Doctor Scratch wrote:I believe the origin of the rumor that Bradford "never read it" is Dan Peterson. Do I need to remind readers about Dan Peterson's record of truth-telling when it comes to behind-the-scenes happenings at the Maxwell Institute? There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to believe that he's telling the truth.
I'd like to use it as toilet paper. I promise I'll read every page first.
Anyway, he may not know whether Bradford read it or not. Bradford probably said he hadn't just to avoid another pointless, endless argument in which Prof. P., no matter how poorly he's made his case, refuses to give an inch because he remains utterly convinced he is absolutely right.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Doctor Scratch wrote:Here's a question. It has basically become Doctrine that Bradford and the Dehlin-friendly GA "haven't read the Greg Smith 'hit piece.'" Where is the evidence that this is the case? How do we know for certain that neither of them read it?
Willie the bold faced liar and bill gambling said so. So it must be true.
"But of course the way one cares for another person is inevitably shaped by what one believes is good for that person, and therefore by what one believes is good. Since I believe in the truth of the Restored Gospel, and believe that the best way to care for people is to help them to obey the commandments and accept the authority of scriptures and prophets as they (as we) come to a fuller understanding of the Truth, I am skeptical of John Dehlin’s approach to supporting people in their “transitions.”
This isn't my definition of helping someone. If asked for help, I try to assist with whatever that person wants. Adults are capable of making their own religious/spiritual/philosophical decisions for themselves. It certainly isn't my place to tell them what to do or believe.
I empathize with Mormons who see a loss of faith as calamitous. I do. But I don't think it's appropriate to dictate the particulars of what a belief system should be to other adults.
I really haven't listened to MS enough to know John's approach, but from what I've read, he doesn't seem to engage in similar dictatorial behavior.
This professor's opinion on how to care for other people seems to be very much informed by LDS corporate culture (which is altogether separate from the values taught in LDS scriptures). In my experience (while serving as the executive secretary in an inner-city ward), using a person's material needs as leverage to force their obedience to the Church is the underlying principle behind the LDS welfare system.
One time, in a hurricane in Haiti, an LDS bishop apparently mistakenly applied this principle during a PR situation. Here is the report.Here is the PR spin.
Juggler Vain wrote:In my experience (while serving as the executive secretary in an inner-city ward), using a person's material needs as leverage to force their obedience to the Church is the underlying principle behind the LDS welfare system.
Hey, JV, I had exactly the same experience in exactly the same position. I was executive secretary in an inner-city ward too!
Interesting coincidence.
Anyhow, we had a bishop who was released for not cutting welfare assistance sharply enough to satisfy the stake. He cut it by 40%, but they wanted the remaining assistance reduced by half and the bishop could not see how to do that without seriously neglecting the needs of the people.
So, they replaced him with a bishop from the suburbs who was willing to do their bidding on this.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Kishkumen wrote:As I have noted on a couple of occasions, this is as much a fight waged by ideologues who insist that their narrow interpretation of Mormonism is the only correct one as anything. I am increasingly convinced that this was a coordinated offensive against liberals. Ralph Hancock was one of the principles in this offensive, as his attack on Joanna Brooks demonstrates.
Hancock is one source of the infighting I mentioned. That he has nonacademic wannabes doing the same thing on the Internet just makes it more visible (and awesome).
"It doesn't seem fair, does it Norm--that I should have so much knowledge when there are people in the world that have to go to bed stupid every night." -- Clifford C. Clavin, USPS
"¡No contaban con mi astucia!" -- El Chapulin Colorado
Bob Loblaw wrote:Hancock is one source of the infighting I mentioned. That he has nonacademic wannabes doing the same thing on the Internet just makes it more visible (and awesome).
Yup. I never really cared much for Hancock. When I took a course with him at BYU I was put off by his egotism.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Juggler Vain wrote:In my experience (while serving as the executive secretary in an inner-city ward), using a person's material needs as leverage to force their obedience to the Church is the underlying principle behind the LDS welfare system.
Hey, JV, I had exactly the same experience in exactly the same position. I was executive secretary in an inner-city ward too!
Interesting coincidence.
Anyhow, we had a bishop who was released for not cutting welfare assistance sharply enough to satisfy the stake. He cut it by 40%, but they wanted the remaining assistance reduced by half and the bishop could not see how to do that without seriously neglecting the needs of the people.
So, they replaced him with a bishop from the suburbs who was willing to do their bidding on this.
That's despicable. That is all the Church should be about in my opinion, to help the poor and the needy. 100% of the money in the Church should go to this effort and when people, in leadership, do things like this it turns my stomach. They should be ashamed of themselves.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Hancock's piece is nothing but one speculation on top of another and using several other speculations as evidence. in court the defense attorney would say "Speculation your honor" and the judge would say 'sustained' reducing hancock's spiel to "Uh uh uh -nothing futher your honor!
Juggler Vain wrote:In my experience (while serving as the executive secretary in an inner-city ward), using a person's material needs as leverage to force their obedience to the Church is the underlying principle behind the LDS welfare system.
Hey, JV, I had exactly the same experience in exactly the same position. I was executive secretary in an inner-city ward too!
Interesting coincidence.
Anyhow, we had a bishop who was released for not cutting welfare assistance sharply enough to satisfy the stake. He cut it by 40%, but they wanted the remaining assistance reduced by half and the bishop could not see how to do that without seriously neglecting the needs of the people.
So, they replaced him with a bishop from the suburbs who was willing to do their bidding on this.
My inner city exec sec experiences revealed, in high relief, what the institution's corporate management philosophy is and does at the extremes, and sometimes it's nice, but often (usually?) it's mean and ugly. I suspect that's what you saw, too, and I doubt it's mere coincidence.
Juggler Vain wrote:My inner city exec sec experiences revealed, in high relief, what the institution's corporate management philosophy is and does at the extremes, and sometimes it's nice, but often (usually?) it's mean and ugly. I suspect that's what you saw, too, and I doubt it's mere coincidence.
-JV
That experience was a real blow to my perception of the Church.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist