Jump to content

Analytics

Contributor
  • Content Count

    2,269
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,006 Excellent

About Analytics

  • Rank
    Separates Water & Dry Land

Recent Profile Visitors

2,984 profile views
  1. If I said, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that children shouldn't be baptized until they are eight," would you respond by saying, "That's nonsense! The Church doesn't teach anything because it can't teach anything! Only people can teach things!"
  2. Actually, the Kansas City Star apologized for what it had done. Consider the following questions: 1- Is the Kansas Star a thing? Or is it merely a collection of people and it's nonsensical to refer to it as an entity in its own right? 2- If it is an entity in its own right, does that entity do things? For example, if I said, "The Kansas City Star covers the Chiefs," would you object and say, "No, the Kansas City Star can't cover the Chiefs. It can't do anything! Only people do things--not abstract organizations!" Or would you not take issue with the claim that the Kansas City Star ca
  3. Did you read the Kansas City Star article?
  4. I would think that for most of the priesthood ban, most apostles believed it was in place because that was the revealed word of the Lord on the issue. But so what? Nobody necessarily knows the specifics of why the Kansas City Star "disenfranchised, ignored, and scorned generation of black Kansas Citians" in the surprisingly large number of specific ways and incidences that it chronicles. But that didn't prevent it from telling the story of a powerful local business that had done wrong and issuing a heartfelt apology.
  5. I don't think we are merely talking about racist comments made by members of the Church. We are also talking about racist policies, procedures, and doctrines that were instigated by the Church itself. The point isn't for me to dictate the terms of an acceptable apology and insist that Church jumps through whatever apology hoops I come up with. Rather, the point is for the Church to do its own research into its own past, and to frankly and honestly tell the membership and other stakeholders the truth it discovers. And if it finds that it hasn't lived up to its own ideals, to offer whatever
  6. Did you read the Kansas City Star article I posted? Instead of talking about "an organization" in abstract, let's talk about the Kansas City Star. Consider the following questions: 1- Is the Kansas Star a thing? Or is it merely a collection of people and it's nonsensical to refer to it as an entity in its own right? 2- If it is an entity in its own right, does that entity do things? For example, if I said, "The Kansas City Star covers the Chiefs," would you object and say, "No, the Kansas City Star can't cover the Chiefs. It can't do anything! Only people do things--not abstract
  7. According to the publisher of the Star, frankly confessing your own history and coming to terms with it was a moral obligation for them. They did it hoping it would help them move forward and be a better paper. They suggest that other organizations should go through this same process to "get the poison out." According to their line of thinking, to the extent the Church is guilty of similar misdeeds it should apologize not only because it is a moral obligation, but also because doing so will help it heal and move forward and be better. The main people this would benefit is its leaders, members,
  8. I would suggest that in general, you shouldn't demand an apology from somebody as a condition of forgiving them, much less as a condition for not harboring resentment and ill will. The Kansas City Star offered a great apology because it wasn't done in an effort to appease outside forces--black or white--that were upset it had done wrong and were threatening to harm it economically if it didn't bend to their demands. Rather, it came from within. If you were to come visit me in Kansas City, I'd show you Ward Parkway and the Plaza and the beautiful parts on the city that J.C. Nichols bu
  9. A typo on my part. Thanks for pointing it out--I fixed it.
  10. I wouldn't describe the Star's actions as "reporting contrary to what it knew." If you've haven't had the pleasure of ever visiting Kansas City, it is a remarkably gorgeous city, "the Paris of the Plains." Real estate developer and visionary J.C. Nichols deserves most of the credit for making the city so beautiful. He had a vision of a beautiful city where people spent extra money to make beautiful and long-lasting brick homes that were well maintained and were surrounded by beautifully manicured public spaces with fountains and hedges. The Country Club district, the Plaza, and Ward Parkway ar
  11. A topic that has appeared on this forum over the years is whether it is appropriate, meaningful, or even sensical for an institution to apologize for what it taught and promoted in the past. That is why I thought the following front-page story from this morning's Kansas City Star is relevant. The truth in Black and white: An apology from The Kansas City Star (I'd recommend to anybody interested to read the rest of the story here: KC Star editor apologizes for poor coverage of Black news | The Kansas City Star) The articles are fascinating because they clearly identify that ev
  12. No, he did reach out to Cardon Saturday morning when he was very publicly figuring out how to react, and then called the police that afternoon. That much of what I said is true.
  13. For the record, it turns out I got most of it from my own imagination. I misunderstood a few of the details I heard and made some unwarranted interpolations. I retract why I’ve said on this topic. Thank you for pointing out the inconsistencies in my narrative.
  14. My understanding is that the call went something like this: Operator: "911. Is this an emergency?" John: "No." Operator: "How can I help you?" John: "I'd like to file a police report." Operator: "Please hold." At that point, the call was transferred to the P.D.'s non-emergency line where an officer took his statement and filed a report. I don't know whether this is a crime or not. That is simply false--I introduced Dehlin's: "friend who happens to be an attorney" into the conversation. Surely you know I didn't type "friend who happens to be an attor
  15. I was told that if you think there is something the police might want to be aware of, emergency or not, it is appropriate to call 911. If it isn't an emergency the operator will happily transfer the call to the non-emergency line. Doing so is part of the job. Whether 911 is "overworked" probably varies from community to community, but I've been told that it is appropriate to call 911 to notify the police of something that they might be interested in knowing.
×
×
  • Create New...