Popular BYU Randy Bott Takes Heat for Comments

[_Chap]

Like I said:

Good of you to drop by.

While we have your attention, do you have an opinion on the topic of this thread, that is, what do you think of Professor's Bott's views on the priesthood ban?

[_schreech]

Hey, Bott taught my mission preparation class at BYU...Even then, I thought the guy was a bit of a nutter. He was a pretty entertaining cat but he definitely thought very highly of himself...

[_malkie]

So, this Randy Bott we're talking about - is he Yahoo Bot's cousin, or something? Just a minor variation in spelling?

[_KimberlyAnn]

Like I said:

Good of you to drop by.

While we have your attention, do you have an opinion on the topic of this thread, that is, what do you think of Professor's Bott's views on the priesthood ban?

I apologize for continuing the derail, Chap.

I, too, would like Bot to share his opinion of Bott. I have a hunch their views will sound a lot alike.

KA

[_Chap]

I, too, would like Bot to share his opinion of Bott. I have a hunch their views will sound a lot alike.

KA

Maybe so. But perhaps Yahoo Bot has read the reactions to those views expressed in this thread, and doesn't feel like stepping up to the line.

Somehow, this time round I don't think it will be enough to shout 'race-baiting' - which is (apart from the 'it was lineage not race' shuffle) one of the most common LDS reactions to people who point out the open racism of LDS teaching and practice over the long term.

[_DarkHelmet]

When asked about the priesthood ban the only smart thing for the church to do is say "We were wrong, and we're sorry". Every time they try to rationalize or justify the ban they will just dig themselves into a deeper hole. Just like Bott did.

Exactly. They would be amazed at how quickly that would defuse the issue. I don't think they've ever tried this strategy, so they don't know what a great strategy it is.

[_Willy Law]

Well Dr. Peterson has weighed in.

"The most offensive thing about the quoted statement, though, is its rather complacent, patronizing, condescending tone. "

Hello Pot? Yeah, this is the kettle..

http://dcpsicetnon.blogspot.com/2012/02/unfortunate-attempt-to-explain-pre-1978.html?spref=Facebook

[_Yahoo Bot]

I, too, would like Bot to share his opinion of Bott. I have a hunch their views will sound a lot alike.

KA

Maybe so. But perhaps Yahoo Bot has read the reactions to those views expressed in this thread, and doesn't feel like stepping up to the line.

Somehow, this time round I don't think it will be enough to shout 'race-baiting' - which is (apart from the 'it was lineage not race' shuffle) one of the most common LDS reactions to people who point out the open racism of LDS teaching and practice over the long term.

I did express my views in my post.

Randy and I are actually brothers. I just cut off the last letter of our last name to try and disguise myself.

[_Chap]

I did express my views in my post.

Well, he went back and edited it to add this:

I have constantly argued that God has had a history of being discriminating in terms of whom receives the priesthood, but the reasons therefor are usually his alone. Sometimes He gives a reason. In the case of Israel and the Levites, it was because he loved Abraham and chose to make Israel a chosen people. Not necessarily the same as saying everybody else was lesser.

In the case of His attitude towards the Moabites, He said that they could not be admitted to the congregation until the 10th generation because they were inhospitable to Israel. However, He changed his mind when David was a third generation Moabite. Seems the ban there was an editorial error.

But to say women, or blacks, have not been given the priesthood because it would only annoy them and impede their childish progress is just speculative nonsense. Even apostles can err and say that kind of nonsense.

So it seems he agrees that Bott's views were "just speculative nonsense".

Very reassuring , given that Bott is a BYU Professor of Religion. And apparently apostles can be just as nonsensical. Presumably Yahoo Bot makes no higher claim for himself either, but in this case I'd say he is just about on the button.

[_Yahoo Bot]

I did express my views in my post.

Very reassuring , given that Bott is a BYU Professor of Religion. And apparently apostles can be just as nonsensical. Presumably Yahoo Bot makes no higher claim for himself either, but in this case I'd say he is just about on the button.

When I was a young pup I had a home teaching companion who was an elderly man. He had been a tavern owner and converted to the church years before and was a high priest when I knew him. We home taught a Weyerhauser executive and his family; the executive later became an Area Authority. My home teaching companion was the greatest guy but when he would talk about blacks it was always with the "N" word and our poor family members would cringe.

The Democratic Party, of which I have been a life-long member until last year, opposed in large part the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The reason for that is that Southern Democrats dominated the party and many of them were members of the Klan. The Republicans, from the Civil War to Teddy Roosevelt, fought the Democrats over civil rights on behalf of the blacks. Blacks were admitted as convention delegates to the Republic Party decades before they were admitted the Democratic conventions.

Perceptions and racism changes. It was wrong then and it was wrong now, but a lot of people, including good members of the church, were wrong. I'd say the church has made a whale of an effort to right past wrongs, perceived or actual.