I'm done.

[LatterDay Marriage]

I don't think any of us get to decide when someone's opinion is valid or invalid.

Really? So if you run into somebody who says that Mormons are not Christians, you'll tell them that is a valid opinion, or that you, a Mormon, are unable to tell if that opinion is valid or not? Would you really react like that? What if somebody said that white people were a superior race, or the that the earth is flat, or that you can train your body to live on nothing but sunlight and air? Are you really unable to recognize those as invalid points of view?

Everyone has a right to their opinion. It's theirs. They came up with it on their own.

I agree, people have a right to hold whatever opinion they want, no matter how invalid it is. They do not however have the right to be protected from having their views critically examined and argued against.

To say, "your opinion is invalid" is just plain rude. And nobody likes rude...This is a personal attack: "Your opinion is invalid."

I would say that if somebody reacts like that it is because they choose to take it that way. It is an evaluation of an opinion and that evaluation is either correct or incorrect. I expect that if a person is very proud, or has a weak ego that can't bear having their views called into question, that they would have a hard time hearing something like that, but I expect better from the posters here. I think it's a bad idea for somebody to venture out onto the internet if they can bear something like that either.

If anybody here has developed the habit of taking offense over something like that I would encourage them to take a statement like that as nothing more than what it says it is, somebody's evaluation of your opinion and it has nothing to do with you as a person. Nothing to do with your character, intelligence etc. so don't take it that way.

Everybody has some opinions that are less than perfect and there is nothing to be ashamed of in learning where you are wrong on something. Prove all things, hold fast to that which is true. That includes the process of exposing your views to criticism so you can refine them and make them better. And it cuts both ways, if I say some opinion is invalid there is nothing stopping that person from replying and showing how their opinion is valid and I'm in the wrong. If they can't defend their own view, they don't have any right to be surprised or upset when somebody rejects that view.

You would be MUCH better received if you said something like, "I fear your opinion may be based on faulty information, or on un-safe assumptions."

This is a statement of your own opinion, and is NOT a persona attack: "I fear your opinion may be based on faulty information, or on un-safe assumptions."

I don't see anybody here posting like that. To me or anybody else on any topic. It seems to me that this is a restriction that is only promoted to me and only on one particular topic. Those who disagree with me are not told to water down their words like that, and nobody is doing it on other topics.

I do not see the solution to this as me trying to tiptoe around and not offend somebody's fragile ego, I think there needs to be an objective standard (not an emotional standard) for what is OK in a post, and if a poster doesn't violate that standard then there should be no issue and moderators should take no action. There needs to be both the maturity to deal with disagreement and humility to not take offense when none is intended. BY has some rather harsh words about people who do that.

If you feel your are superior enough to someone else to decide that their opinion is invalid, then there are deeper things going on here than just learning the do's-and-dont's of how to carry on a polite conversation.

I don't call an argument invalid unless I feel I am informed well enough to do so, and I provide my reasons for calling it that too. That doesn't mean I'm superior over anybody, and I'm perfectly happy to have them reply and provide additional information showing that their view is valid after all, if they can. If they can not do that they should re-examine their position, not get upset with whoever points out the problem with their view.

[KSSunflower]

I don't think building up the kingdom includes stirring contention, driving others away from honest discussion, and I'm pretty sure humility is listed as an important characteristic of a servant of the Lord.

It does no good to try to compel others to believe the same.

One more point (that I've made before): being intolerant of another's differing opinion, and constantly arguing to try to convince them to match your own is actually a sign of weakness and uncertainty, not strength and conviction. "By their fruits ye shall know them" and honestly, I can't really see much good fruit from your participation in certain discussions.

-BBB

I agree stirring up contention is counterproductive to open discussion. I think it takes two to argue. The contention is not one-sided. Humility would definitely help everyone involved.

Compelling does no good, but persuasion and correction do. I don't see LDM (or anybody else's posts) as compelling others. He is persistent but not forceful. We still have our agency and nothing LDM has said would take that away. Others have had just as difficult time accepting his views, as he theirs.

