He's making a big deal out of diminishing freedom of speech. The only place i've run into a problem of speaking out about anything is when I was a Mormon. There is NO freedom of speech in that religion, unless you agree 100% with the leaders.
Right. I went to the bishop with concerns and was "warned" that if I continued to "question priesthood authority it was a slippery slope to apostasy". At the time I was not trying to be apostate and really just wanted answers. You are correct, unless it's all roses you are wrong and they are right.
Religious liberty does not mean the ability to dictate to other people how they live their lives.
These self-styled religious libertarians are really trampling on the religious liberties of others. Mormons want to ban alcohol, close stores on Sunday, and of course, bar gays from getting married. No one is forcing Mormons to shop on Sunday, drink or accept gays.
Oaks is conflating religious liberty with the declining political power of Christians in the US. Their ability to control American society is the opposite of religious liberty for those of us who choose to think, act or believe differently from them.
It's also typical of Utah to allow a religious leader to preach at a tax-payer funded state school. Oaks is crying about his lost religious liberty while he uses Utah taxpayer money to spread his own personal religious beliefs.
Theocracy is the enemy of religious freedom. The best way for religious freedom to spread is for churches like LDS, Inc. to butt out of politics.
They can only have newspapers, magazines, TV affiliates, satellite TV networks, internet sites, churches, universities, Temples, thousands of missionaries etc... It's so tough nowadays.
I'm not sure what freedom he is missing, but I don't want his voice suppressed. How is this distinctive voice of Dallin Watchman on the Tower Oaks not being heard? We must find out.
Dallin Oaks needs to be abroad in the land spreading the good news, because when he says things like his wonderful Frontline bit: "It's wrong to criticize leaders of the church, even when the criticism is true" that has to ring a little scary in the ears of non-Mormons.
Free Dallin....
[For all wondering there is some sarcasm at work here]
I agree. Let the living prophets, seers and revelators be seen and heard throughout the land. Let the people see Mormonism in its full glory and see the truth thereof.
Snowball is right on. Dallin is a real piece of work. Give that man a microphone and let him go to town. Dred Scott?...wasn't he one of those less valiant ones who was denied the priesthood because of his skin color? I guess Dallin forgot about that part.
Repressive zealots and scolds imagine that religious freedom means that they are free to pass restrictive legislation against those with alternate lifestyles and beliefs. They feel that banning mosques and gay marriage are expressions of their religious freedoms.
The only example he can give of a diminishing of "freedom of speech" is that employees of Mozilla voiced their displeasure at who was picked as their CEO. The CEO then resigned (was not fired) based on that exercise of freedom of speech by the employees.
How is this a bad thing? Isn't freedom of speech (and freedom to react to that speech) what Oaks wants? Does Oaks belong to any organizations that actively limit the activities of members who exercise their freedom of speech in a way he doesn't care for? Should we be unconcerned when a religious organization throws someone out for exercising freedom of speech but complain when employees of a business organization express their concerns without actually throwing anyone out?
Me thinks he splits hairs to one side of the issue.
Oaks wants the freedom to deny the priesthood to women forever, and never to recognize same-sex marriages.
He also wants the freedom to remain a tax-subsidized institution by the citizens of America -- many of whom are the very people that LDS church is prejudiced against (see above).
"...churches should stand on at least as strong a footing as any other corporation when they enter the public square to participate in public policy debates."
This flies in the face of the Church's public (not private) stance not to get involved in politics.
I just heard a clip of Oaks' speech on the radio. He spoke in full Mormon "Conference Cadence". It sounded wildly inappropriate and a little creepy in a university lecture context.
He apparently no longer knows how to speak like a normal person. Assimilation is complete.
For the mormon definition of liberty, one only needs to look to BYU, where "freedom" means you are "free" to have every tiny little portion of your life tightly controlled as dictated by octogenarians in funny underwear
At least the others are either just unapologetically abusive (which there's a certain honesty to, like Packer), or wishy-washy (like Monson).
Oaks' "religious liberty" mantra is blatantly hypocritical, because he's referring, often, specifically to protests to the church's campaigns to limit gay rights.
Freedom of religion does not mean the freedom to impose your religion on other people. Sheesh. When will these people realize that their personal beliefs do not apply to other people in a multicultural society?
There should be more incursions on religious freedom. Iraq is legalising child girl brides, there's lunatics in Africa killing toddlers and albinos for being witches and gays for being gay, girls are having their clitori sliced off etc.
Meanwhile, in America, there's silly old white pricks dictating to kids what they can do with their own bodies and encouraging their minions worldwide to ask teen girls and boys intrusive sexual questions about their sex lives.
Oaks and the rest of them are panicking because they see the writing on the wall. Religion is becoming less relevant in the US, which is probably the most religious first world country. The sooner these old farts croak the better for everyone.
EDIT wow! Anyone read the comments? And they were the ones DN let through!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/18/2014 09:32AM by ozpoof.
The only trend I see is the one where religions are getting less of a free pass, and are held more to the laws that everyone else has to abide by. He is complaining because the world is becoming less theocratic? What persecution...