Polygamy.....I Now Pronounce You Man and Wives

[PRmerger]

lol…I guess I should start being offended when people call me Steve instead of Stephen since the people who call me Steve MUST be acting disrespectfully dismissive.

Sorry…but I find that funny.

You should stop using a term that is dismissive of a prominent person in history. He is not known as Joe.

In fact I suggest you retract this else you could receive an infraction. It may be in violation of CAFs rules.

 

[TexanKnight]

You should stop using a term that is dismissive of a prominent person in history. He is not known as Joe.

In fact I suggest you retract this else you could receive an infraction. It may be in violation of CAFs rules.

lol…really? According to a website about name origins:

"The meaning of the name Joe is God Will Increase

The origin of the name Joe is English

Notes: Most often used as a nickname for the name Joseph."

Read more at babynames.com/name/JOE#YZdvoTbYTqmiYTFA.99

So, calling someone a name that means “God will increase” is bad?

No. I do not pander to people who have grandiose thoughts of themselves. You may do so if you choose.

 

[PRmerger]

lol…really? According to a website about name origins:

"The meaning of the name Joe is God Will Increase

The origin of the name Joe is English

Notes: Most often used as a nickname for the name Joseph."

Read more at babynames.com/name/JOE#YZdvoTbYTqmiYTFA.99

So, calling someone a name that means “God will increase” is bad?

No. I do not pander to people who have grandiose thoughts of themselves. You may do so if you choose.

It is not the name that is offensive. It is not the shortening* of a name that is offensive. It is not the origin of the name that is offensive.

It is offensive because you are using it as a dismissal of a person of prominence in another member’s religion.

Please retract.

It is good for you to be here, Texan*, so you can dialogue with those who have been able to chat with others of differing opinions in a charitable manner.

*QED.

 

[lynnettejane]

I personally think the issue of “Joe” is just another way for Mormons to have us focus on something other than the points we raise. It is a way to misdirect the conversation

I don’t agree in this case, it happened too early in the thread. Also, you stated earlier that you refer to a friend of 30 years as Joe, entirely appropriate. But here it has been pointed out by NT that this offensive, it is not pandering to be considerate. I would not feel comfortable if he/she referred to the Pope as Frank

 

[SteveVH]

My strategy drives them all crazy…I always consider it a badge of glory when they stop responding. I love surrenders…

There is no glory in winning the battle and loosing the soul. Sorry, I just find that to be a strange attitude. We’re not here to pin badges of glory on ourselves.

 

[PRmerger]

Again, such beliefs are easily mocked and scorned. I know Catholics do not share these beliefs. We mormons believe in eternal families, and that belief means we must struggle with logical extremes and consequenses like the stuff above. If you need to make fun of me, I guess you’ll do so.

There is no need to mock and scorn your belief. Yet we can proclaim it to be a false and untenable position. In fact, it appears to be contradictory, not a “mystery”.

Catholics, of course, have lots of mysteries (to wit: the Trinity, the hypostatic union)…but none of them are contradictory. None of them are irrational…they are supra-rational.

 

[TexanKnight]

I don’t agree in this case, it happened too early in the thread. Also, you stated earlier that you refer to a friend of 30 years as Joe, entirely appropriate. But here it has been pointed out by NT that this offensive, it is not pandering to be considerate. I would not feel comfortable if he/she referred to the Pope as Frank

your call. I call my son Joshua Josh, my daughter Brittany is Britt. My wife Susan is Suz.

If people want to pick THAT to be offended by, so be it. There is no mal intent on my part

 

[TheIrishman]

It all comes down to the intent of the sayer. I call my papa Joe, his name is Joseph but I call him that out of an intimate relationship that we possess. I have no problem with a non member referring Joseph Smith as Joe because that is a very common usage for Joseph. However, if the sayer has mal intent and is trying to belittle or mock someone then the use of Joe would be unnacceptable.

 

[NeuroTypical]

There is no need to mock and scorn your belief. Yet we can proclaim it to be a false and untenable position.

I appreciate the distinction, PRmerger. I have absolutely no problem with Catholics explaining why they reject what they consider to be the false claims of my church. Doing so doesn’t make you a bad neighbor IMO, but a good Catholic.

 

[SteveVH]

your call. I call my son Joshua Josh, my daughter Brittany is Britt. My wife Susan is Suz.

