--Introduction
There's a certain poster on this board who is constantly (and, may I add, inaccurately) accusing me of playing politics here with postings that I have put up--ones which I have explicitly explained at time of posting (or have regularly explained in the past) are meant to demonstrate efforts at opinion suppression and not, per se, of political expression.
Regardless and irrespective of politics (I am officially registered as a "non-party-affiliated"/otherwise-known-as-independent voter), this effort by some to muzzle disagreeable opinion represents a worrisome impulse to squelch the constitutionally-protected right of free speech. It is an attempt at censorship that one sees not only in authoritarian secular governments, but in authoritarian theocratic ones, as well.
That would, of course, includes the traditional manacled mindset of Mormonism.
For purposes of RfM discussion, I don't propose to argue for or against any of these examples that I post here--at least based on the political perspective expressed therein. I simply know from personal experience on a routine basis that some of those who disagree with my cartoons demand that I be silenced, fired or even deported. Gawd bless Amer'ca. It just so happens that the overwhelming majority of those who issue these orders happen to reside on the right-hand side of the thought spectrum. That includes the postings on this site which cleatly represent an overt political agenda, as even the writer highlighted here readily admits.
I do not cite those posts of this particular RFM critic as examples of people who are allegedly "politically incorrect" but, rather, as examples of intolerance for free speech that we see not only in the wider world today but, again, in the much narrower world of regimented Mormondumb. The personal political perspectives of those who send me complaining emails about my work is not at all why I post them on RfM. I put them up here to demonstrate that there are a lot of constitutionnally-illiterate Americans out there who, in my view, display an unfortunate and dangerous disregard for this "divinely-inspired" U.S. Constitution of ours that just so happens to include in its text boilerplate protection, upfront and center, of the right to individually-expressed divergent points of view with regard to the actions of government and its leaders. It is a fundamental principle of liberty that has been upheld, time and again, through case law rendeted at the highest judicial levels of the federal government.
The genuinely puzzling part about the kerfuffle being raised by this RFM poster is that he is constantly putting up commentary that he frames in purely partisan political terms, and about ehich he makes no spologies. At least I tartly to couch my presentations in the context of religious belief vs. political freedom, in order to make them relevant to the general purposes of RfM. I also carefully and judiciously edit their content so as to remove their more flagrant politically-charged arguments. I am not a board moderator, nor do I pretend to act or speak as one. For what it's wortth, Admin has generally allowed my posts to go up and to remain up (although head of the Mod Squad, Eric K, has explicitly noted on this site more than once that I get deleted as much is anybody else participating in this forum). I hope that part of the reason why that is so is because I make a sincere and concerted effort, when I think it is necessary, to put my comments in proper context that align with the policies and purposes of this site.
Judging from the postings of my self-proclaimed politicized opponent, however, he does nothing of the sort--given that he openly and constantly advocates for a highly partisan and politicized point of view. I am not demanding that Admin take down his posts in this regard (although I do think they're unapologetically and politically problematic). I provide relevant excerpts of them below, however, because whether this poster likes it or not, I think they clearly demonstrate what can only fairly be described as a hypocritical stance on the poster's part.
Now, enjoy the rest in whatever way you think is best. :)
-----
From the critic:
1. "It's Merry Christmas. You don't have to say Happy Holidays any more. Now that the liberal left is no longer in power and political correctness has been banished - at least for now - you don't have to be ashamed to use a Christian oriented term, even though it's only being used culturally, not necessarily religiously. It's Merry Christmas again. And what if you're not a Christian? It's only an American holiday... get over it. . . .
" . . . I stand by that 'Merry Christmas' post. There is no question that my political beliefs lean quite conservative. I don't necessary follow all beliefs of all other conservatives. So bring it on. Nothing I have written is shameful [Note: You're right; your politics here are shameless]. . . .
"Surely, you can produce more than a Merry Christmas wish to trap me in my own words. [Note: Surely I can and, in short order, surely I will, so sit tight because you're about to get hammered by the facts concerning your shameless political postings]. . . .
"Putting aside politics, I have healed some and learned to be more tolerant, and a better person on some issues from feedback from others on this board. [Note: Good, get ready because here comes some more help for you in that regard]. . . . But . . . you're not learning the critical lessons either. Just like intolerant mormons who believe that they have the only true church, yours is the only true politics. That is not what this board is for." [Note: That's interesting, given that you're about to be exposed--through your own words, no less--as someone who thinks that that's exactly what RfM Is for].
