Just read the 100-page hit piece on Dehlin . . .
Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2012 3:25 pm
. . . or at least a reasonable facsimile thereof.
In reading Greg Smith's criticisms of the "Mormons for Marriage" website (in the 2011 FARMS Review), it struck me I was seeing exactly what Smith's criticisms of Dehlin must be like.
In short, Smith sees himself as the anointed defender of the LDS Church, and of President Packer specifically in this article.
"Mormons for Marriage" commented on Packer's 2010 October GC talk regarding homosexuality.
What is the thrust of Smith's criticism?
1. Smith says that the website has rules about being respectful to General Authorities.
2. Smith notes that all posts on the website are moderated through the owner of the website.
3. Smith then lists a number of comments by posters he thinks are not respectful.
Smith goes on like this for pages, coming up with many unremarkable instances of comments made by people other than the owners of the website, and then trying to show by allegedly witty analysis that these comments are not respectful, and that the owner of the website is therefore a liar and all-around bad person; that she is complcit in anything and everything that is posted there.
Smith's piece is not just dreck. It is bad dreck.
And I fully expect his 100-page "hit piece" on John Dehlin is comprised of exactly the same sort of supercillious and vacuous analysis.
The reason it is reputedly 100-pages has nothing to do with how damning it is, but only because John Dehlin has had so many guests on his podcasts and posting their comments on his blog--all of which is seen as fertile ground for Greg Smith to find fault with what is said or written by others than Dehlin, and then to blame Dehlin for what others have said under his auspices.
There are other things that Smith will say about Dehlin himself in his paper, but I give it as my prediction that approximately 50% of his paper will deal with this sort of criticism.
All the Best!
--Consiglieri
In reading Greg Smith's criticisms of the "Mormons for Marriage" website (in the 2011 FARMS Review), it struck me I was seeing exactly what Smith's criticisms of Dehlin must be like.
In short, Smith sees himself as the anointed defender of the LDS Church, and of President Packer specifically in this article.
"Mormons for Marriage" commented on Packer's 2010 October GC talk regarding homosexuality.
What is the thrust of Smith's criticism?
1. Smith says that the website has rules about being respectful to General Authorities.
2. Smith notes that all posts on the website are moderated through the owner of the website.
3. Smith then lists a number of comments by posters he thinks are not respectful.
Smith goes on like this for pages, coming up with many unremarkable instances of comments made by people other than the owners of the website, and then trying to show by allegedly witty analysis that these comments are not respectful, and that the owner of the website is therefore a liar and all-around bad person; that she is complcit in anything and everything that is posted there.
Smith's piece is not just dreck. It is bad dreck.
And I fully expect his 100-page "hit piece" on John Dehlin is comprised of exactly the same sort of supercillious and vacuous analysis.
The reason it is reputedly 100-pages has nothing to do with how damning it is, but only because John Dehlin has had so many guests on his podcasts and posting their comments on his blog--all of which is seen as fertile ground for Greg Smith to find fault with what is said or written by others than Dehlin, and then to blame Dehlin for what others have said under his auspices.
There are other things that Smith will say about Dehlin himself in his paper, but I give it as my prediction that approximately 50% of his paper will deal with this sort of criticism.
All the Best!
--Consiglieri