Anyone see this?

[ERCougar]

On the anti-pro-Prop 8 backlash...
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/...6411205.column

[RobinFinderson]

I saw it.

I don't think Mr. Goldberg makes such good points. He starts off with two whack examples -- that because of political correctness sensitivity we would never see television commercials showing either Jews or Muslims in a negative light. He then essentially asks the rhetorical question, then why not extend the same PC respect to Mormons?

But the whole premise is false. To the extent that ANY religion becomes a political actor, political attacks against that actor are fair game. You don't think that conservative Zionists get hammered in the media in Israel? And that brings up another flaw in his reasoning -- while he is correct that there would never be anti-Muslim or anti-Jew political commercials that castigate those religions broadly, it isn't really fair to compare those two broad religions to Mormonism, because the Mormon hierarchical beast has a clear head, and the instructions to donate time and money came directly from the head of the church. A better comparison would be between Mormons and smaller politically organized groups of Jews and Muslims, in which case all three groups could fairly expect political media scrutiny.

What is offensive in the ad is really only offensive to a small group of Mormons who believe that Missionaries are Christ's own servants on a mission from God. To many Mormons, the missionaries should be out of bounds for this kind of political combat. But what those same Mormons fail to understand is that Missionaries are perhaps the strongest symbol of the Mormon church in general. The makers of the ad were not suggesting that missionaries would literally ransack people's homes, but rather that the Mormon church was getting into people's business where it doesn't belong. To expect the media to respect Missionaries as an untouchable sacred religious symbol is not that different than the view of those Muslims that expect the rest of the world to erase all depictions of Mohammad out of all political cartoons.

[UtahDan]

Two thoughts:

1. Yes the hypersensative types on the left are hypocritical for their failure to condemn this when all kinds of other much less offensive or non-offensive things draw their ire.

2. I am not anxious for Mormons to add ourselves to a list of hypersensitives who act outraged whenever you disagree with us and then cry bigotry as a proxy for debate. I think those who are arguing that there should be equal outrage should be asking themselves whether we really want to be the Jewish family that sues the school because Christmas songs are sung at Christmas. I would like it much better if we were to say "we don't find it particularly offensive because most people know how silly it is." Lets set and example to other faith and organizations of turning the other cheek.

[RobinFinderson]

Two thoughts:

1. Yes the hypersensative types on the left are hypocritical for their failure to condemn this when all kinds of other much less offensive or non-offensive things draw their ire.

I have a pet theory that it is actually the right that is most hypersensative. Can you indulge me with an example of the 'hypersensative types on the left?' Not just a person (Al Sharpton) but an example (Al Sharpton when he...).

Maybe we could test the hypothesis with a game. You name one example of left-wing hypersensitivity and I will respond with a right-wing example. It will go around like a game of the The Minister's Cat until we can see which side really has the most pansies.

[LA Ute]

I would like it much better if we were to say "we don't find it particularly offensive because most people know how silly it is." Lets set and example to other faith and organizations of turning the other cheek.

That's pretty much been the Church's approach during my lifetime. There's a reason there is no Mormon Anti-Defamation League, and I don't think there ever will be one.

Having said that, I do think the standards that seem to apply to religions generally should apply to Mormons. Many of the attacks on Mormons -- during both Prop 8 and the Romney campaign -- would be unimaginable against Jews or Catholics, or at least would exact a much greater political cost. I am not Chicken Little, but I do think we Mormons should be concerned about this. Yes, our involvement in Prop 8 was significant, very visible, and made all the difference in the measure's success, but it is undeniable that Prop 8 would not have passed without Catholic and Evangelical money and support. Were we picked as the whippping boy because we are vulnerable -- the weak animal separated from the herd? I think so, at least in part.

Before anyone jumps on me for suggesting Mormons should play the victim, that's not what I am suggesting. All I am saying is that we should be paying close attention to what has been going on.

[LA Ute]

I have a pet theory that it is actually the right that is most hypersensative.

With all due respect, that strikes me as a crazy theory. Are you really saying the political correctness is more a creature of the Right than of the Left? If so, I think you have a very steep hill to climb.

[RobinFinderson]

With all due respect, that strikes me as a crazy theory. Are you really saying the political correctness is more a creature of the Right than of the Left? If so, I think you have a very steep hill to climb.

Its just a theory. I suggested a game to test the theory. I'll go first:

Right wingers are a bunch of sniveling pansies when they complain about people saying "happy holidays" instead of "merry Christmas."

Your turn.

[ERCougar]

Its just a theory. I suggested a game to test the theory. I'll go first:

Right wingers are a bunch of sniveling pansies when they complain about people saying "happy holidays" instead of "merry Christmas."

