Oaks goes hard on gender identity

The anything-goes forum for insults, board drama, and interpersonal conflicts. No moderation. Rated R to NC-17.
2kings98
CTR A
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:08 am

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by 2kings98 »

tapirrider wrote:
Lemmie wrote:this guy can post here about watching while a child died and watching while a woman was raped. He posted here that he could have stopped both, but he doesn't "believe" in that.

I suppose he doesn't believe this applies to him either:

"Stript, wounded, beaten nigh to death,
I found him by the highway side.
I roused his pulse, brought back his breath,
Revived his spirit, and supplied
Wine, oil, refreshment--he was healed.
I had myself a wound concealed,
But from that hour forgot the smart,
And peace bound up my broken heart."

"Then in a moment to my view
The stranger started from disguise.
The tokens in his hands I knew;
The Savior stood before mine eyes.
He spake, and my poor name he named,
"Of me thou hast not been ashamed.
These deeds shall thy memorial be;
Fear not, thou didst them unto me."

I don't know what that nonsense is, but it also does not apply to me.
----
The Church above all else, including family. I have disabled PM's and e-mails, because, quite frankly, the Internet is not for conversations and debating. It's for fighting. Simple as that.

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by Lemmie »

tapirrider wrote:
Lemmie wrote:this guy can post here about watching while a child died and watching while a woman was raped. He posted here that he could have stopped both, but he doesn't "believe" in that.

I suppose he doesn't believe this applies to him either:

"Stript, wounded, beaten nigh to death,
I found him by the highway side.
I roused his pulse, brought back his breath,
Revived his spirit, and supplied
Wine, oil, refreshment--he was healed.
I had myself a wound concealed,
But from that hour forgot the smart,
And peace bound up my broken heart."

"Then in a moment to my view
The stranger started from disguise.
The tokens in his hands I knew;
The Savior stood before mine eyes.
He spake, and my poor name he named,
"Of me thou hast not been ashamed.
These deeds shall thy memorial be;
Fear not, thou didst them unto me."

Excellent point, tapirrider. Not only did he not recognize those verses, but he called them nonsense. I've been out for more than 30 years and I recognize them, but he doesn't? He has no understanding of the Mormon religion at all. I'm guessing he just uses the name, for some reason. Not a good reason, given his nonsense, so in this case I feel sorry for whatever ward or branch he pretends to belong to. That has got to be an ugly situation.

2kings98
CTR A
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:08 am

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by 2kings98 »

Lemmie wrote:Excellent point, tapirrider. Not only did he not recognize those verses, but he called them nonsense. I've been out for more than 30 years and I recognize them, but he doesn't? He has no understanding of the Mormon religion at all. I'm guessing he just uses the name, for some reason. Not a good reason, given his nonsense, so in this case I feel sorry for whatever ward or branch he pretends to belong to. That has got to be an ugly situation.


Actually, I really haven't seen the crap you posted before. You've been out for thirty years, but I've been in for that long. I have a far better understanding of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saint's doctrine. Just because I don't recognize some random garbage (which you probably wrote to trick me) doesn't make that any less so.

I don't simply "use the name." Apart from the fact that I duck my calling as they, for some reason, won't release me, I serve well in my ward/branch (service projects, helping the missionaries, etc.) and I get along with most everyone but for the young man/woman/it trannie thing (I can't reward that sickness with kindness) and another dude because of a beef outside of church.

Just because someone doesn't walk in lockstep with your narrow-minded view of what a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should be, it does not mean that that person is not a member. But you have full knowledge of that.
----
The Church above all else, including family. I have disabled PM's and e-mails, because, quite frankly, the Internet is not for conversations and debating. It's for fighting. Simple as that.

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by Lemmie »

m crook wrote: Just because I don't recognize some random garbage (which you probably wrote to trick me)

The "random garbage" Michael Crook thinks was written to "trick" him is actually several verses of "A Poor Wayfaring Man of Grief."

For crook's edification:

"A Poor Wayfaring Man of Grief" was a favorite hymn of Joseph Smith, founder of the Latter Day Saint movement. The hymn was introduced in the church by apostle John Taylor, who learned the hymn in 1840 as a missionary in England.[1] Taylor included the hymn in the Latter Day Saints' Manchester Hymnal, which was used in England from 1840 to 1912. The hymn was also included in the church's 1841 hymnal published in Nauvoo, Illinois. Unlike the version in the Manchester Hymnal, the hymn in the Nauvoo hymnal included music composed by Taylor.[1] The hymn was originally written as a Christmas hymn.

On the afternoon that Joseph Smith and his brother, Hyrum, were killed by a mob in prison in Carthage, Illinois, the Smiths requested Taylor sing the hymn twice.[2]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Poor_ ... n_of_Grief

Cook's response?

Actually, I really haven't seen the crap you posted before

:rolleyes: in other words, you know nothing about the church you pretend to be a part of.
Last edited by Lemmie on Wed Oct 10, 2018 2:09 pm, edited 4 times in total.

