"Attitudes of superiority lead to societal conflict." --David M. Belnap, "The Inclusive, Anti-Discrimination Message of the Book of Mormon"
"I'm definitely much more familiar with the literature on near-death experiences than you are -- some of it by people who are much more familiar with brains and how they work than you are -- and I know that you don't know what you're talking about." --Daniel C. Peterson, "Sic et Non"
Part I: The History
Remember way back when? When the Mopologists were at war with the EVs, and with other non-Mormon Christians? Do you remember when DCP said that he found Calivinism repulsive, or when Midgley et al. went on the attack on James White and others? Do you remember how SHIELDS went to pains to prove that the details concerning Walter Martin's death were "exaggerated"? And what about this bit of nastiness, from the late Bill Hamblin, still hosted by FAIRMormon?
I guess that's one way to make a point.Bill Hamblin wrote:All one needs to do to see the bigotry on this board is replace the ubiquitous terms Morg and Morgbot with Kike. Try the following on for size:
“I get mad every time I think about those Kikes. The Kikes are so clannish; and they wear funny cloths. Those stupid Kikes always do what their Rabbis tell them. They think they should be obedient to God. What mindless Kikebots. They actually have 613 commandments; count ’em—six hundred and thirteen. This proves they’re a mind-control cult. You know, Kikes have committed murder and embezzled money. In fact, when a Kike commits murder, it’s because he’s a Kike. There is something about those Kikes that makes them violent. The Kikes are all rich, too. They control the money and politics of New York. Not just New York, they control Hollywood too, and want to control the politics of the entire country. Indeed, they are a threat to freedom and democracy. And their kosher rules are so-ooo stupid. They make me want to gag. Why shouldn’t I eat a cheeseburger if I want to? You can’t get a good ham sandwich in a Kike deli. I want a ham sandwich, and I’m not going to let those Kikes stop me from eating it. I sure hate those Kikes! They drive me nuts.”
It simply won’t do to insist that you’re not really a bigot because what you believe about Mormonism is really true. Anti-Semites honestly think they’re not bigots either–what they believe about Jews is really true: “I’m not bigoted! There really is an international Jewish banking conspiracy.”
In any case, I'm sure you catch my drift: the Mopologists don't exactly have a good track record when it comes to issues like "tolerance" and "diversity" and "inclusiveness."
Part II: They Try Harder
Remember how the Mopologists began offering an essay award through "Interpreter" in an effort to attract more female authors? And remember how they later canceled that award, due to an apparent lack of interest? Do you remember how "Sic et Non" got swarmed with critical comments after the Author in Chief made insensitive remarks about LGBT+ activism at BYU? Remember how DCP blew a valve after his hypocrisy concerning Richard Mouw was exposed? And remember how, just a few months ago, Dr. Peterson blew his top yet again over pretty much this same topic? Here--you might as well refresh your memory:
SeN, down in the Comments, of course wrote:I've reached my limit, Shades. This isn't a game.
I just saw (and skimmed) my Malevolent Stalker's latest treatise on your message board. In it, he portrays me as holding religions other than my own in contempt and as disrespecting believers in them.
This is a brazen and shameless lie, and he knows it. What's more, you know it.
My record in this respect is decades-long, well-documented, very public, internationally attested, and unambiguously clear.
Unless and until you correct him on your message board, your comments will not be welcome here, because your silence there will demonstrate your lack of genuine interest in the truth.
Part III: Politics Invades "Mormon Interpreter"
And that brings us, inevitably, to the latest "Interpreter" article, authored by David M. Belnap and entitled, "The Inclusive, Anti-Discrimination Message of the Book of Mormon." Remember: the President of the Interpreter Foundation once compared LGBTQ+ activists to Nazi book-burners. So, "inclusive? You really have to wonder what the hell is going on.
But then you step back and remember: Interpreter has lost donors lately, largely because of DCP's political comments on "SeN"--he's alluded to the notion that his anti-Donald Trump comments have alienated key donors, and have even pissed off people in his own family. So, how to interpret this latest bit from Belnap? It this a coincidence?
Well, for starters, the notion that the Mopologists actually believe any of the stuff in Belnap's article is ridiculous on its face. Of course they don't think that the Book of Mormon actually supports "inclusiveness," unless you define "inclusive" as "all of those whose calling and election has been made sure." Paid your dues? Sure--come on in. Otherwise? Sorry--it's a TK smoothie for you. Duh, haven't you read Added Upon?
