Saw Cinepro linked this on MD&D. THought I'd bring it here for everyone's enjoyable thoughts.
Here's Cinepro's quick summation:
-John Dehlin was an "idiot" for leaking the policy. - People only got hurt because the policy was leaked. If it hadn't gotten leaked, no one would have known about it and therefore they wouldn't have gotten hurt. Therefore it's Dehlin's fault people felt "hurt" or "betrayed." - Policies aren't "suppressed" or "buried", (but people are still idiots if they "leak" policies that aren't suppressed or buried). - The 11/5 policy must have been an "iterative" step for the leaders down the path towards discerning the will of the Lord on the subject. (Apparently this path has u-turns).
What a delightful crew this interpreter Radio show crew is, huh?
I was told on Twitter by some of the '#DezNat' crew that I was causing more harm to LGBT members by talking about the policy than the policy itself caused.
They went on to discuss a talk by someone (I honestly can't remember) where they detailed how the outrage of the policy actually caused more depression/suicide/etc because otherwise those LGBT members would not likely have known about it or felt as much pressure.
The logic is absolutely insane and I tried to explain that we can't be silent about abhorrent policies just to limit the exposure, and that the only reason the policy was changed was because of public pressure.
But you just can't win with some believers... and this is just another approach to blame the messenger instead of the old, white dudes winging revelation whenever they get pissed off about a Supreme Court decision or political vote.
lemuel wrote:If their works had stayed in the dark where they belonged, no one would've been hurt. It's the whistleblower's fault.
Well, it's the same as the original pattern laid down by Joseph Smith of old. Whistleblowers were constantly challenging him by tattling about money digging, and fake banking, and plural wives. So this is actually faith promoting if you know a little church history.
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
So, the apologetic for Mr Nelson’s embarrassing revelatory U-Turn is that Dehlin beat Jesus? Have I got that right?
“When we are confronted with evidence that challenges our deeply held beliefs we are more likely to reframe the evidence than we are to alter our beliefs. We simply invent new reasons, new justifications, new explanations. Sometimes we ignore the evidence altogether.” (Mathew Syed 'Black Box Thinking')
Saw Cinepro linked this on MD&D. THought I'd bring it here for everyone's enjoyable thoughts.
Here's Cinepro's quick summation:
-John Dehlin was an "idiot" for leaking the policy. - People only got hurt because the policy was leaked. If it hadn't gotten leaked, no one would have known about it and therefore they wouldn't have gotten hurt. Therefore it's Dehlin's fault people felt "hurt" or "betrayed." - Policies aren't "suppressed" or "buried", (but people are still idiots if they "leak" policies that aren't suppressed or buried). - The 11/5 policy must have been an "iterative" step for the leaders down the path towards discerning the will of the Lord on the subject. (Apparently this path has u-turns).
What a delightful crew this interpreter Radio show crew is, huh?
Don't know about delightful. They sound like idiots to me.
"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." Isaac Asimov