Your turn.

Left wingers are a bunch of sniveling pansies when they complain about people saying "merry christmas" instead of "happy holidays".

Unoriginal, but I think the right wingers win that one on volume.

[ERCougar]

I saw it.

I don't think Mr. Goldberg makes such good points. He starts off with two whack examples -- that because of political correctness sensitivity we would never see television commercials showing either Jews or Muslims in a negative light. He then essentially asks the rhetorical question, then why not extend the same PC respect to Mormons?

But the whole premise is false. To the extent that ANY religion becomes a political actor, political attacks against that actor are fair game. You don't think that conservative Zionists get hammered in the media in Israel? And that brings up another flaw in his reasoning -- while he is correct that there would never be anti-Muslim or anti-Jew political commercials that castigate those religions broadly, it isn't really fair to compare those two broad religions to Mormonism, because the Mormon hierarchical beast has a clear head, and the instructions to donate time and money came directly from the head of the church. A better comparison would be between Mormons and smaller politically organized groups of Jews and Muslims, in which case all three groups could fairly expect political media scrutiny.

What is offensive in the ad is really only offensive to a small group of Mormons who believe that Missionaries are Christ's own servants on a mission from God. To many Mormons, the missionaries should be out of bounds for this kind of political combat. But what those same Mormons fail to understand is that Missionaries are perhaps the strongest symbol of the Mormon church in general. The makers of the ad were not suggesting that missionaries would literally ransack people's homes, but rather that the Mormon church was getting into people's business where it doesn't belong. To expect the media to respect Missionaries as an untouchable sacred religious symbol is not that different than the view of those Muslims that expect the rest of the world to erase all depictions of Mohammad out of all political cartoons.

I agree with you on this. The church became involved in an ugly game by choice and they have to face the consequences of that. I was more remarking the presence of the piece in the LA times.

[LA Ute]

Its just a theory. I suggested a game to test the theory. I'll go first:

Right wingers are a bunch of sniveling pansies when they complain about people saying "happy holidays" instead of "merry Christmas."

Your turn.

Foul! When "right wingers" complain about that they are not manifesting any sensitivity to a perceived attack. They are griping about political correctness -- which makes your first shot a little ironic, no? Right-wingers show hypersensitivity by complaining about politically correct hypersensitivity that causes people to avoid saying "Merry Christmas?"

Just giving you a hard time. Want to try something else?

[LA Ute]

The church became involved in an ugly game by choice and they have to face the consequences of that.

No doubt. The debate, I think, is over whether those consequences include discourse that crosses the line between legitimate political debate and un-American religious attacks. In fact, the whole debate is over where that line should be (and maybe even over whether there there should be a line).

[RobinFinderson]

Left wingers are a bunch of sniveling pansies when they complain about people saying "merry christmas" instead of "happy holidays".

Unoriginal, but I think the right wingers win that one on volume.

What?? Are you nuts? I have never heard a left-winger complain about getting a "merry christmas" instead of a "happy holidays." Left wingers don't care. We use the phrase "Happy holidays" because it INCLUDES Christmas already. It it the limp-wristed right wingers who think there is a 'war on Christmas.'

Maybe we need to be more specific:

Bill O'Reily, John Gibson, that Buttars dude, and Rush (freaking) Limbaugh all get their panties twisted up in a knot over the use of "happy holidays."

[il Padrino Ute]

Robin -

Political correctness stifles free speech. People have to be sensitive to everyone and everything in order to avoid lawsuits, character attacks and accusations of bigotry.

Which side brought political correctness into today's world?

[ERCougar]

What?? Are you nuts? I have never heard a left-winger complain about getting a "merry christmas" instead of a "happy holidays." Left wingers don't care. We use the phrase "Happy holidays" because it INCLUDES Christmas already. It it the limp-wristed right wingers who think there is a 'war on Christmas.'

Maybe we need to be more specific:

Bill O'Reily, John Gibson, that Buttars dude, and Rush (freaking) Limbaugh all get their panties twisted up in a knot over the use of "happy holidays."

You've never heard anyone complain that "Merry Christmas" is exclusionary? If not, we live in different worlds and there's not much point to debating this.

I don't know anyone who complains about the use of "happy holidays" and you don't know anyone who complains about the use of "Merry Christmas". Ok.

[RobinFinderson]

Robin -

Political correctness stifles free speech. People have to be sensitive to everyone and everything in order to avoid lawsuits, character attacks and accusations of bigotry.

Which side brought political correctness into today's world?

Who cares how PC began? My hypothesis is that right-wingers are the CURRENT biggest bitchers and moaners about getting picked on, and I am testing it with a game, and right now I am winning. Step up to the plate!