Senator Absent at NAACP Meeting
February 19th, 2008It appears he is afraid of the media. Best part is toward the end at about 1:45:
Also from the Mormon-owned station.
Salt Lake Tribune story here.
Touchy Mormons have wondered why I’m including Mr. Buttars religion at all in my writings about this issue. I believe we’ll see more of this kind of ignorance in the future not less if the church remains silent. I believe that is what can be expected when a dominate culture is fed ignorance for decades. Racism is ignorance. Bigotry is ignorance. That more people aren’t clamoring publicly, that the media outlets are standing back and choosing their language far more carefully than Mr. Buttars has (twice now!) says so much about a culture that has been shaped with a heavy pair of hands by one party and one church. I call out the church because here is a brilliant chance to take a stand. I know the church will probably not comment, but how great would it be if it did? Wouldn’t you want whatever organization you belong to to stand up against hate speech?
The irony is that Mr. Buttars and his supporters are now trying to make Buttars the victim. Typical conservative tactics. o
UPDATE: From the Mormon owned paper. Best bit from the candy ass GOP Salt Lake County chair:
“Salt Lake County Republican Party Chairman James Evans said that Buttars’ comments, including his recent reference to lynching, were not racist.
“‘It is a ‘hate lynch mob,’ Evans said, echoing Buttars’ words.
“‘People decide who’s a racist and who’s not based on their agenda,’ Evans said. ‘This is a political agenda to silence a white, conservative male … race is being used as a weapon to undermine Sen. Buttars’ effectiveness.’”
The poor, white conservative male defense. Give me a break.
Tags: chris buttars, ignorance, utah racism
-
This entry was posted on Tuesday, February 19th, 2008 at 11:30 pm and is filed under link, politics, utah. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed. Please read the Terms of Service before leaving a response.
February 19th, 2008 at 11:48 pm
Jon, it is so fantastic that you are continuing to cover this. It’s important, compelling, disturbing and outrageous and for those of us outside of Utah, we’re not hearing about it at all. Also, the comments you’re getting on each thread are so extremely interesting.
More than anything, though, I will sleep better tonight knowing that Rod Decker is still alive and screaming at his audience. That and this missed opportunity for the church? The world is in a perfect place.
February 20th, 2008 at 4:19 am
Silent? Wha…?
Twice every year the LDS church goes on record in worldwide broadcasts, in umpteen zillion languages, calling for peace, tolerance, love, and mutual respect. Has for decades. In consequence, I have no doubt where it stands on the issue of hate speech, and neither will anyone who regularly tunes-in to the semi-annual Conferences or even weekly Music and the Spoken Word on Sunday mornings. The LDS church has taken an unequivocal stand. And yes, I do think this is great.
Your condemnation of Mr. Buttar’s statements is clearly correct and abundantly fitting, but poorly served by calling into question the LDS church’s commitment to basic Christian values.
I can’t say the same of the Utah Republican Party — I have often wondered what they’re about and this incident is no exception.
As for local politics, a favorite and somewhat tired saw of the Church’s detractors is to declare and then decry its role in civic processes. So it’s odd now to hear you to take the opposite tack, as it would fuel that cycle. As for me, I approve of the dignified, above-the-fray approach, and do not hope to call down the Church’s wrath on elected officials — especially those who already seem intent on self-destruction.
By the way, Heather’s new sugar bowl is truly impractical, in relative terms, yes, but also SO good looking that it’s got to be worth having on the breakfast table.
February 20th, 2008 at 7:23 am
hey there you free speech phony, yeah right…YOU!!!and pull your pants up!!
you are a hypocrite liar who publicly preaches free speech (except when it is something with which you disagree)but who really hates open discourse.
let’s see how stupid you people really are: (rules of the truly stupid souless morons):
1. anyone who might say, “hey, you have a black mark on your {record}{shirt} {soul}” is a racist devil to be destroyed.
If i say “that black mark on your record is one ugly baby” I should have my gonads removed by a team of man hating lesbian trasgendered half elf midgets with a speech impediment.
Pay attention to which media outlets are pumping up this story. These are the enemies of free speech.
2. Only black people can use the word “lynched”, even if they live in Lynchberg, Tenn. or Lynchberg, Va. And they should be fired if they aren’t black. All whites who are named Lynch must be sent to a concentration camp run by …. you get the idea.
3. If i say “white lie” I am a racist who must be destroyed, unless I am a homo, woman, oriental, indio, or….anything besides a white male.
This reminds me of the lynching of Don Imus. And that was concocted to discipline the talk show host roster to not speak ill of Hillary.
February 20th, 2008 at 7:28 am
I’ve said before, and I’ll say it again: The LDS church is hurting herself by not speaking up. People outside of Utah think Mormons and Utah are one in the same, and they think that Mormons are racist. Honestly. It’s not nice, but it’s an attitude I have encountered over and over. If the LDS church wants to change that perception, this would be a great place to start.
Someone mentioned (in the comment run for the previous Buttars-related post) that the Catholic Church didn’t speak out against “The Passion of the Christ” and its anti-Semitism. I am not Catholic, but much of my family is, and I think it’s important to note that Mel Gibson is not a regular Catholic. He’s a Traditionalist (believer in the pre-Vatican II liturgy), which is the rough equivalent of a Fundamentalist Mormon. So that would be like the LDS church inserting itself into the legal troubles of Warren Jeffs. No one expects that, certainly.
