After a few months of non-Prop 8 posts, I'm back with a new idea on tolerance. Back during election season, I found myself really angry a lot. Not just about prop 8, but about Obama and just the direction of our nation in general. After just a short while, the new administration has proved to be even more destructive than we feared, but I'm not going to get into that. For whatever reason, I don't feel as fired up about this stuff anymore. Don't get me wrong--I'm still a passionate conservative, but what I mean is I don't feel that chronic frustration/anger/anxiety about it all.
I'm sure many of you were aware of last week's Big Love episode depicting ordinances in the Mormon temple. Many church members were angry about it, trying to organize boycotts and write letters and all that. I didn't. While the fact that the producers chose to publicly portray something I hold sacred disturbed me, I feel that it's just not worth fighting about. Mormons have always been and will always be an easy target, and one of the few exceptions to society's anthem for tolerance. Kind of like when someone is bullying you in grade school and your mom tells you to ignore it, because what he wants is your reaction, it's best to just ignore these jabs, pokes, and slaps. Disrespectful acts such as this and those that occurred to Mormons during and since Prop 8 have not and will not harm the Church in the big picture. It is a worldwide religion, and is one of the fastest-growing at that.
Perhaps the deeper issue here, as Terrance D. Olson so eloquently pointed out in his essay, Is Something Sacred? Meridian's Response to Big Love, is the fact that those who don't respect what others hold sacred usually don't hold anything sacred themselves, and a society without reverence for something is weakened. He says, "Most of the time, it is probably our unwillingness to grant others their sacred feelings, and not the differences in what we hold sacred, that create contention. . .When nothing is sacred, everything is fair game in conflicts of ideas, attitudes, or behaviors. If something is sacred, then some ground rules of harmonious interaction are possible. "
Sunday, March 22, 2009
More on tolerance
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Well said! I haven't heard a word about the Big Love episode. I didn't hear anything about it outside church members talking about it before or after it aired. I am counting that a success!
You have to admit that when a church refuses to ordain African American leaders until 1978 (!), it probably should not espouse any self righteous rhetoric about tolerance. What are the leadership opportunities available to women in the LDS Church?
Furthermore, there is a major disconnect when Mormons celebrate the legacy of Brigham Young (an avowed polygamist) and then have the audacity to condemn the marriages of loving, committed couples.
I also would be interested in reading your specific grievances with President Obama as many conservatives are in full support of his economic policies and programs.
Dear Crusader-
You amuse me. For someone who seems so opposed and to have so much distain for the authors of this blog and their viewpoints, you sure are an avid reader. Judging from the fact that you promptly reply to all non-family, non-picture related items within a few days of posting, I’m guessing that you have this blog bookmarked and read it consistently. So why spend precious time in the day reading the family blog of people you don’t know and obviously don’t like? I can only think of two reasons:
1) You are a bored negative person who enjoys conflict. You waste your time in life and on the web trying to start petty arguments with those who you know will never agree with you thus fueling future conflict.
However, you mentioned in a previous post that you are a teacher and having several friends who are teachers, I know that your free time must be extremely limited. Which leads me to the second, and I think more plausible, theory.
2) You like this blog. Whether you want to admit it or not, there’s something here that keeps you coming back. You wouldn’t keep reading and checking and posting, if you weren’t trying to elicit a response and therefore build some type of connection. Whether you want to admit it or not, there’s something here that you like.
Caught you :)
Please name the conservatives who support Pres. Obama's economic policies.
Hi Bunch of BS (ha ha ha...great name!) I do continue to check in and comment on a wide variety of blogs. After all, if people put their opinions out for public consumption, they have to expect feedback, right? You never answered any of my questions about LDS leadership though....hmmmmm....caught you! :)
Conservatives supporting Barack Obama's economic recovery plan
-Wick Allison
-Jeffrey Hart
-M. Jodi Rell
-Jim Douglas
-Charlie Crist
-Jon Huntsman Jr. (Utah's governor!)
Crusader-
My reasons for not answering your questions was because your attitude or tone has always seemed to be one of conflict and argument and not curiousity and learning. If you pose these questions because you are merely trying to take issues with a church and a belief system and you want to somehow prove that it's wrong because it's not in accordance with what you think, then I'm not really interested in having a conversation. I don't believe in the point of just arguing. However, if your questions are coming from a place of respectful intrigue, I would be more than happy to engage in a dialogue (offline from this blog). So what's your motive? :)
Post a Comment