Sorry on two counts. One, that I can’t spell your name and two, that I gave the impression that I count you as a “dedicated defender of Sandra.” I re-read what I wrote and I note that that is the exact impression and I gave and I didn’t mean to do that because I know full well you don’t defend her.

I guess my point was that I would have liked to have seen a little more discussion on the issue, but maybe the judge’s decision is tight enough that it limits that discussion.

At any rate, I apologize for the confusion.

Lance

You are correct that I predicted that the district court’s decision would be overruled by the Tenth Circuit (though you can’t spell my name). I readily admit that my prediction was proven wrong. Thankfully, I don’t pretend to be a prophet.

I guess that means the decision is pretty much water-tight.

Lance

Sounds like a little wildness in the corridor - thanks for the news.

In hindsight I would not do it again. Not because I consider it wrong or somehow unethical; I don’t. I wouldn’t do it again because I would never want to put those I care about though the problems that the past three years have presented.

As to “stepping down” to anyone’s level, I don’t view it that way. I never claimed in my defense that I was doing a parody. I did, however, claim that I was exercising my freedom of speech to provide alternative viewpoints concerning what I consider to be lies and deceit on the part of the Tanners. It was the court who said that my site was a parody (and, in their words, a successful one) and therefore protected under the safe harbor provisions of the Lanham Act and not liable for prosecution.

That being said, I understand that some people may find parody a bit disturbing. (I find the parody and mockery published by the Salamander Society to be disturbing and sometimes offensive.) My whole point was that while the Tanners can question whether Mormonism is “shadow or reality,” the same question can be raised about their claims.

It is a pity that the Tanners thought they had to attack in a heavy-handed manner in Federal Court. It came off feeling like they were trying to silence freedom of speech when they didn’t like that freedom being exercised toward them. I’ve said all along that all they had to do was ask and the domains would have been given to them. But, they didn’t ask and instead launched into a three-year broadside that they eventually lost.

-Allen

Personally i feel Jerald and Sandra Tanners Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? needs an in depth online Wiki type review. Even a review of their smaller Major Problems in Mormonism would be a great project. All lesser Anti-Mormons seem to borrow their basic case against Mormonism. The Tanners just say a lot more on the same topics.

Spoof websites have value, but i think handling the Tanners technical arguments have more value.