Page 1 of 3

Bott's brief statement to press request for response ....

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 8:43 pm
by _Rollo Tomasi
If this has already been posted here, I apologize.

The Student Review reports that this is what happened when it tried to get an interview with Bott (emphasis mine):

In fact, when asked to explain his position on the situation, Bott emailed the Student Review with only a link to the press release and the statement: “I have been asked by the Church to forward their response and endorse it. In order to be obedient, that will be the extent of my comment.”

Here is the link to the Student Review article:

http://thestudentreview.org/2012/02/29/ ... nton-post/

In the comments section of that same article, there is a post about a statement by one "Ryan Bott," the purported son of Randy Bott:

“As many of you know, my dad (Randy) has been in the news… The explanation is simple… yes, he did grant an interview to Washington Post to discuss “Mitt Romney”. The reporter told him that he had cleared the interview with BYU and the Dean of Religion – which he found out this morning was a lie. The reporter misquoted and misrepresented the majority of the interview. My dad has been asked by BYU and the church to remain silent, but I feel his side should be told.

Some have noticed that we have deactivated the Know Your Religion Blog… This was not done as an admittance of guilt, but was done at the request of BYU until things settle down.

Any of you who personally know my father, know that he is definitely NOT a racist, as the media would have you believe. It amazes me that no one at BYU or the church seem to care to give him the benefit of the doubt, investigate what was really said; instead it seems easier to just believe a liberal Washington Post Reporter, go on “hear-say”, and throw my dad under the bus.

Here’s hoping that people will take the time, and reflect on their experiences with my dad and judge him according to his works, rather than lies that a reporter makes up to stir the pot during an election season.

Just thought you should know the truth behind the story… – Ryan Bott”

This all gets curiouser and curiouser ....

Re: Bott's brief statement to press request for response ...

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 8:48 pm
by _Drifting
I said a day or two ago on a different thread that I was beginning to feel sorry for Bott and that I thought he was being 'scapegoated'.

I have asked this before; what did he say that was incorrect in what the Church has taught or was inconsistent with that which General Authorities have said?

Re: Bott's brief statement to press request for response ...

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 8:51 pm
by _just me
Drifting wrote:I said a day or two ago on a different thread that I was beginning to feel sorry for Bott and that I thought he was being 'scapegoated'.

I have asked this before; what did he say that was incorrect in what the Church has taught or was inconsistent with that which General Authorities have said?


Nothing. Except he forgot that a hand was waved and we were to "forget" everything.

The church teaches many things about people of dark skin and the priesthood. However, they have no official position on the subject.

It really should be simple to understand. Everything the church teaches about skin color and priesthood accessibility is NOT official.

Re: Bott's brief statement to press request for response ...

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 8:55 pm
by _just me
So, now this man has been told to shut up. Is everyone that tells their understanding about the gospel going to be told the same thing?

There has been such a big push for all members to blog about the church. Will the church be rethinking that position? Will it become more insular? Will missionaries be told to not discuss certain issues and beliefs with prospective new members?

Just how worried are "The Brethren?"

Re: Bott's brief statement to press request for response ...

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 8:57 pm
by _DarkHelmet
Wow. This thing is getting totally blown out of proportion. I'm waiting for Bott to proclaim "I'm just a patsy," before BYU officials escort him through a parking garage and DCP jumps out and shoots him in the gut.

Nothing was taken out of context. Bott said things that we have all heard in the church to explain the priesthood ban. The church got embarrassed and ordered him to take down all his stuff. It's not the Washington's Post fault, or the reporters fault. There is no grand conspiracy here. Just a guy that said things that the church no longer wants said.

Re: Bott's brief statement to press request for response ...

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 9:02 pm
by _Equality
He was thrown under the bus all right, not by the Washington Post, but by President Newsroom.

Re: Bott's brief statement to press request for response ...

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 9:12 pm
by _Rollo Tomasi
Equality wrote:He was thrown under the bus all right, not by the Washington Post, but by President Newsroom.

Yup. He's toast -- offered up as a sacrifice on the great PR altar. And for what? For simply repeating what dead prophets said and believed for nearly 150 years. A real travesty.

Re: Bott's brief statement to press request for response ...

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 9:13 pm
by _Yahoo Bot
He was thrown under the bus by his son.

And he partially threw himself under the bus by saying the he had done something to be "obedient," which is a back-handed slap at his employer. What's the deal, does he lack free will?

Re: Bott's brief statement to press request for response ...

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 9:15 pm
by _just me
My guess is he would very much like to keep his job. Keeping his job probably means obeying the command to take down his blog and shut up.

Re: Bott's brief statement to press request for response ...

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 9:16 pm
by _Drifting
Yahoo Bot wrote:He was thrown under the bus by his son.

And he partially threw himself under the bus by saying the he had done something to be "obedient," which is a back-handed slap at his employer. What's the deal, does he lack free will?


No, he lacks an honest Employer.