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

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/

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.

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.

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.

@Leta, I’m going to let the troll hang him/herself. If I see a duplicate comment post again, it will be unpublished.