2kings98
CTR A
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:08 am

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by 2kings98 »

Okay, you got me. Obscure text from an even more obscure, slow and boring hymn, an awful hymn that is almost never used. And once again, falsely claiming that I'm not a member of the Church isn't going to change anything, because the fact is that I've been a member for over thirty years. But whatever gets you through the night.

Also, I don't get the relevance of the passage you posted as pertains to this discussion.
----
The Church above all else, including family. I have disabled PM's and e-mails, because, quite frankly, the Internet is not for conversations and debating. It's for fighting. Simple as that.

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by Lemmie »

2kings98 wrote:Okay, you got me. Obscure text from an even more obscure, slow and boring hymn which is almost never used.

:rolleyes: obscure? :lol: :lol: if you attended church, you would know that A Poor Wayfaring Man of Grief is one of the most commonly used hymns, EVER. The fact that you don't recognize it explains everything about you and your claim to hold a TR.

2kings98
CTR A
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:08 am

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by 2kings98 »

Lemmie wrote: :rolleyes: obscure? :lol: :lol: if you attended church, you would know that A Poor Wayfaring Man of Grief is one of the most commonly used hymns, EVER. The fact that you don't recognize it explains everything about you and your claim to hold a TR.

Sigh. You must be r____. I've been in my current unit for seven years, and not once have we used that hymn, not in that time frame. In all my time since getting baptized as a child, I have only witnessed it being sung exactly twice, and even then it was five years apart, in two separate units.

So, no, it is NOT commonly used, except maybe in MoTard. I don't understand what the obsession is about my membership status. It just so happens that I am a member in good standing, but what if I weren't? What if I am, which I am? How does it affect YOUR life? Hmmm? Are you so ____ in the head that you jerk yourself off to learning whether someone's a member or not? Please just slit your wrists.
----
The Church above all else, including family. I have disabled PM's and e-mails, because, quite frankly, the Internet is not for conversations and debating. It's for fighting. Simple as that.

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by Lemmie »

In all my time since getting baptized as a child, I have only witnessed it being sung exactly twice, and even then it was five years apart, in two separate units.
So now you recognize it, after not recognizing it in 3 posts, and AFTER I gave you a link? Prior to that, you said this:
mcrook wrote:Actually, I really haven't seen the crap you posted before
You've proven once again you're a liar.

2kings98
CTR A
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:08 am

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by 2kings98 »

Lemmie wrote:You've proven once again you're a liar.


Not remembering is not lying. The last time I heard the hymn sung was in 2011, so I can't possibly be arsed to remember the lyrics, especially since I want to vomit with rage whenever I see it in the bulletin.

I am impressed with your gaslighting and behavior modification attempts, however. I suppose you remember each and every hymn, lyric for lyric, without the green book? Without the app? Without the words on the screen ala General Conference? No? Then go slit your wrists.
----
The Church above all else, including family. I have disabled PM's and e-mails, because, quite frankly, the Internet is not for conversations and debating. It's for fighting. Simple as that.

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by Lemmie »

2kings98 wrote:
Lemmie wrote:You've proven once again you're a liar.


Not remembering is not lying. The last time I heard the hymn sung was in 2011, so I can't possibly be arsed to remember the lyrics, especially since I want to vomit with rage whenever I see it in the bulletin.
so now it's "vomiting in rage" over something that 10 minutes ago you didn't even recognize and called "random crap." And not since 2011? So you don't attend sacrament meeting, then.

Keep piling on the lies.

Anyway, back to the topic. There has been a lot of pushback after Oaks' speech. Apparently, even Salt Lake City proper wasn't too thrilled by it.

User avatar
Maksutov
God
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 2:19 pm

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by Maksutov »

Between Oaks' doubling down on bigotry and Nelson's manifest dementia, things are looking up. :lol:
"God" is the original deus ex machina. --Maksutov

2kings98
CTR A
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:08 am

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by 2kings98 »

Lemmie wrote:so now it's "vomiting in rage" over something that 10 minutes ago you didn't even recognize and called "random crap." And not since 2011? So you don't attend sacrament meeting, then.

Keep piling on the lies.

Anyway, back to the topic. There has been a lot of pushback after Oaks' speech. Apparently, even Salt Lake City proper wasn't too thrilled by it.


Um, yes. I already told you that I didn't remember until you mentioned the supposed hymn (I remember music, not lyrics) and I went to verify. And yes, both the words and lyrics DO make me want to vomit with rage all over a pile of hymnals while the songwriter's descendants watch.

Again, I forgot, because it's such an ugly, slow, boring, awful hymn. The person who wrote it should be dragged out of his or her grave and killed again. Buried, dug up, killed again.

No lies. I attend SM most of the time, though the wife does allow me "bye" weeks. What with this new schedule coming 1 January, I will only attend 2nd/4th, because I don't do SS. Never have. BORING.

That written, the only people pushing back after Oaks' talk (not a speech, asshat) are, to anyone with common sense, devil worshipers and child molesters. He is a prophet and to not agree with him is to worship Lucifer.
----
The Church above all else, including family. I have disabled PM's and e-mails, because, quite frankly, the Internet is not for conversations and debating. It's for fighting. Simple as that.

User avatar
tapirrider
Holy Ghost
Posts: 893
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 2:10 am

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by tapirrider »

Lemmie wrote:Excellent point, tapirrider. Not only did he not recognize those verses, but he called them nonsense. I've been out for more than 30 years and I recognize them, but he doesn't? He has no understanding of the Mormon religion at all. I'm guessing he just uses the name, for some reason. Not a good reason, given his nonsense, so in this case I feel sorry for whatever ward or branch he pretends to belong to. That has got to be an ugly situation.


Yep. Its quite telling, and odd that some things like that song stay with me and still have deep and beautiful meaning, not because of Joseph Smith but because of the message.

Lemmie wrote:this guy can post here about watching while a child died and watching while a woman was raped. He posted here that he could have stopped both, but he doesn't "believe" in that.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJudAJMPBOo

2kings98
CTR A
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:08 am

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by 2kings98 »

tapirrider wrote:Yep. Its quite telling, and odd that some things like that song stay with me and still have deep and beautiful meaning, not because of Joseph Smith but because of the message.

Lemmie wrote:this guy can post here about watching while a child died and watching while a woman was raped. He posted here that he could have stopped both, but he doesn't "believe" in that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJudAJMPBOo


I could barely stomach it, but I listened to the song with lyrics. Just as horrible as I remember it. The message is corny and is irrelevant in this day and age. I mean, really. "Cheered my guest," is it? Oh, and the poor guy "sued," did he? He went to court and SUED?

Awful. Again, the intended message is one that is pathetic and is to be disregarded here in 2018.

It may have passed muster in the pioneer days because there were so few songs to begin with, so they pretty much had to run with something that sucks.
----
The Church above all else, including family. I have disabled PM's and e-mails, because, quite frankly, the Internet is not for conversations and debating. It's for fighting. Simple as that.

User avatar
SteelHead
God
Posts: 8261
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by SteelHead »

I never thought to find a interwebz denizen more repugnant than Faqs. I stand corrected.
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin

User avatar
SteelHead
God
Posts: 8261
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by SteelHead »

2kings98 wrote:I could barely stomach it, but I listened to the song with lyrics. Just as horrible as I remember it. The message is corny and is irrelevant in this day and age. I mean, really. "Cheered my guest," is it? Oh, and the poor guy "sued," did he? He went to court and SUED?

Awful. Again, the intended message is one that is pathetic and is to be disregarded here in 2018.

It may have passed muster in the pioneer days because there were so few songs to begin with, so they pretty much had to run with something that sucks.

"Sued" at the time did not necessarily mean legal case, it just means to entreat or beg. Your understanding of English seems rather limited.
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin

2kings98
CTR A
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:08 am

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by 2kings98 »

SteelHead wrote:
2kings98 wrote:"Sued" at the time did not necessarily mean legal case, it just means to entreat or beg. Your understanding of English seems rather limited.

Well, that was then. This is now. "Sued" means becoming a defendant in a civil case. I couldn't care less what it meant in the 1400's or whenever the song was written.
----
The Church above all else, including family. I have disabled PM's and e-mails, because, quite frankly, the Internet is not for conversations and debating. It's for fighting. Simple as that.

User avatar
SteelHead
God
Posts: 8261
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by SteelHead »

It is still a valid use of the word - it does not necessarily mean legal case. You should read more, troll less.

sue (su)

v. sued, su•ing. v.t.
1. to bring civil action against: to sue someone for damages.
2. to make petition or appeal to.
3. Archaic. to woo or court.
4. to institute legal proceedings.
5. to make petition or appeal: to sue for peace.
6. Archaic. to court a woman.
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin

2kings98
CTR A
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:08 am

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by 2kings98 »

SteelHead wrote:It is still a valid use of the word - it does not necessarily mean legal case. You should read more, troll less.

sue (su)

v. sued, su•ing. v.t.
1. to bring civil action against: to sue someone for damages.
2. to make petition or appeal to.
3. Archaic. to woo or court.
4. to institute legal proceedings.
5. to make petition or appeal: to sue for peace.
6. Archaic. to court a woman.

Yeah, yeah. Opposing opinions are always "trolling," according to your fragile, probably-raped-by-your-teacher mind. I don't care what fake definitions you're posting. "Sue" means to, well, SUE. In court. That's the only definition.
----
The Church above all else, including family. I have disabled PM's and e-mails, because, quite frankly, the Internet is not for conversations and debating. It's for fighting. Simple as that.

User avatar
SteelHead
God
Posts: 8261
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by SteelHead »

I quote an English dictionary. You quote yourself and demonstrate your limited vocabulary.

Good luck with that.
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin

User avatar
tapirrider
Holy Ghost
Posts: 893
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 2:10 am

Re: Oaks goes hard on gender identity

Post by tapirrider »

SteelHead wrote:I never thought to find a interwebz denizen more repugnant than Faqs. I stand corrected.


And I never thought I would come across a Mormon who would say that the message in Matthew 25:37-46 is pathetic and is to be disregarded in 2018.

Post Reply