If people want to pick THAT to be offended by, so be it. There is no mal intent on my part

Joseph Smith is not your son or your daughter or your wife or even an old buddy. It is evident to all viewers on this forum the intent of your usage. If we cannot act with at least a certain degree of respect for those of other faiths then this forum falls apart. You have a lot of good things to contribute here. There is no need to insult other members.

 

[TexanKnight]

It all comes down to the intent of the sayer. I call my papa Joe, his name is Joseph but I call him that out of an intimate relationship that we possess. I have no problem with a non member referring Joseph Smith as Joe because that is a very common usage for Joseph. However, if the sayer has mal intent and is trying to belittle or mock someone then the use of Joe would be unnacceptable.

While there is no malintent, I also do not believe he is deserving of my respect. His teachings and etc. led Mormons to believe it was ok to kidnap my children.

Sorry

 

[lynnettejane]

your call. I call my son Joshua Josh, my daughter Brittany is Britt. My wife Susan is Suz.

If people want to pick THAT to be offended by, so be it. There is no mal intent on my part

No offence intended Tex, but sometimes, probably because it is written not spoken, things can be misinterpreted. To call your family by ‘pet’ names we all know is normal, but I have a sneaking suspition that you know very well that calling Joseph Smith Joe will be offensive to LDS. If you ever visit Mormondialogue one of their forum rules is that he is not referred to as Joe, it is disrespectful

 

[TexanKnight]

No offence intended Tex, but sometimes, probably because it is written not spoken, things can be misinterpreted. To call your family by ‘pet’ names we all know is normal, but I have a sneaking suspition that you know very well that calling Joseph Smith Joe will be offensive to LDS. If you ever visit Mormondialogue one of their forum rules is that he is not referred to as Joe, it is disrespectful

Then block my posts.

 

[lynnettejane]

While there is no malintent, I also do not believe he is deserving of my respect. His teachings and etc. led Mormons to believe it was ok to kidnap my children.

Sorry

I have no respect for him either, but others do, I can understand why you feel the way you do, well I think I can, thank God I have never had to go through that trauma.

Peace

 

[twopekinguys]

What is up with all the board nannies, and derails?

Could we please get back to the topic at hand?

Got a problem with a poster or his/her style? Take it private, alert a mod, ignore them, but let’s talk about the subject at hand.

Just sayin

 

[lynnettejane]

Then block my posts.

What block TK ? Never!!

 

[PRmerger]

What is up with all the board nannies, and derails?

Could we please get back to the topic at hand?

Got a problem with a poster or his/her style? Take it private, alert a mod, ignore them, but let’s talk about the subject at hand.

Just sayin

It’s a “public” offense that is being made. Therefore it is appropriate that a “public” admonition be given.

If someone called Fr. Martin Luther “Marty” you can be assured that I would be posting a response that this poster retract that term.

It’s the right thing to do.

It’s also the charitable thing to refrain from using terms that a particular group finds offensive. For example, while I don’t find the term “Protestant” to be offensive in any way, and I use it often here on the CAFs, if a poster tells me he doesn’t like to be called a Protestant, you can be assured that I will never use that term in dialogue with him. I defer to his wishes and use the tern “non-Catholic Christian.”

It maintains charitable discourse.

 

[TexanKnight]

It’s a “public” offense that is being made. Therefore it is appropriate that a “public” admonition be given.

If someone called Fr. Martin Luther “Marty” you can be assured that I would be posting a response that this poster retract that term.

It’s the right thing to do.

It’s also the charitable thing to refrain from using terms that a particular group finds offensive. For example, while I don’t find the term “Protestant” to be offensive in any way, and I use it often here on the CAFs, if a poster tells me he doesn’t like to be called a Protestant, you can be assured that I will never use that term in dialogue with him. I defer to his wishes and use the tern “non-Catholic Christian.”

It maintains charitable discourse.

Then block my posts.

Thanks

 

[PRmerger]

What is up with all the board nannies, and derails?

Could we please get back to the topic at hand?

Got a problem with a poster or his/her style? Take it private, alert a mod, ignore them, but let’s talk about the subject at hand.

Just sayin

I hope you note the irony in this, tpg. You seem to be reserving the right for yourself to do what you are objecting to in others.

 

[PRmerger]

I appreciate the distinction, PRmerger. I have absolutely no problem with Catholics explaining why they reject what they consider to be the false claims of my church. Doing so doesn’t make you a bad neighbor IMO, but a good Catholic.

And that is why dialogue can be so insightful, powerful and fruitful!