Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehlin?

[_Yoda]

If DCP did his job as the Editor of MI, and pulled the article on the advice of the GA, then why is Dehlin upset with DCP? Shouldn't Dehlin's anger be more with whomever wrote the article to begin with?

What is also confusing to me is that Dehlin, himself, claimed that he has not READ the article in question. He has evidence that it was apparently negative. It sounds like whomever the GA was who read the article, told him about it. But he has not even read the article himself.

And, since the article has been clearly pulled, is not being published, and has apprently been read by NO ONE, what, exactly are we talking about here? What am I missing?

I would say that if negative articles are actively being pulled from publication, this is something that should be celebrated. I also don't really see why DCP is being portrayed as the ultimate bad guy here, simply because he is the Editor of MI. If he made the ultimate call to actually pull the article in question, then shouldn't he be celebrated as well?

I actually agree with what Liz has said here. If only Dan would have indicated something to this effect in his only public response to this. His response seemed like a duck and cover to me.

Thanks, Rock.

To be fair to Dan, he really hasn't made ANY type of official public response that I am aware of. Dan's blog is hardly an official medium. When Dan first created his blog, he made it clear that it was simply a random forum for his personal thoughts on things. His personal view is that he is tired of Scratch consistently attacking his character, and that was the main purpose of his blog entry.

I suspect that the reason that Dan has not stated anything publicly is out of respect for the confidentiality of the GA involved. Also, you will notice that DCP was not the one who brought this whole mess up, which, in my mind, suggests that he was trying to show John Dehlin some respect as well. I think that John was, unfortunately used as a bit of a pawn by Scratch in this case. If the whole incident had never been mentioned, then no one would have even known that anything negative had been written about Dehlin to begin with.

[Guest]

If DCP did his job as the Editor of MI, and pulled the article on the advice of the GA, then why is Dehlin upset with DCP?

I imagine because DCP was aware of the piece, involved in it, and wanted it published. If not for the GA's intervention, DCP would have been fine with publishing the hit piece. If DCP did the same for a hit piece on you, would you be upset with him?

Shouldn't Dehlin's anger be more with whomever wrote the article to begin with?

Who says it isn't? Sounds like he is just as upset with Smith, the alleged author.

What is also confusing to me is that Dehlin, himself, claimed that he has not READ the article in question. He has evidence that it was apparently negative. It sounds like whomever the GA was who read the article, told him about it. But he has not even read the article himself.

This is a curiosity. I think Dehlin said he doubted the GA had read the article.

And, since the article has been clearly pulled, is not being published, and has apprently been read by NO ONE, what, exactly are we talking about here? What am I missing?

You're missing what the rest of us are missing: the content of the article, more information about why DCP wanted it published, more information about why MI thought it appropriate to publish a hit piece on a member of the church in good standing, how it came to the attention of a GA, and why the GA ordered it pulled.

I would say that if negative articles are actively being pulled from publication, this is something that should be celebrated. I also don't really see why DCP is being portrayed as the ultimate bad guy here, simply because he is the Editor of MI. If he made the ultimate call to actually pull the article in question, then shouldn't he be celebrated as well?

He's the bad guy because he didn't pull the article out of respect for John and a sense of common decency, but because he was ordered to by one of the Brethren. Come on, you know he didn't make the "ultimate call" here.

[_Equality]

To be fair to Dan, he really hasn't made ANY type of official public response that I am aware of.

Why is that a point in his favor? He could clear a lot of this up by responding with clarity. He has chosen to be coy and squirrelly in his only response so far.

Dan's blog is hardly an official medium. When Dan first created his blog, he made it clear that it was simply a random forum for his personal thoughts on things. His personal view is that he is tired of Scratch consistently attacking his character, and that was the main purpose of his blog entry.

If his character did not make him such an easy target, Scratch would have nothing to say. DCP makes Scratch's job too easy, the way bumbling politicians give fodder to late-night talk-show hosts. And what does "official medium" have to do with anything? You are starting to sound like bcspace (shudder).

I suspect that the reason that Dan has not stated anything publicly is out of respect for the confidentiality of the GA involved.

I suspect it is out of a profund sense of embarrassment, like when George Costanza got caught by his mother treating his body like an amusement park. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBxhAa5zy-4

[_Equality]

If the whole incident had never been mentioned, then no one would have even known that anything negative had been written about Dehlin to begin with.

This statement nicely summarizes the church's approach to troubling issues. Sweep them under the rug, hope nobody finds them, and pray that nobody talks about them. "Nothing to see here; move along, move along." You should check with the church PR department--maybe Otterson, Purdy, and Farah could use your help.

[_stemelbow]

Thanks, Rock.