That said, it’s too bad that the Catholic Church and Pope John Paull II didn’t condemn “the Passion” as anti-Semitic, because Mel Gibson’s drunk, anti-Semitic comments clearly revealed his intentions in making a movie that portrays Jews as violent, horrible, evil people. So by viewing this movie, and not condemning it, Pope John Paul II merely perpetuated the notion that Catholics are anti-Semitic, a notion which, I believe, hurts the Catholic Church. So, like the LDS church, the Catholic church only hurt herself by remaining silent.
February 20th, 2008 at 7:32 am
Jon, please bounce the troll.
February 20th, 2008 at 10:49 am
Leta, please see John F’s comment above…
February 20th, 2008 at 11:06 am
@John F., Thanks for the comment, but for non-Mormons, they don’t pay attention to Mormon conferences. They do pay attention to the media. Which was my point in involving the church to begin with. Here’s a great opportunity to do some positive PR. Why wouldn’t an organization take advantage? Same for the GOP in Utah. Same for the Governor’s office, Utah Senate President, etc. True to Utah form, a missed opportunity to lead.
@Leta, I’m going to let the troll hang him/herself. If I see a duplicate comment post again, it will be unpublished.
February 20th, 2008 at 11:56 am
When things like Mitt Romney winning literally 90% of the vote in the Utah Republican primary happen, that’s why non-Mormons outside the state equate the church with the political machinery.
February 20th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
N double A C Peter. Lol. Sorry…that cracked me up.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
@John F
I agree with you to some extent. I think that if the church were to issue some statement, it would only reinforce the perception (sometimes correct, sometimes not) that the church interferes in politics, especially in Utah.
While not often, the church does sometimes take stances on political issues, whether it is the DOMA, prop 22 in California, or the Equal Rights Amendment.
@Blurb
In Utah, the fact that so many legislators are mormon and conservative republicans gives the perception that the church is more involved in politics than it actually is. While many of the legislators attribute their actions to their faith in the lds church and it’s doctrines, the church itself doesn’t often get involved. I view Buttar’s (and others’) efforts to legislate against gays, liberals, etc., as rooted in personal prejudice and bigotry, and not necessarily anything to do directly with the church. They may attribute their “morality” to the church, but they don’t really understand or practise what the church (or even more important, Christ) teaches. There are lots of problems in the church, and among the membership, but the basic doctrine is of love, understanding, acceptance and respect. Those who don’t exemplify those traits (who are many) are simply bad examples. The fact of the matter is, is that the current political environment in Utah is a combination of many factors, one of them being the dominant religion, but even more than that, the culture that is intertwined with that religion, but not necessarily representative of that religion.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
That being said, I find Buttars reprehensible and disgraceful, and am sorely disappointed with his colleagues, the Utah GOP, Utah in general, etc. etc. etc..
I like how Mr. Truth Speaker indicates that a “homo” cannot be a white male.
I don’t understand why some cannot comprehend that “free speech” does not mean that there are no consequences when you say something stupid, bigoted, racist, or otherwise reprehensible. Free speech means simply that we have the right so way what we want without being jailed or censored - Buttars isn’t being jailed or censored because of what he said, rather the public is censuring him. This is an important distinction. In no way is right to free speech being attacked.
February 20th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Bells rung about racism from the ivory towers of a well to do white males living atop the whitest hills of the whitest cities on earth tend to ring with the hollow clang of guilt and the tinny tone of self righteousness.
SKA!! pickitup pickitup pickitup pickitup pickitup RUUUUDE BOYAH!!
i know that when i chime in i tend to come with a smidge of smack down, but i do have you on RSS enjoy hearing the struggles of life in that place I don’t miss.
all the best.
February 20th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
and of course you have seen this:
http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/
February 21st, 2008 at 5:40 am
@Blurb
First, great thread — takes me back to feeling jazzed when the Student Review published my letters to the editor. (Yes, I still have the issues.)
I think I understand your point/question better: Why doesn’t the Church use this opportunity for positive PR? Could the Church be more PR savvy? Hell, yes. More specifically, my short answer is I think it will, but carefully…. The long answer is that, unlike the other organizations you mention, the Church is in the biz of being a church, which includes advocating reform in a way that best preserves the flock, including Buttars himself.
Folks out there should understand that with one public sentence the Church could have Mr. Buttars, his children, and his grandchildren mowing their lawns at midnight. Dilemma: Should the Church abandon its role as moral compass, or should it risk ostracizing a family to make a good point and buy PR? (Granted, this is entirely aside from his political prospects, if any remain.)
Taking a page from the Church’s play book: Perhaps the Church intends to respond as did Christ to the woman taken in adultery (St John 8:3-11). Guilt was clear then, too. The crowd stood ready to stone this woman upon word from the Rabbi (Christ) as prescribed by law. You know the rest of the story. The fun part is that The Rebel Jesus (nod to Jackson Browne) broke the rules, the crowd learned something (call it PR), and the woman lived. Kinda smooth. (Yeah, yeah, I know…Where was the man in all this?)
If our sense is that the Church is breaking the rules by missing an opportunity here, the reason may be that it is figuratively pausing to write on the ground, “…as though he heard them not.”
I will be listening for what the Church eventually has to say, and I suspect that you and the media will as well. I hope to hear a forthright exploration of this topic, with an implicit or explicit “Go, and sin no more.” I hope it makes the news wires and reflects well on our fair state.
@Merkley???
I like your poetic smack! Still, I’ve got no self-righteousness your you, but some guilt for sure. Once, decades ago, when I was young and dumb(er), I uttered a Buttars-like comment. A black family overheard me, and the father took me to task for my idiocy. How right he was. I retain the distinct shame of it and feel it in this moment. I can advise Buttars to wise up, but I can cast no stones.
@Craig
+1