-----
2. "I always thought that the Arizona Republic [newspaper]should just change their name to the 'Arizona Democrat'. They refuse to use the words 'illegal alien'. They buy in to all of the 'new world order' nonsense, and for years opposed our democratically -elected Sheriff [Note: Thst would be Joe Aroaio, to whom one of my direct supervisors is related by marriage].
"The Arizona Republic exerted so much liberal influence for so long, that our otherwise Conservative state has approached the liberal end of the scale on many issues. Then to top it off, they endorced Hillary. . . .
"I started fact-checking what I read in the daily newspaper. Every time, they had lied and/or made things up that couldn't be proven, to sway the public in a liberal direction."
------
3. "There is no question that my political beliefs lean quite conservative. [Note: you've already ssid that and it's obvious from your persistent political postings on the board] . . .
"[T}his is different from hard-leaning partison politics. Your attacks against an elected US president are no better than mine were when I felt justified in shamelessly attacking the gay community. But this isn't a 'Recovery from Politics' board. [Note: Huh? You say you can politically trumpet Tromp on this board in complete disregard for RfM protocol because it's unacceptable to criticize gays?]
"The media does not like being called out, especially by a worthy adversary who wins real battles against them in public opinions that they're currently losing control of now, because of Donald Trump. The real mental illness is in Benson's flaming liberal world-view. . . .
"To show an example of how Trump is beating the media badly, consider this. On most of the real news involving Trump, I hear it from him directly via twitter, in real-time and unfiltered. Then a few hours later or the next day Fox news anounces and discusses Trump's tweet. I don't even turn the channel to CNN, nor do I read the Arizona Republic, to get their side of it, because I don't like reading fake news. If I want print media, there's always the Drudge Report. Increasingly, Benson's employer and the rest of their kind are becomming increasingly irrelevant in the public eye. [Note: The conservative Wall Street Journal is losing national circulation because traders--like news consumers across the country--are increasingly not subscribing to print editions of newspapers and, instead, are reading online content; hence, as an example of a national trend in readership evolution trends, the WSJ has reduced the amount of content in and the size of print edition, as well as eliminated staff levels]. . . .
"Fake news may make some liberals feel good, but it's not going to be profitable much longer."
-----
4. "If George Washington were to somehow come back from the dead and sign up for this 'Recovery from MORMONISM'S board, and then use the board to support liberalism instead of recovery from mormonism ideas, we would need to first ask ourselves why he was doing it and how he can get away with it, considering board rules. If the moderators tended to look the other way from the board rules because 'after-all, this is George Washington', we might be suspicious. If they eventually changed the board rules to allow some mormonism-related political discussion and then George started using a single phraise like 'Constitution hangs by a thread', to attack the legally elected and standing president, I would question his motives with respect to compliance with board rules. If the moderators were allowing it to continue and many people piled-on to the attacks in an '... I have the truth and everyone else is wrong' manner, then I would accuse George Washington of using cult-like tactics, or running a cult. I've had far too many of my posts deleted after doing exactly as Benson did, but that my political opinions aren't politically correct, and besides, Benson gets a pass. In this manner, I believe that RFM can be harmful to some new people who come here for help, only to see their beliefs under attacks." [Bote: A fairy tale analogy since Washington was, of course, neveGeorge Washington were to somehow come back from the dead and sign up for this "Recovery from Mormonism" board, and then use the board to support liberalism instead of recovery from mormonism ideas, we would need to first ask ourselves why he was doing it and how he can get away with it, considering board rules. If the moderators tended to look the other way from the board rules because 'after-all, this is George Washington', we might be suspicious. If they eventually changed the board rules to allow some mormonism-related political discussion and then George started using a single phraise like 'Constitution hangs by a thread', to attack the legally elected and standing president, I would question his motives with respect to compliance with board rules. If the moderators were allowing it to continue and many people piled-on to the attacks in an "... I have the truth and everyone else is wrong" manner, then I would accuse George Washington of using cult-like tactics, or running a cult. I've had far too many of my posts deleted after doing exactly as Benson did, but that my political opinions aren't politically correct, and besides, Benson gets a pass. In this manner, I believe that RFM can be harmful to some new people who come here for help, only to see their beliefs under attacks.
[Note: Although Washington was never an apostate Mormon who would actually come to this board for love and support, he--at least in your own rationalizing mind--could imagine him coming to the RfM board to putposely peddle his personal political platform in clear violation of house rules? ] don't think so].
