Latest Blogposts
12 for '12: Dark SeasJesus Or Genome, Dark SeasWine Wednesday: Bodegas Carchelo "C"Sarah Palin Takes On Mr. Snuffleupagus and the PresidentNew Tunes Tuesday: Kimbra, Garbage, ExitmusicTV Tonight: Glee, Dancing With the Stars, Hollywood Treasure12 for '12: Lady MurasakiGlad You Asked: Spindrift, Reptar and Crime FictionTea Grotto renewedGive SLC Mayor Becker an Earful
Latest Blog Comments
·I read daily too:Let's get to the bottom of your angst: You're a k
birdlovaaaducksaauce:I'm really happy to have you mentioned the greeat
test
News Blog
Posted // 2009-08-20 -
Mormon Conversations
by Josh Loftin |
|
 |
||
Posted // 2009-08-20 - Already notable for its awesome public relations, which generally consists of "Wait! Wait! I Won't Tell You!," the LDS Church has gone totally 2006 in its quest to prove it has evolved since the 1970s.
The church has launched a blog. If you don't know what a blog is, the church explains it by stating that it will have a "more conversational tone" and is a place for items that "may not lend themselves to a news release." Of course, the blog will be written by members of the Public Affairs Department (aka Bureau of Righteous Thought), so their conversational non-press releases will likely sound like stilted press releases from the Mormon Church. (For comparison, read blogs written by journalists as a side project, including posts written by me. They often sound like news stories).
However, despite the blog authors being members of the Bureau of Righteous Thought and the blog being published on the official LDS Church's website, please do not think these are official positions of the church. NO! These are only conversational non-press releases, whose existence were announced in an official press release.
Oh, and by the way, these conversational non-press releases cannot be commented on by people reading the blog. Which, of course, eliminates the conversational part. Then, it becomes more of a lecture. Or a press release.
It gets better. Their total activity on the blog is two posts. The first one is a conversational non-press release explaining their new outlet for conversational non-press releases, which is usually the "About" page. The second post, which seems to be the entire reason for the blog's existence, is an entirely non-conversational item that, after explaining they will take the radical step of linking to other blogs on occasion (revolutionary!), links to another blog that takes the horse whip to an AP story suggesting that the gay marriage opposition of the LDS Church is hurting their image. Which is, of course, a ludicrous proposition, because everyone loves the wonderfully compassionate stand that the LDS Church (and others, to be fair) have taken in making sure that gay couples remain in the shadows.
Essentially, this is a press release telling people everything that is wrong with the AP story, except it's not a press release. It's a conversational non-press release that simply links to problems other people had with the story. So, it's not official. Except it is, because it says that the author of the criticism has "concerns we share." Who is we? The LDS Church (which hosts the blog), the Bureau of Righteous Thought (who writes the blog), or the conversational, NOT official, conversant who wrote the post? Or is that part of the conversation, that the we is neither he nor she (and definitely not he-he or she-she, but maybe he-she-she-she?) but an us, the collective public who is part of the conversation, even though we cannot actually participate?
My head hurts. Is this what's it's like to be Mormon?
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
© Copyright 2012 Copperfield Publishing
Salt Lake City's Independent Guide to
News, Arts & Entertainment
Find more productive things to do, eh? You mean like round up 22 million dollars to help take away the civil liberities of gay people? If your religious organization is going to involve itself in government matters, not to mention meddling in the very, personal lives of others, then be prepared for verbal backlash. Which in my mind is very productive, because it allows outsiders of the Mormon Church to see you folks for who you really are, intolerant, elitists. And don't give me this crap that I am the one being intolerant. I am not trying to shut down your church or your sacred temples. You are free to live your life the way you see fit, why can you not let others live theirs as well, "...give them the rights that you entitle for yourself."(Ingersoll).
Why do you care about marriages that are being performed outside of the temple anyways? According to the church they are not even valid. No one is demanding that they have the right to get married in your sacred building.
It seems to me, you need to get a life and a hobby and find something productive to do with your life then bag on other people's religious views. Maybe you need to move OUT of Utah and experience some other religiously dominant areas in the country and the world. You probably grew up in Utah, or have some sort of bizzare anger against some Mormon person in your life and you choose to bash and degrade. What is this country built upon?? No one is forcing YOU or ANYONE ELSE for that matter to be Mormon or join their church or accept what they do. So find something else in the huge, huge world to expend all of your abounding energy. To me someone who spends so much time and energy trying to prove someone wrong or find fault is hiding something, or very insecure hmmmm....... It's definately one thing to stand up for what you believe, but to constantly put down what other's do???? Wow, I thought we were more liberal here. Guess not.
The LDS' so called "blog" doesn't need a comment section, it just needs an icon that you can press that has a smiling blank stare that just nods to everything that was written, just sheep following their shepherd...did I just use a doctrinal phrase to criticize the blog?....maybe
I really like the way this is written. There is no acusation just asking questions. Anyone can take away from the questions what they want but I am sure that these are questions that people would like answers to. Josh, well done.
For someone who preaches tolerance, you sure seem to bag on the Mormons a lot.
I'm not pissed, and I'm not trying to be a prude or a zealot, I pride myself on being a laid back kind of guy. I just think that the recent happenings involving the LDS Church (including the Kiss-In) is a really sensitive issue with people taking very adamant stances on polar sides.
It would be difficult for the church to be more politically correct, because it goes against some of their most fundamental and core doctrines.
It's also hard for others to be tolerant of the church because, well, nobody likes to be discriminated.
Seems to me like it's a difficult position to be in. It's easy to point fingers. It's also easy to blame an organization for the acts of an individual. Instead of thinking 'The Church' is full of zealots because of how some security guards handled the Temple Square issue pause to think for a moment. Doesn't that make you just as bad as the Mormons who think all 'gays' are crazy sex fiends bent on destroying humanity as we know it?
Give them some credit for trying to bridge the gap.