I am not sure disagreeing with somebody's opinion is the same as being intolerant. If so, there isn't a tolerant person on this forum. We all have disagreements. We all try to convince others of our view or point out holes in theirs. I would say that more has been done to try to convince LDM of his flaws, not only in his opinion but his personality. We see him post more because he has multiple people who disagree with him.

By their fruits you shall know them. And more than one on this forum have brought bad fruit to these discussions. Others need to step up and take responsibility for their own negative contributions.

Is it also weakness and uncertainty to insist one diminish their convictions so others might feel better?

I have been hurt more by the negative things repeatedly said about the church than LDM's firm view on masturbation. So much discussion on sexuality here is centered on the shortcomings of the church and its leaders. How is that helpful to building people up in the gospel? Are we saying one can say the church and prophets were wrong, but we can't suggest somebody on the forum is wrong?

[beachdreamer]

I don't think any of us get to decide when someone's opinion is valid or invalid.

Bryan, good luck in trying to help LDM see the light. LDM declaring other peoples opinion as invalid has two problems. First it is rude and judgemental as you have stated. The other problem is that he is arrogantly stating his own opinion as fact. Throughout all his arguments he constantly states sources or facts, and then draws conclusions - his opinions. This is all fine. But he states his opinions - his conclusions as facts and doctrine. He is not able to distinguish his opinion from facts. He is constantly restating his version of the quote or finding as if it is doctrinal fact. By finding his opinions as "valid" he is arrogantly and dogmatically looking at his opinion as doctrinal fact. I have pointed this out many times. He does not seem capable of understanding this point. He alienates many on this board for this reason. I would bet it would be difficult to tolerate him in person as well with such an attitude.

[Bryan_LDS_husband]

LDM,

Well, I tried. I was attempting to point out why you are offending people. Silly me, I actually thought you might say something like, "Oh! So THAT'S why people are taking offense to my comments instead of understand the points I'm trying to make!" But I guess instead of wanting to learn how you might improve your communication skills, you are content in continuing to alienate.

Good luck with that.

Bryan

[cmfray]

KS, you make some really good points! I don't have a problem when someone suggests I am wrong, thinks my argument lacks logic, or disagrees with me - again, in my view, it's all about how one says it. I recognize that I also need to look inward and correct my own failings with this matter!

I saw this article which I think has some great points in it! While it is about talking to non-members, I think it can also apply to talking to other members.

https://www.lds.org/youth/article/the-d ... ook-shared

[blahblahblah]

I agree stirring up contention is counterproductive to open discussion. I think it takes two to argue. The contention is not one-sided. Humility would definitely help everyone involved.

Compelling does no good, but persuasion and correction do. I don't see LDM (or anybody else's posts) as compelling others. He is persistent but not forceful. We still have our agency and nothing LDM has said would take that away. Others have had just as difficult time accepting his views, as he theirs.

I am not sure disagreeing with somebody's opinion is the same as being intolerant. If so, there isn't a tolerant person on this forum. We all have disagreements. We all try to convince others of our view or point out holes in theirs. I would say that more has been done to try to convince LDM of his flaws, not only in his opinion but his personality. We see him post more because he has multiple people who disagree with him.

By their fruits you shall know them. And more than one on this forum have brought bad fruit to these discussions. Others need to step up and take responsibility for their own negative contributions.

Is it also weakness and uncertainty to insist one diminish their convictions so others might feel better?

I have been hurt more by the negative things repeatedly said about the church than LDM's firm view on masturbation. So much discussion on sexuality here is centered on the shortcomings of the church and its leaders. How is that helpful to building people up in the gospel? Are we saying one can say the church and prophets were wrong, but we can't suggest somebody on the forum is wrong?