-----
5. "I've got to admit, every time I discover that this board is being used as a tool to promote radical liberal agendas, I feel the need to be just as creative if necessary, to find a way to express an opposing view." [Note: i've got to say that's a a silly neener-neener-boo-boo cop-out].
-----
6. "Benson, who is an athiest starts using 'what would jesus do' to bring up political issues that coincidentally meet a liberal agenda on the same topic, without even addressing the core religious issues at hand. Then he calls foul when a direct opposing political position is presented in response to his own political position. Thank god and jesus that his post wasn't political.... Really(?). This kind of reporting [Note: I am not a reporter; I am a commentator whose personally-signed work appears on the opinion/editorial pages, not in the news section, where it appears along with various commentary from both the conservative and liberal side of the ideological spectrum] is right out of the liberal-left-journalist playbook. [His] so-called sanitized post is just a sneaky way to delve in to an off-topic issue. Anyntime an athiest uses religious principles and Jesus to make his points, you know there are credibility issues. But... but... but... he only quoted others who believe in Jesus... (Whatever). Any time you bring up the founding fathers and the Constitution (right or wrong) as a source of credibility regarding political issues, you've gone in to politics... off topic. That leaves... no credibility, a precarious place for a journalist to be. [Note: I am a cartoonist who's got your knickers in a twist].
"The pragmatic truth is that our new president is going to make some positive changes in this area, to protect our society from a dangerous religion/cult (on topic). There's not much the liberal left can do to stop him. It is sad that too many people (including Benson) jump right to the politics instead of addressing the relevant issues. Perhaps a few more trips to the temple and practicing having your throat slit open again, might wake some of us up from a growing allah akbar mentality. [Note: just wait till I get you to drop to your knees in the middle of a post and bow to Mecca on your prayer rug].
"Perhaps if Benson were the grandson of a well-known muslim claric, we might get some real journalism out of him on this topic. As it is, I think we've got a one-trick pony here." [Note: What we've actually got is your one-party political tricks on full display here].
-----
7. "I don't care what anyone says Jesus would do. [Note: That's certainly obvious, although you seem to believe that he has told you he'd post, through you, as G-O-D for the G-O-P].
"What different people say that jesus would do is different, depending on who you ask. For an athiest to even ask that question proves that point.
"Diversity in principal is not the problem. But like one person recently said '... if there were a bowl of M&Ms and only a few of them were poisoned, how many of them would you choose to eat?' [Note: Please don't try to attribute that Halloween health warning to RfM Admin].
"Sometimes, you have to put away the bleeding heart and take care of yourself and your own family first. [Note: as opposed to your jerking knee] . . .
"Another consideration is who should pay these expenses. Liberal idealogy can teach people to be very generous as long as those generous people don't personally have to pay the expenses themselves. As our healthcare system collapses, these impoverished immigrents need healthcare more than anyone. Their kids need to be educated in our public schools. They all need jobs while millions of Americans remain unemployed. Philanthropy should not come from the public treasury. Teach a man to fish, don't just give him a fish and tell him that he is entitled to it. Someone from the free software foundation once put it this way 'freedom, as in freedom of speach... not free beer'" [Note: Paid for by the Conservatives for a Conservative Creator Political Action Committee].
-----
8. "Other than that we have a narcissist here who can't follow the board rules about political discussions [Note: finally, you're coming clean] because he believes that his own beliefs trump [Note: a telling Freudian slip on your part] the rules (a familiar belief?), I am not sure exactly how this chain relates to recovering from mormonism. None of us are perfect, and you're a great artist. But I think you're wrong to often promote your personal politics here on this board, when such talent could be put to better use, and that politics are not directly the purpose of this board." [Note: What a great wrap-up if there ever was one. No truer words have ever spoken by "azsteve"--about himself--as demonstrated by the historical record].
-----
SOURCE: All of the above are excerpted and quoted from posts authored by "Recovery from Mormonism" contributor, "azsteve," on the RfM discussion board, January/February 2017, with original spelling, grammar, capitalization and punctuation retained from those postings. For the full quotes and dates, use this site's search tool to input keywords at
http://exmormon.org/phorum/search.php**********
Holy, hilarious hypocrisy, "azsteve." You're the H Team's lead-off batter.
Edited 24 time(s). Last edit at 02/27/2017 05:11AM by steve benson.