To be fair to Dan, he really hasn't made ANY type of official public response that I am aware of. Dan's blog is hardly an official medium. When Dan first created his blog, he made it clear that it was simply a random forum for his personal thoughts on things. His personal view is that he is tired of Scratch consistently attacking his character, and that was the main purpose of his blog entry.

I suspect that the reason that Dan has not stated anything publicly is out of respect for the confidentiality of the GA involved. Also, you will notice that DCP was not the one who brought this whole mess up, which, in my mind, suggests that he was trying to show John Dehlin some respect as well. I think that John was, unfortunately used as a bit of a pawn by Scratch in this case. If the whole incident had never been mentioned, then no one would have even known that anything negative had been written about Dehlin to begin with.

I appreciate this post, Liz. The bolded part has me concerned.

[_stemelbow]

I think Mormons also pride themselves on putting their light upon the mountain side, not hidden under a bushel basket.

Come on Stem let truth prevail. Your buds with Dan, write him and ask:

1. Dan did a GA ask MI to not publish an article about JD?
If yes, enquiring minds might want to ask further
2. Why did they ask for it to squelched?
3. How did they even find out about the article in the first place?

Stand up for the truth Stem … and please share it with us when you find out.

I will not post anything from DCP here. That would be ridiculous. He doesn't want to post here for very good reasons, i'd say. most posters, like you, hate the guy for some unknown reasons. Sure, John hates him because in John's view DCP has gone out and hurt people. I just don't buy that, at all.

[_Equality]

I think Mormons also pride themselves on putting their light upon the mountain side, not hidden under a bushel basket.

Come on Stem let truth prevail. Your buds with Dan, write him and ask:

1. Dan did a GA ask MI to not publish an article about JD?
If yes, enquiring minds might want to ask further
2. Why did they ask for it to squelched?
3. How did they even find out about the article in the first place?

Stand up for the truth Stem … and please share it with us when you find out.

I will not post anything from DCP here. That would be ridiculous. He doesn't want to post here for very good reasons, i'd say. most posters, like you, hate the guy for some unknown reasons. Sure, John hates him because in John's view DCP has gone out and hurt people. I just don't buy that, at all.

Stop libeling John Dehlin. He never said he hates DCP. You continually smear people by ascribing to them motives and feelings they have not expressed. We know you don't "buy" things that are obvious. It's a sign of the thickness of your skull. You sure didn't get any smarter during your time away from the board.

[_Buffalo]

I think Mormons also pride themselves on putting their light upon the mountain side, not hidden under a bushel basket.

Come on Stem let truth prevail. Your buds with Dan, write him and ask:

1. Dan did a GA ask MI to not publish an article about JD?
If yes, enquiring minds might want to ask further
2. Why did they ask for it to squelched?
3. How did they even find out about the article in the first place?

Stand up for the truth Stem … and please share it with us when you find out.

I will not post anything from DCP here. That would be ridiculous. He doesn't want to post here for very good reasons, i'd say. most posters, like you, hate the guy for some unknown reasons. Sure, John hates him because in John's view DCP has gone out and hurt people. I just don't buy that, at all.

CFR

I think you accuse people of hate because you yourself have a heart full of hate. It comes out in every post you make. Let it go, Stem. Let go of the hate.

[_stemelbow]

Stop libeling John Dehlin. He never said he hates DCP. You continually smear people by ascribing to them motives and feelings they have not expressed. We know you don't "buy" things that are obvious. It's a sign of the thickness of your skull. You sure didn't get any smarter during your time away from the board.

Its not libeling him to read what he says about the man and conclude he doesn't like him. Indeed, read Buffalo's newest post. he does the same thing. he's funny though. he doesn't realize that by saying as much he has spoiled his own point. I don't' know if John would use the words hate in reference to DCP but surely he has some sort of animosity for the guy. At least, that's what he's expressed in this very thread.

[_Buffalo]

Stop libeling John Dehlin. He never said he hates DCP. You continually smear people by ascribing to them motives and feelings they have not expressed. We know you don't "buy" things that are obvious. It's a sign of the thickness of your skull. You sure didn't get any smarter during your time away from the board.

Its not libeling him to read what he says about the man and conclude he doesn't like him. Indeed, read Buffalo's newest post. he does the same thing. he's funny though. he doesn't realize that by saying as much he has spoiled his own point. I don't' know if John would use the words hate in reference to DCP but surely he has some sort of animosity for the guy. At least, that's what he's expressed in this very thread.

I'm not the one accusing everyone who disagrees with me of hate. That's you, stem.

Hate is a cancer in the soul. It will shorten your life and reduce its quality. Let go of the hate and the anger.