KSSunflower, if I've hurt you, I apologize. Yes, we all could probably do with a little more humility, and I agree that others are also responsible for the contention. Perhaps I can clarify a few things. Disagreement is not intolerance. People can quite peaceably disagree. But the insecurity of knowing that someone disagrees can drive some to continue arguing well past the point of persuasion and correction. And conviction is the same. No one is asking anyone to diminish their conviction, in fact, I am suggesting that some might do well to increase their conviction in their position. When you truly KNOW you are right, you don't have to argue as much because even if someone disagrees, you are confident that they will eventually see it on their own without having to be convinced (that's where the whole letting others have their agency comes in). Nor am I suggesting that anyone be silenced, because I know that growth only comes through conflict and invalidation.

Now here is the big But. But LDM asked for feedback on where he has offended others, and so I am responding to that, trying to help him understand what the rest of us see.

-BBB

[KSSunflower]

KS, you make some really good points! I don't have a problem when someone suggests I am wrong, thinks my argument lacks logic, or disagrees with me - again, in my view, it's all about how one says it. I recognize that I also need to look inward and correct my own failings with this matter!

I saw this article which I think has some great points in it! While it is about talking to non-members, I think it can also apply to talking to other members.

https://www.lds.org/youth/article/the-d ... ook-shared

I saw this article the other day and thought about posting it. Thanks for posting it. It had good ideas I think can apply here.

[BBoy]

I can't believe how busy this little thread was over the weekend! Yikes, I hope no one stayed home from church to contribute to it. Or passed up a chance to have sex with their Dear Spouse.

This thread should probably be shut down since it really has nothing to do with enhancing married LDS sex, other than perhaps keeping a certain person distracted so that he is not sabotaging other threads....

[JustGettingBy]

So to answer one of your questions posed, if someone said "mormons are not Christian" I am fully within my right to give another perspective (mine), but I can still respect and even be friends with him/her if they don't agree with my counter argument / perspective. After that point I am just irritating them unless that are the type of individual that likes to learn and understand others perspectives. That type of person is in the minority from what I have found. So if someone has an invalid or illogical stance, I let them be. It isn't my job to convince them otherwise. There may be some exceptions, such as they are hurting themselves or others.

I do sense that you are explaining how you feel some things should work on a social level. I think you are getting some fairly clear feedback that the way you feel "others should be willing to have their views challenged". Well, your way of interacting is clearly being challenged as not productive. I would fully agree that you are the only one doing this on this site. But your strength of being tenacious and devout actually work against you in this aspect.

Without trying to use even more words, I feel the main issue is that you are free and right to express your different view. Of someone replies that they don't agree, then one more post of "we see things differently" is all that is needed. Then drop it. Otherwise it does come off as you trying to teach others. It does come across to me that you feel stewardship that you must change my mind. Instead throw a line in your prayer for them and just leave it at that.

[Bryan_LDS_husband]

So to answer one of your questions posed, if someone said "mormons are not Christian" I am fully within my right to give another perspective (mine), but I can still respect and even be friends with him/her if they don't agree with my counter argument / perspective. After that point I am just irritating them unless that are the type of individual that likes to learn and understand others perspectives. That type of person is in the minority from what I have found. So if someone has an invalid or illogical stance, I let them be. It isn't my job to convince them otherwise. There may be some exceptions, such as they are hurting themselves or others.

I do sense that you are explaining how you feel some things should work on a social level. I think you are getting some fairly clear feedback that the way you feel "others should be willing to have their views challenged". Well, your way of interacting is clearly being challenged as not productive. I would fully agree that you are the only one doing this on this site. But your strength of being tenacious and devout actually work against you in this aspect.

Without trying to use even more words, I feel the main issue is that you are free and right to express your different view. Of someone replies that they don't agree, then one more post of "we see things differently" is all that is needed. Then drop it. Otherwise it does come off as you trying to teach others. It does come across to me that you feel stewardship that you must change my mind. Instead throw a line in your prayer for them and just leave it at that.

Could not have said it better myself. My recap of what's going on here:

US: LDM, your methods are offensive and abrasive.
LDM: I don't undertand why you think that. All I'm doing it quoting our leaders. Please help me understand.
US: Ok, we will try to help you understand. Here's why: (insert explanations from above -- omitted here to save space)
LDM: No, that can't be it. You are wrong.