Des News Reports Brandon Flowers-Dawkins Incident

[_Elphaba]

I disagree with the criticisms of Dawkins. Why would anyone expect an atheist well known for debating religionists about how all religions are man-made, and who consistently writes books, lectures, blogs, and tweets about the same, to have remained silent when the discussion was about Mormonism? It's obviously what he was booked to do.

The person at fault for putting Flowers in this extremely unfair position is the one who booked both a Mormon and an outspoken atheist on the same show, and that is Skavlan. In fact, Skavlan clearly meant to make Flowers look foolish given he directed the conversation to Flowers Mormonism without Dawkins on the stage, and then brought Dawkins out. Given Dawkins' reputation, it's likely Flowers might have said much less, if anything at all, about his Mormonism if Dawkins had been there all along.

I am not saying Dawkins was completely innocent. He obviously either suggested, or agreed to, setting Flowers up by coming on stage after Skavlan had gotten Flowers to discuss his Mormon beliefs. That is extremely bad form, and I really wish Dawkins had not done that.

But it is absurd to expect Dawkins not to have confronted Flowers given he is known for, and was obviously booked, to do just that. The criticism belongs to Skavlan, who planned the whole thing in the first place.

[_Ludd]

by the way, Mr. Ludd, I don't think we've crossed paths, but I have to say, you're a freaking genius.

OK.

I don't know if we've crossed paths either, but what does that have to do with my supposedly being a "freaking genius"? (My likely-soon-to-be-ex-wife probably wouldn't agree with you on that one, since she believes I've been "deceived" by all the evil anti-mormons who "don't know anything compared to the prophet and apostles".

[_Bob Loblaw]

My likely-soon-to-be-ex-wife probably wouldn't agree with you on that one, since she believes I've been "deceived" by all the evil anti-mormons who "don't know anything compared to the prophet and apostles".

I am sorry to hear that you are in that position. That happens to far too many people. The only reason it hasn't happened to me is that people in my stake still think I believe in the church. If they didn't, they wouldn't keep coming to me for patriarchal blessings.

[_Ludd]

I disagree with the criticisms of Dawkins. Why would anyone expect an atheist well known for debating religionists about how all religions are man-made, and who consistently writes books, lectures, blogs, and tweets about the same, to have remained silent when the discussion was about Mormonism? It's obviously what he was booked to do.

The person at fault for putting Flowers in this extremely unfair position is the one who booked both a Mormon and an outspoken atheist on the same show, and that is Skavlan. In fact, Skavlan clearly meant to make Flowers look foolish given he directed the conversation to Flowers Mormonism without Dawkins on the stage, and then brought Dawkins out. Given Dawkins' reputation, it's likely Flowers might have said much less, if anything at all, about his Mormonism if Dawkins had been there all along.

I am not saying Dawkins was completely innocent. He obviously either suggested, or agreed to, setting Flowers up by coming on stage after Skavlan had gotten Flowers to discuss his Mormon beliefs. That is extremely bad form, and I really wish Dawkins had not done that.

But it is absurd to expect Dawkins not to have confronted Flowers given he is known for, and was obviously booked, to do just that. The criticism belongs to Skavlan, who planned the whole thing in the first place.

I agree the whole thing was obviously a set-up, and in very poor form, if you ask me. I very much doubt Skavlan would have invited Tom Cruise or John Travolta on his show and then brought out some well-known anti-Scientologist to ambush them. I'm sure Flowers wouldn't have mentioned Mormonism at all had he not been put on the spot by the host the way he was. You could tell he was pretty perplexed by the whole thing, and I'm sure the Killers won't be making another appearance on that show.

[_Bob Loblaw]

I agree the whole thing was obviously a set-up, and in very poor form, if you ask me. I very much doubt Skavlan would have invited Tom Cruise or John Travolta on his show and then brought out some well-known anti-Scientologist to ambush them. I'm sure Flowers wouldn't have mentioned Mormonism at all had he not been put on the spot by the host the way he was. You could tell he was pretty perplexed by the whole thing, and I'm sure the Killers won't be making another appearance on that show.

It definitely wasn't a fair fight. No one expects a musician to be an expert on anything except maybe music. To bring in someone who has made a career out of bashing religion is bad form, indeed.

[_Ludd]

My likely-soon-to-be-ex-wife probably wouldn't agree with you on that one, since she believes I've been "deceived" by all the evil anti-mormons who "don't know anything compared to the prophet and apostles".

I am sorry to hear that you are in that position. That happens to far too many people.

Yeah, I should have been smarter and not tried to explain my loss of belief to her. But how do you keep things like that private in the context of a marriage? You can't. That's the problem. It's like we now live in two different worlds. Two different universes. And even if we still have 90% of our beliefs in common, that last 10%......well, I think you know what I mean.

The only reason it hasn't happened to me is that people in my stake still think I believe in the church. If they didn't, they wouldn't keep coming to me for patriarchal blessings.

You're kidding, right?

I can't imagine losing faith while being a bishop or a stake president, let alone a patriarch. Kinda makes me wonder how many GA's there are who have figured out that it's all a big hoax---especially if they are the "full-time" variety for whom the church is their source of livelihood. You gotta figure there are a few. I'm just waiting for the day that one of them finally gets up the balls to publicly admit it, no matter the consequences.

[Guest]

Yeah, I should have been smarter and not tried to explain my loss of belief to her. But how do you keep things like that private in the context of a marriage? You can't. That's the problem. It's like we now live in two different worlds. Two different universes. And even if we still have 90% of our beliefs in common, that last 10%......well, I think you know what I mean.

I stopped trying to work out the last 10% and pay more attention to the 90%. It doesn't have to be the 800-lb gorilla in the marriage.

You're kidding, right?

You'll never know for sure.

I can't imagine losing faith while being a bishop or a stake president, let alone a patriarch. Kinda makes me wonder how many GA's there are who have figured out that it's all a big hoax---especially if they are the "full-time" variety for whom the church is their source of livelihood. You gotta figure there are a few. I'm just waiting for the day that one of them finally gets up the balls to publicly admit it, no matter the consequences.

I've met bishops and stake presidents who didn't believe in the church but not anyone higher up than that. They probably exist though.

[_just me]

You guys are horrible, evil, hypocrite, anti-mormons! Always siding with the critic to make the Mormon look bad.

[_Ludd]

Yeah, I should have been smarter and not tried to explain my loss of belief to her. But how do you keep things like that private in the context of a marriage? You can't. That's the problem. It's like we now live in two different worlds. Two different universes. And even if we still have 90% of our beliefs in common, that last 10%......well, I think you know what I mean.

I stopped trying to work out the last 10% and pay more attention to the 90%. It doesn't have to be the 800-lb gorilla in the marriage.

Hard to say what will happen. It's like I said in my last post---it's like we're now living in two different worlds. She told me not long ago that she feels like it's an "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" kind of deal where she woke up one day and her real husband had been replaced with a replicant. How do you respond to something like that?

[_Bob Loblaw]

Hard to say what will happen. It's like I said in my last post---it's like we're now living in two different worlds. She told me not long ago that she feels like it's an "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" kind of deal where she woke up one day and her real husband had been replaced with a replicant. How do you respond to something like that?

In my marriage we talked it out. I told her that I have changed but then people are supposed to change over nearly 20 years of marriage. But I told her that at my core I am still the same person she married. I value truth, and I try to love and serve others as I always have. It took time but she didn't give up and we ended up being able to respect our differences and still keep the good things we have in common.