And yet, that's exactly what baffles me about the publication of Belnap's piece, which I regard as highly significant. Was this a calculation on the part of the Board in an effort to piss off the donors who left? I.e., "Not only does Trump suck, but you suck, too! And guess what, we actually support "Inclusiveness"!" I could legitimately see them doing this: revenge via adopting otherwise odious political stances. Anything to score a point, right?
On the other hand, I wonder if this just proves that DCP was effectively "muscled out." Maybe the other people on the Board are getting fed up with his antics, and pressured him to allow a hardcore liberal article like this. (Brant Gardner, who apparently helped out, has always struck me as a semi-"subversive" element within Mopologetics. He's too nice to ever properly fit in with the rest of them.) Plus, he recently said this:
Does it now? Then how'd this article slip through the cracks? While Belnap's article counts a lot of phrases in the Book of Mormon that might be read as "nice," Moby Dick has a lot of material that might be read as "saying stuff about whales." I mean, talk about cherry-picking: looking for advice on how to be nice in a work of scripture is like looking in the sky for a cloud.Daniel Peterson wrote:In academia, book reviews and articles are pretty much standard stuff. And I don't believe that the two volume-editors have ever wrapped themselves in apostolic authority or infallibility or claimed an exemption from academic critique for their editorial decisions.
And, both here and at Interpreter, it carries a bit of clout.Cobra Kai 4 Life wrote:Thanks Daniel. Your opinion is duly noted.
And it's not as if the antics have been toned down in any meaningful way. The other day, "SeN" offered a "Note on Anti-Semitism" which amounted to an old-school wisecrack about Jewish names:
Didn't you know? Ethnic jokes are all the rage these days! Why, they are practically the very *support system* of "Inclusiveness"! Naturally, Midgley can't help but chime in:SeN wrote:A Jewish man and a Chinese man are in a bar. Suddenly, the Jewish man punches the Chinese man in the face.
“Ow! Why did you do that?” asks the Chinese man.
“That’s for Pearl Harbor,” says the Jewish man.
“But the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. I’m Chinese!” says the Chinese man.
“Chinese, Japanese, what’s the difference?” asks the Jewish man.
So the Chinese man punches the Jewish man.
“Ow! What’s that for?” asks the Jewish man.
“It’s for the Titanic,” says the Chinese man.
“What? That was an iceberg that brought down the Titanic!” says the Jewish man.
“Iceberg, Goldberg, what’s the difference?”
Careful! Those jabs at Trump are what got you into hot water in the first place! But can Midgley and DCP really envision themselves in the same boat as the other "Inclusiveness"-leaning pols--like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Elizabeth Warren? I rather doubt it.Louis Midgley wrote:I will right now mention Marjorie Taylor Greene, who is truly weird. But Donald J. Trump is not just your average Joe either. His failed efforts to steal the election, including eventually sending a mob to take over the nation's Capitol, were not all that far from his strongest supporter, and clearly were the "inspiration" for her spouting his ideology.
Now please notice that I carefully avoided mentioning that gemli also has a very strange ideology he claims flows from and/or rests on the secret findings of some some unknown science. This is not all that far from Jewish space lasers. Or the ravings of a host of conspiracy peddling talk show hosts. There are a host of both men and women who fit rather snugly into what might be called the Hanity Insanity Club, are there not?
So we are left with the article, then, and the fact that it made it through "peer review" (or fifth-columnist Gardner used his wiles to force it into publication). Did you ever really imagine that you'd see lines like this in "Interpreter"?:
Sure, sure. I await the day that Midgley chooses "to love and reach out to" Gina Colvin, D. Michael Quinn, Grant Palmer, and others. How about Gee with Metcalfe, or Robert Ritner? How about DCP with Blair Hodges....or me? Face it: it's not going to happen. War is always preferable.Belnap wrote:Today, whatever the apparent justifications for racial, ethnic, international, or class strife may be, whatever the reasons for divisions or for others’ circumstances and regardless of a person’s ethnicity, economic class, gender, or other characteristic, you and I can and should choose to love and reach out to others.
The Belnap article is remarkable because it can--and will--forever be used as a cudgel against the Mopologists over their own rotten behaviors and prejudices. You really have to wonder why the Mopologists would publish an article espousing something that they have zero ability in ever achieving, or even aspiring to. But it's interesting in an academic sense, at least.