Comments | mormon_politics: so called spiritual roots of the democratic party.

mvalley in mormon_politics

so called spiritual roots of the democratic party.

Sep 07, 2005 08:38

Todd Compton writes for sunstone magazine. A magazine that can be critical of some church leaders. And has some ideas that I dont agree with. ON an lds message board there is a liberal person that posted this talked about the so called spiritual roots of the democrat party. There are members of the church in both parties. But I personally ( Read more... )

Comments 9

winter_in_asia September 7 2005, 15:53:20 UTC

As moderator, I don't mind if you post here, but please take the time to edit your posts for improper grammar and spelling. Your lack of inclusion of question marks baffles me.

winter_in_asia September 8 2005, 17:33:30 UTC

Also, your link appears broken.

slacker990 September 9 2005, 01:56:33 UTC

I don't know mvalley and am not defending him. I too find his posts difficult to read. I would suggest however that not all users of the internet have the same or even similar intellects and capabilities. Meaning that I know some who can not easily use a keyboard, to be able to type at all is a huge chore, and taking time to self-edit and self-correct grammar is not a priority for them. For some, english is not their first language and they may not even realize that they have made errors.

I learned a long time ago (way longer than I want to admit to) that to flame people on the internet (especially for spelling and grammar) is a losing battle. Most people don't know or don't care, and it doesn't really change the core of their post. It may effect how you perceive the message, but they don't usually care about how their message is received. Those that DO care, usually KNOW that they made a mistake or many, and they will self-correct over time, but flaming them only makes the flamer look small.

Just a thought.

winter_in_asia September 9 2005, 02:05:41 UTC

I apologize if it came across as flaming. I appreciate his participation here even if I find his content to be objectionable or shortsighted at times. For me, however, it's a sign of respect to take the time when posting about something to make sure it's digestible for the average reader. I guess part of it is that I've worked really hard to make sure the bulk (if not all) of my posts are clear and well-written, and as a moderator, I ask that people make similar efforts.

Once again, however, I apologize if I came across as rude or flaming. This was not my intent.

mvalley September 8 2005, 19:03:35 UTC

I went to it and the link was still there. Just open up in the link in that guys speech and you can go page by page in what it says. I personally think it is full of flaws. But that is my opinion.

winter_in_asia September 9 2005, 02:10:02 UTC

What arguments to you view as flawed?

mvalley September 9 2005, 14:10:51 UTC

I should take the time and say what I disagree with on here. Will when I have time.

mvalley September 27 2005, 02:52:16 UTC

I went down it won't take place. However using the same things other democrats use we are the party of giving and accusing republicans of coveting. Forced charity is not charity but like lucifer. He made feeble attempts to answer that you already had a choice. Many people could be democrats because they covet what does not belong to them. Medicare social security when it is someone elses money ( ... )

winter_in_asia September 30 2005, 14:04:33 UTC

You seem to not be understanding how to reply to people. Once again, I've only seen this because I stumbled upon it. And, frankly, I can't really understand what you're trying to say.

If you're responding to something someone's said, please use the "reply to this" link rather than the "post a new comment" link. By doing so, LJ will notify us about your response.