cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board  

Go Back   cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board > non-Sports > Religion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-24-2008, 04:28 AM   #61
YOhio
AKA SeattleNewt
 
YOhio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,055
YOhio is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

MoTab and her affiliates have to be the only musical organization in the world kicking out folks sympathetic to homosexuals. I bet there are a lot of choir members sweating it right now. Some tenors may want to give bass a shot.
YOhio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2008, 04:30 AM   #62
Archaea
Assistant to the Regional Manager
 
Archaea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
Archaea is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

a poster offered this perspective on the case, not without merit.

Quote:
There are also always two sides to a story. I don't know all of the details here but the story is rife with "advocacy journalism" with language designed to elicit synmpathy for Danzig and disgust and contempt for the LDS church. Those who know the history of the Salt Lake Tribune won't find this particularly surprising. If you'll look closely in the article amonst the inflammatory language, though, you will also note that it was Danzigs threat to publish his recitation of the Church's "abuses" rather than his letter of support for Jeffery Nielson that got him a warning about a disciplinary council. Even he (Danzig) admitted his language was over the top and not appropriate.

Also in the article is this:

"Shifting approaches: Between June 2006 and December 2007, the LDS Church came out with several statements acknowledging homosexuality may be inborn and difficult to change, even with much effort and prayer. It was exactly the position Danzig had been defending."

So the Church has adopted essentially what Danzig apparently wanted to see. So if Danzig was hoping the Church would adopt "exactly the position" it has stated "between June 2007 and December 2007," why is Danzig trumpeting his criticism of and departure from the LDS Church in February 2008?

Also note the following:

"Many committed Mormons, including philosophers, psychologists and some politicians, disagree with the church on the Federal Marriage Amendment, said Nielsen, who now teaches at Utah Valley State College and Westminster College. Several members wrote letters to The Tribune defending Nielsen and sharing his view. He is unaware of disciplinary action taken against any of those letter writers."

This is pretty true, but it destroys Danzig's accusation that he is being singled out for standing up for Nielson. Clearly there is more to this than is in the story.

The last part is a plug for "Family Fellowship, a support group for the LDS families with gay and lesbian children." This group's stated position from their website is that same-sex marriage is "the next logical step." That homosexuality "must be seen in a different moral perspective." That the Church is "repressive" and is a "stumbling block on the path leading to self-acceptance."

Again, without denying that there can be heavy-handedness at times in the church, clearly there is more to the story than this one-sided portrayal. And going public with one's pet grievances does not necessarily put that person on some sort of untouchable high moral plain.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα
Archaea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2008, 04:35 AM   #63
Taq Man
Member
 
Taq Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vegas Baby, Vegas.
Posts: 329
Taq Man is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post
a poster offered this perspective on the case, not without merit.
If the Danzig's released the church from all confidentiality restraints and requested that the churches side of it be made public would the church do so?

Could they get access to it under the freedom of information act since it is information about them?
Taq Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2008, 04:45 AM   #64
Archaea
Assistant to the Regional Manager
 
Archaea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
Archaea is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taq Man View Post
If the Danzig's released the church from all confidentiality restraints and requested that the churches side of it be made public would the church do so?

Could they get access to it under the freedom of information act since it is information about them?
Freedom of information affects government information.

For policy reasons I doubt the Church would ever comment so that it won't have to in future cases.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα
Archaea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2008, 07:28 AM   #65
SoonerCoug
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
 
SoonerCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
SoonerCoug is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taq Man View Post
I had Dr. Bradshaw for Molecular Biology and Cell Bio. He was a hard nosed prof. and I learned a lot from him. He was a mission president at one time too. I used to wonder what it would have been like to have him as my MP.

5 years after I graduated I was working for the Armed Forces DNA lab and an auditor was having a shit fit about the cell bio class I took at the Y. He wanted a full breakdown of the class to see if it was rigorous enough. I called up Dr. Bradshaw to see if he could help me out. He had everything from the year I took the class (All the tests and everything) He was gracious and kind and willing to help a former student when he had no obligation. He is absolutly one of the good guys.

The auditor was more than satisfied.
Bradshaw was a master teacher, and my favorite professor at BYU, even though he was bitchy sometimes. I learned more from his classes than all the other classes in the college of bioag combined.
SoonerCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2008, 01:29 PM   #66
RC Vikings
Senior Member
 
RC Vikings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Rexburg, Idaho
Posts: 2,236
RC Vikings is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YOhio View Post
MoTab and her affiliates have to be the only musical organization in the world kicking out folks sympathetic to homosexuals. I bet there are a lot of choir members sweating it right now. Some tenors may want to give bass a shot.
That's pretty funny.
RC Vikings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2008, 02:05 PM   #67
MikeWaters
Demiurge
 
MikeWaters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,363
MikeWaters is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

No FOI act in this case. The only way to get the information, I would think, is a civil suit.

I can't remember the church ever commenting on a disciplinary case, even when the disciplined person requests and gives permission that they do so. The reason being, of course, that they don't want to be public figures under public scrutiny.
MikeWaters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2008, 02:28 PM   #68
SoonerCoug
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
 
SoonerCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
SoonerCoug is on a distinguished road
Default

We need to get Peggy Fletcher Stack to start posting here. I just emailed her.
SoonerCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2008, 02:41 PM   #69
Cali Coug
Senior Member
 
Cali Coug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
Cali Coug has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeWaters View Post
No FOI act in this case. The only way to get the information, I would think, is a civil suit.

I can't remember the church ever commenting on a disciplinary case, even when the disciplined person requests and gives permission that they do so. The reason being, of course, that they don't want to be public figures under public scrutiny.
The courts won't get involved in an ecclesiastical decision like a church court. It is considered infringing on the church's right of free exercise granted under the First Amendment.

No court would touch this issue.
Cali Coug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2008, 02:49 PM   #70
MikeWaters
Demiurge
 
MikeWaters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,363
MikeWaters is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Coug View Post
The courts won't get involved in an ecclesiastical decision like a church court. It is considered infringing on the church's right of free exercise granted under the First Amendment.

No court would touch this issue.
You are saying one would be unable to file a slander suit and depose witnesses?
MikeWaters is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.