the pope excommunicates someone then they're not Catholic. Continue to make absolutely no fucking sense at your leisure. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	lottelita 2007-06-21 07:04 am UTC (link)
	And yet you say that they're still Mormon Actually, I didn't say that. Anywhere. Not sure where you got that, but if you did, I see where your boggle is coming from. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

puipui
2007-06-21 07:28 am UTC (link)

You've been calling them LDS. LDS = Mormon. Yes, at one point, very deep into the conversation, you said that "FLDS != LDS" but at no point did you indicate that you were only calling them "Fundamentalist LDS" because that's what they might call themselves, and that you understand that they are not affiliated at all with the Mormon church and that people who are actually LDS find it extremely offensive when you lump those people in with them. And your response when told that they're not affiliated with the Mormon church was to say "But clearly fundamentalist LDS does exist. QED." when, well, no. It doesn't. It's possible that they call themselves that, but that's not actually what they are.

Wow. It has just occurred to me that you really and truly had no idea how offensive you were being. And I'm not even Mormon. That's... wow, that's just really damn impressive, right there.

Damn, I feel bad about calling you names, now. Like I just kicked a really dumb puppy or something. So sad!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) -

lottelita, 2007-06-21 01:50 pm UTC

(no subject) -

puipui, 2007-06-21 05:12 pm UTC

(no subject) -

tez, 2007-06-21 05:24 pm UTC

(no subject) -

lottelita, 2007-06-21 08:19 pm UTC

(no subject) -

mrbimble, 2007-07-01 04:00 pm UTC

	vito_excalibur 2007-06-21 02:00 pm UTC (link)
	Remember, it's pointless to argue on the Internets with a person who can't read. ~~Or think.~~ (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	lottelita 2007-06-21 02:10 pm UTC (link)
	But if I don't get the last word ... THE TERRORISTS HAVE WON. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	ecchaniz0r 2007-06-22 03:14 am UTC (link)
	lolfanpoodle (Reply to this)(Parent)

white_serpent
2007-06-21 04:39 pm UTC (link)

Could it be this?

Well, there is in fact a church calling itself the Fundamental Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and they haven't been struck down by Joseph Smith yet, so ...

Or maybe this?

But pretending that FLDS doesn't exist because LALALALALA THE NICE MORMONS DON'T WANT IT TO is absurd.

Because that implies it to me.

No one's denying this particular sect exists. You decided to make that jump all by yourself. You asked if using the FLDS name was kosher, and you were told "not really." Since then, you've apparently been trying to prove it's a perfectly okay term to use and no one should be offended.

So, why did you ask if it was kosher, again?

Part of the problem in using that term is that by doing so, you're also implying that all people who characterize themselves as "Mormon polygamists" are part of this specific breakaway sect, which is untrue.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	tez 2007-06-21 04:42 pm UTC (link)
	I love you. May I have your internet babies? (Reply to this)(Parent)

	lottelita 2007-06-21 08:24 pm UTC (link)
	You're right; I shouldn't have asked if it was kosher/accurate to call FLDS people FLDS. It clearly is accurate. If it offends someone, and might thus be thought of as "unkosher," so be it. Thank you for reminding me that not all polygamists who (claim to) follow in Smith's footsteps are FLDS. It is difficult to keep the wackos straight, lord knows. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	hearsawho 2007-06-21 09:59 pm UTC (link)
	Jesus. I can't even tell what the hell it is you're trying to argue anymore. (Reply to this)(Parent)

(no subject) -

ecchaniz0r, 2007-06-22 03:15 am UTC

(no subject) -

faultypremise, 2007-06-22 04:01 am UTC

rachel_pi
2007-06-22 01:29 am UTC (link)

It's entirely possible for a person to be excommunicated latae sententiae, which means that they incur the penalty of excommunication without any action being taken by ecclesiastical authorities. You can be automatically excommunicated for serious offences, including heresy, apostasy and spreading schism, or conspiring to do those things.

Mel Gibson is commonly regarded as a Sedevacantist, meaning that he believes the current pope, and indeed every pope since Vatican II, to be illegitimate. That can certainly be taken as spreading schism or as intended to deceive the faithful.

Although, you are technically sort of right, because an excommunicated Catholic is still nominally Catholic and can attend Mass, they just can't have communion.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

ladyvorkosigan
2007-06-21 11:43 am UTC (link)

Well, honestly, kind of, right? I mean, I guess people have different opinions on this, but I tend to identify people with what they self-identify as rather than what another branch of the religion identifies them as. Which doesn't excuse one from knowing the doctrinal differences between groups, but . . . otherwise the policing problem is too hard (THIS group gets to call themselves Christians, and THIS group gets to call themselves Muslims, but THIS group doesn't). Again, of course there are differences, and I know that some groups don't consider various offshoot groups to be the religion they identify as, but using the terms people self-identify as while being aware of underlying differences still seems fairest to me.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

ladyvorkosigan
2007-06-21 11:47 am UTC (link)

(I should add that the reason this seems fair to me is because, while I understand why Mormons hate people associating them all with polygamists, there are an awful lot of cases where it's the reverse - where one group splits off from another over some issue that we're more sympathetic too, like the rights of women or gay people, and if we always go with what the established central church says we then have to start saying "Well, you don't get to call yourself X branch of Christianity; the central people say so," and it equally doesn't seem right to start judging the reasons for these splits).

(Reply to this)(Parent)

airawyn
2007-06-22 10:47 pm UTC (link)

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!"

"Why shouldn't I?" he said.

I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!"

He said, "Like what?" I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?"

He said, "Religious." I said, "Me too! Are you Christian or Buddhist?"

He said, "Christian." I said, "Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?"

He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?"

He said, "Baptist!"

I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?"

He said, "Baptist Church of God!"

I said, "Me too! Are you Original Baptist Church of God, or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God?"

He said,"Reformed Baptist Church of God!"

I said, "Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915?"

He said, "Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915!"

I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off.

-- Emo Phillips

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	puipui 2007-06-22 10:59 pm UTC (link)
	dies (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -