How Does the SLC PD View Mormons? LGBT?

[smac97]

Hmm:

Quote

If a police officer publicly expressed hatred or bias against Muslims or gays or blacks or Latinos or Jews, you would expect that to be intolerable.

But what about Mormons?

That's what some folks are asking on social media after learning a Salt Lake City police officer is about to be promoted to sergeant several months after posting a tirade against Latter-day Saints on his Facebook page.

"If you've expressed support for the Mormon church in the last couple of days, I'll be deleting you," Officer Kevin Stayner wrote last November in response to the church's policy of not baptizing the children of same-sex couples until they become adults.

"I find their rhetoric offensive, their policies bigoted and their Christianity flawed," he continued. "If this offends you, good. You aren't a martyr for supporting that church; you're an [a--hole]. I spend enough of my time cleaning up the excrement of society; I refuse to tolerate it from my friends."

Stayner removed the post shortly after it went up, but not before several people commented on it and took screen shots to save it.

I tried to talk to Stayner, but the police department had its public information officer respond instead. Detective Greg Wilking said the administration learned of the post and immediately took action. Stayner was interviewed and the matter handed over to the Human Resources Department.

Wilking said Stayner realized as soon as he posted the remarks that he had made a mistake.

Stayner had been on track for a promotion a year and a half ago, before the Facebook post. He has completed all requirements for advancement, Wilking said. But social media protesters wonder if the officer would be getting the job bump if a different religious or ethnic group had been targeted.

Wilking said such talk is speculation, noting the department reviews incidents on a case-by-case basis.

Stayner is the department's liaison to the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community. He also is a peer review officer, meaning that if police have personal problems, he is one of the department members designated to counsel them.

That presumably would include officers who are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

So Officer Stayner

• A) publicly expresses contempt (hatred?) of Mormons and their church, with the calculated intent to offend, 
• B) is referred to HR,
• C) has his conduct excused by his higher-ups as merely "a mistake" and
• D) he gets off with a slap on the wrist or no real repercussions at all for his statement (his promotion is apparently still on track), which 
• D) leads some to rather aptly ask if the SLC PD is going easy on Officer Stayner because
• E) he is gay, and hence has carte blanche to publicly declare his prejudice against a large portion of the public he serves because of their religious affiliation and belief, and
• F) his targets are Mormon, and hence fair game for public displays of contempt and condemnation.

Meanwhile, this article contrasts the SLC PD's treatment of Officer Stayner with its treatment of Eric Moutsos, an LDS police officer who asked not to be assigned to participate in a Gay Pride parade:

Quote

Two years ago a decorated Salt Lake City police officer was investigated for discrimination.

He was suspended and eventually resigned from the force for asking he not be assigned to perform motorcycle choreography in the annual gay pride parade. Police Chief Chris Burbank publicly branded Eric Moutsos a bigot.

Fast forward two years. On social media, Kevin Stayner, an openly gay police officer, attacked Mormons and their faith and he is about to be promoted. He posted the following on Facebook:

Quote

If you’ve expressed support for the Mormon Church in the last couple of days I’ll be deleting you. I find their rhetoric offensive, their policies bigoted and their Christianity flawed. If this offends you, good. You aren’t a martyr for supporting that church; you’re an *******. I spend enough of my time cleaning up the excrement of society. I refuse to tolerate it from my friends.

Stayner posted this in response to the policy announced by the Mormon Church that they would no longer baptize children living with gay parents. Though the post was taken down almost immediately, the announcement that Stayner is up for a promotion has revived the controversy.

According to the Salt Lake City Tribune, Stayner is the police liaison to the LGBT community and also the “peer review officer” a post that places him as a counselor to officers with personal problems, including Mormon officers.

...

In an exclusive interview, Eric Moutsos, now selling solar panels, told Breitbart News:

Quote

 

We live in a day and age where if you privately ask to not want to celebrate in a homosexual parade as a religious accommodation, the Government will destroy you publicly and immediately; however, if you publicly (via social media) spew true bigotry and hatred toward a constitutionally protected class of religious observers, the Government will quickly promote you.

The fact they did nothing about this months ago only underscores the double standard that is evident here in Salt Lake City. Truly, they are only solidifying his words of hatred to be their very words of hatred. Mormons living, working, or passing though Salt Lake City, should be very concerned.

 

The Salt Lake City police force said the Stayner matter has been investigated and he has been cleared, something that Eric Moutsos finds appalling.

A few thoughts:

1. Officer Stayer is a "peer review officer" with responsibilities to act as "counselor" for other police officers.  Including officers who are LDS, the religion for which Officer Stayner publicly expressed hostility, even hatred, and got away with it.  The mind reels.

2. This looks a lot like Officer Stayner receiving favorable, hands-off treatment, including carte blanche to publicly express hostility, even hatred, toward a huge segment of the population he serves, and whose taxes pay his salary.  And it looks like Officer Stayner is receiving such treatment because he is gay, and/or because the targets of his hostility are Mormons.  The mind reels even further.

3. In contrast, Officer Moutsos had his career destroyed when he objected to being forced to participate in a Gay Pride parade (as a participant, not as a public safety officer).  Although he purportedly resigned after being put on paid leave, the circumstances of his departure were . . . not that pat (emphases added):

Quote

After his bosses allegedly branded him a bigot and the Salt Lake City Police Department allegedly hounded him out of his job, Eric Moutsos has finally broken his silence to explain his motivations for not wanting to perform motorcycle tricks at a gay pride parade last summer. He also explains his version of what really happened.

Last summer, an announcement by the Salt Lake City police that a then-unknown police officer declined to provide protective services for a gay parade in Salt Lake City made global news.

The Salt Lake Tribune reports, “A Salt Lake City Police Officer has been placed on leave for refusing an assignment at this weekend’s Gay Pride Parade. … He had been given a traffic control and public safety assignment.”

Breaking his silence in a statement released this week, now eight months later, Moutsos essentially said it was all a lie.

Moutsos insists he never refused an assignment to do traffic control and public safety. In fact, that is what he asked to do for the parade. What he did not want was to participate in the parade by doing motorcycle choreography with his fellow Salt Lake City motorcycle squad. He said he did not feel right about it and that it violated his conscience to appear supportive of the parade’s political message.

When his superiors told him he could not swap, Moutsos relented and said he would do the motorcycle choreography. By then, it was too late. He says, “The police department suspended me, took away my gun and badge, and told me that I would be investigated for discrimination.”

And then the department hung him out to dry, he asserts. “Two days later, a police spokesperson gave interviews to the media, and the news reported that I refused to work a security and traffic assignment at the parade. I was immediately branded a bigot,” he says.

...

Moutsos’s former boss is angry that he has come forward now. Salt Lake City Police Chief Chris Burbank told local media that the mere fact that Moutsos disagreed with the message of the parade was problem enough.

Burbank insists that Moutsos is a bigot and that bigotry has no place in his department. “I will not tolerate bias, bigotry or hatred in the organization,” states Burbank, adding that expressing his personal religious views to someone else in the department disqualifies Moutsos from being a police officer.

In an exclusive interview with Breitbart News, Moutsos says he has the quiet support of other officers in a heavily Mormon force, but they have largely been cowed into silence. In fact, he says the supervisor pressed to take away Moutsos’s gun and badge last June actually sobbed when he did it.

Moutsos describes a department under the thumb of aggressive political correctness. Officers in the department have taken down their Facebook pages because others monitor them. Moutsos says a woman in the department confronted him about his mention of God on his Facebook page. She said it was offensive.

On the one hand, Moutsos says officers are told their religious beliefs are considered personal and therefore forbidden in the department, but LGBT officers are free to espouse their LGBT beliefs openly and with impunity. He says, “It is a terrible double standard.”

4. Regarding the personal opinions of (former) Officer Moutsos, let's take a look:

• "More than anything, Moutsos is calling for unity. He says, 'I love people. I‘ll protect you. I will take a bullet for you, but I do not advocate certain things in people’s lives. Just like 99% of the world does not agree with my faith, and that’s okay.' Moutsos is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormon)."  (Link)
• "{T}the former cop, who refused to participate in a parade celebrating gay rights and who now works for an organization vigorously fighting same-sex marriage, did something unexpected: He attended Sunday's wedding at the Gallivan Center of Derek Kitchen and Moudi Sbeity, plaintiffs in the historic lawsuit that, eventually, toppled Utah's ban on same-sex marriage.  Moutsos posted on his Facebook page pictures of himself and the happy couple taken during the wedding celebration. He explained that he and Kitchen had become friends while they followed Utah's landmark anti-discrimination bill at the Legislature and that Kitchen had invited him to the wedding.  While he still holds to his religious beliefs that marriage should be between a man and a woman, Moutsos described Kitchen and Sbeity as 'two great individuals' and wished them well 'on their journey together.'" (Link)
• "In an interview with The Washington Times, Mr. Moutsos said he hasn’t changed his mind about the department’s role in the parade.  'It looks like we’re doing a type of a celebration in front of the parade,' Mr. Moutsos said. 'I didn’t feel OK with being in front of that parade. And I don’t mean to rain on anyone’s parade, I simply didn’t want to be in one.'  After seven years on the force, he said he had often come to the aid of members of the local gay community. But as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, he was uncomfortable with the message he would have sent by performing in front of the Utah Pride Parade.  'I’d feel the same way if this were an abortion parade. Even though it’s legal, I just ask not to be in front of the parade. But I will protect it,' Mr. Moutsos said." (Link)
• “'I love gay people,' the 33-year-old told the Los Angeles Times on Thursday. 'I love them like I love humanity. I just did not agree with some of the messages in that parade.'”  (Link)
• "{Moutsos} told The Times: 'I asked my supervisor, "What if an African American officer didn’t want to ride in front of a KKK parade?" And he said he’d have to do it. That’s when I knew in my heart it was wrong.'"  (Link)
• Personal Statement by Mr. Moutsos

Something is rotten in the City of Salt Lake City.  

Thanks,

-Smac

 

[jkwilliams]

While I don't approve of either officer's behavior, they aren't comparable. One was a refusal to perform official duties (yes, I know the officer denies it, but that is what the police department ruled). The other was being an [a-hole] away from work. 

That said, recently here in Fairfax County (just south of us), the county fire department's head of professional standards was fired for having racist and lewd posts on his Facebook page. This was especially problematic because a female firefighter recently committed suicide after being sexually harassed at work and getting no support from this guy's office.

http://www.wusa9.com/news/local/fairfax/fairfax-fire-official-reassigned-after-lewd-images-discovered-on-facebook/187912448

So, yes, I think someone whose job represents the public--all of it, not just the LGBT community--should have consequences for behavior like this. 

[Storm Rider]

There are sacred, specially privileged classes in the US and Mormons are not one of them.  Thus, almost anything can be said about them, to them, etc. without any degree of reprimand or correction.  However, you touch one of the sacred cows and holy hell will descend upon your house, your family, your church, your cousins, your next door neighbors because you dared to speak.  

There is not a doubt in my mind that if this officer had written a tirade against gays and said they were despicable, etc. the President would have sent out a host of Federal prosecutors, he would have lost his job, the Chief of Police would have had to resign and there would have been a call for the resignation of the mayor.

Yes, little Johnny, the world is full of hypocrites.  Nothing new or surprising.  Let's move along. 

Edited June 15, 2016 by Storm Rider

[smac97]

Just now, jkwilliams said:

While I don't approve of either officer's behavior, they aren't comparable. One was a refusal to perform official duties (yes, I know the officer denies it, but that is what the police department ruled).

Mr. Moutsos states that he relented and agreed to participate in the Gay Rights parade, but by then "it was too late."

Quote

When his superiors told him he could not swap, Moutsos relented and said he would do the motorcycle choreography. By then, it was too late. He says, “The police department suspended me, took away my gun and badge, and told me that I would be investigated for discrimination.”

And then the department hung him out to dry, he asserts. “Two days later, a police spokesperson gave interviews to the media, and the news reported that I refused to work a security and traffic assignment at the parade. I was immediately branded a bigot,” he says.

He didn't refuse after all.

Quote

The other was being an [a-hole] away from work. 

But Moutsos was punished for his "away from work" viewpoint, while Officer Stayner is getting off for his "away from work" viewpoint.  Did you note this?

Quote

Moutsos’s former boss is angry that he has come forward now. Salt Lake City Police Chief Chris Burbank told local media that the mere fact that Moutsos disagreed with the message of the parade was problem enough.

Burbank insists that Moutsos is a bigot and that bigotry has no place in his department. “I will not tolerate bias, bigotry or hatred in the organization,” states Burbank, adding that expressing his personal religious views to someone else in the department disqualifies Moutsos from being a police officer.

And this:

Quote

Moutsos describes a department under the thumb of aggressive political correctness. Officers in the department have taken down their Facebook pages because others monitor them. Moutsos says a woman in the department confronted him about his mention of God on his Facebook page. She said it was offensive.

On the one hand, Moutsos says officers are told their religious beliefs are considered personal and therefore forbidden in the department, but LGBT officers are free to espouse their LGBT beliefs openly and with impunity. He says, “It is a terrible double standard.”

Darn straight there's a "terrible double standard."  (Former) Officer Moutsos lost his job for his personal point of view (which was/is utterly devoid of hostility/hatred toward LGBT folks).  Officer Stayner, on the other hand, faces no repercussions for his  personal point of view (which was/is per se hostile and hateful toward LDS folks and their church).

I agree with you that these two cases are not "comparable."  The one was punished not only for expressing his personal views, but also for even having those views.  Meanwhile, the other has a point of view (hostility/hatred toward Mormons) that he can both publicly express and not face any repercussions for such expressions.  

Yep.  Not much a comparison at all.

Quote

That said, recently here in Fairfax County (just south of us), the county fire department's head of professional standards was fired for having racist and lewd posts on his Facebook page. This was especially problematic because a female firefighter recently committed suicide after being sexually harassed at work and getting no support from this guy's office.

http://www.wusa9.com/news/local/fairfax/fairfax-fire-official-reassigned-after-lewd-images-discovered-on-facebook/187912448

So, yes, I think someone whose job represents the public--all of it, not just the LGBT community--should have consequences for behavior like this. 

Agreed.

Thanks,

-Smac

[jkwilliams]

3 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Mr. Moutsos states that he relented and agreed to participate in the Gay Rights parade, but by then "it was too late."

He didn't refuse after all.

But Moutsos was punished for his "away from work" viewpoint, while Officer Stayner is getting off for his "away from work" viewpoint.  Did you note this?

And this:

Darn straight there's a "terrible double standard."  (Former) Officer Moutsos lost his job for his personal point of view (which was/is utterly devoid of hostility/hatred toward LGBT folks).  Officer Stayner, on the other hand, faces no repercussions for his  personal point of view (which was/is per se hostile and hateful toward LDS folks and their church).

I agree with you that these two cases are not "comparable."  The one was punished not only for expressing his personal views, but also for even having those views.  Meanwhile, the other has a point of view (hostility/hatred toward Mormons) that he can both publicly express and not face any repercussions for such expressions.  

Yep.  Not much a comparison at all.

Agreed.

Thanks,

-Smac

Gee, and I thought I was agreeing with you. 

[smac97]

13 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Gee, and I thought I was agreeing with you. 

I think we agree in the end, but we take different paths to get there.  I am disturbed by the PD's treatment of Mr. Moutsos.  You aren't.  And I am disturbed by the corollary preferential treatment of Officer Stayner, as it appears to be predicated on A) his being gay, and B) the target of his hostility/hatred being Mormons.  You appear more sanguine than I am about that.

Think about this situation if the roles were reversed.  If Officer Moutsos had publicly expressed hatred toward homosexuals, and as a result he receives zero adverse consequences, his promotion is allowed to go forward, and he continues to work as a "counselor" for other officers, including gay/lesbian officers.  If that happened, there would be screaming to beat the band.  Protests.  Perhaps even riots.  The police chief overseeing this travesty would lose his job.  Backpedaling would be the order of the day.

Now consider Officer Stayner essentially being fired because he declined (but later agreed) to participate in a pro-Mormon rally in which he is essentially compelled to engage in speech which is A) favorable to Mormons and their Church, and B) with which he privately disagrees.  Again, there would be screaming all over the place.  Officer Stayner would be held up and lionized as both a hero and victim of oppression.  There would be protests, perhaps even riots.  The police chief overseeing this travesty would lose his job.  Backpedaling would be the order of the day.

But none of this is happening.  Because the roles aren't reversed.  Because Officer Stayner is part of a privileged class and Mormons are not.  Because Mormons are fair game.  Because Officer Stayner is free to publicly express hatred for Mormons and have no adverse consequence to his job, which is to protect and serve the public - including Mormons.  Meanwhile, Mr. Moutsos has publicly expressed love and affection for LGBT folks, and has affirmatively declared he would take a bullet for any of them.  But he nevertheless lost his job and was publicly branded a bigot by his boss because he was not comfortable with being coerced into public speech supporting a lifestyle with which he personally disagrees.

That is the world we now live in.  It should change.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited June 15, 2016 by smac97

[jkwilliams]

9 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I think we agree in the end, but we take different paths to get there.  I am disturbed by the PD's treatment of Mr. Moutsos.  You aren't.  And I am disturbed by the corollary preferential treatment of Officer Stayner, as it appears to be predicated on A) his being gay, and B) the target of his hostility/hatred being Mormons.  You appear more sanguine than I am about that.

Thanks,

-Smac

I admit I haven't followed the Moutros case, but I believe they should have accommodated his beliefs. I don't think they should have brushed off Stayner's bigoted statements. 

And what possible reason could you have for saying I was in any way "sanguine" about the treatment of Stayner? I explicitly compared what he did to what was a firing offense here in Virginia. I said bigotry and hate should have consequences. There was no "except when perpetrated by a gay man against Mormons."

Kindly don't twist my words. 

Edited June 15, 2016 by jkwilliams

[Robert F. Smith]

33 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

While I don't approve of either officer's behavior, they aren't comparable. One was a refusal to perform official duties (yes, I know the officer denies it, but that is what the police department ruled). The other was being an [a-hole] away from work. 

That said, recently here in Fairfax County (just south of us), the county fire department's head of professional standards was fired for having racist and lewd posts on his Facebook page. This was especially problematic because a female firefighter recently committed suicide after being sexually harassed at work and getting no support from this guy's office.

http://www.wusa9.com/news/local/fairfax/fairfax-fire-official-reassigned-after-lewd-images-discovered-on-facebook/187912448

So, yes, I think someone whose job represents the public--all of it, not just the LGBT community--should have consequences for behavior like this. 

It appears to me that you may have misunderstood the published articles and Spencer's comments.

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Robert F. Smith said:

It appears to me that you may have misunderstood the published articles and Spencer's comments.

I understood he was talking about a double standard. I agreed with him.

[smac97]

13 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I admit I haven't followed the Moutros case, but I believe they should have accommodated his beliefs. I don't think they should have brushed off Stayner's bigoted statements. 

And what possible reason could you have for saying I was in any way "sanguine" about the treatment of Stayner? I explicitly compared what he did to what was a firing offense here in Virginia. I said bigotry and hate should have consequences. There was no "except when perpetrated by a gay man against Mormons."

Kindly don't twist my words. 

Fair enough.  I apologize.

[Mystery Meat]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Something is rotten in the City of Salt Lake City.  

Thanks,

-Smac

 

Yeah, its the Mayor. Folks I know inside the city government say she hates Mormons, and has been gradually purging them from their positions.

[smac97]

11 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

Yeah, its the Mayor. Folks I know inside the city government say she hates Mormons, and has been gradually purging them from their positions.

I have not heard anything about this.  Have there been any lawsuits about this?  Investigation?  Media coverage?  

Thanks,

-Smac

[jkwilliams]

13 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I have not heard anything about this.  Have there been any lawsuits about this?  Investigation?  Media coverage?  

Thanks,

-Smac

I've not heard anything like that, either. At least in public, she's always been respectful and cordial toward the church.

[Daniel2]

Wow.

On this, of all weeks, Smac decides to launch a new thread attempting to spin Mormons as the persecuted minority, and gays and lesbians as the over-privileged class.

A day after a thread is closed by mods on the murder of 49 LGBT citizens, with over 50 wounded.

While a threat to justice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, and there certainly is a time and place to discuss such things, this timing boggles the mind.

Yeah... Latter-day Saints are the real victims in this country, today...

 

 

Edited June 15, 2016 by Daniel2

[smac97]

1 minute ago, jkwilliams said:

I've not heard anything like that, either. At least in public, she's always been respectful and cordial toward the church.

Yes, that was my perception as well.  I will certainly give her the benefit of the doubt.  I hope the allegations against her are not true (or exaggerated).

Thanks,

-Smac

[jkwilliams]

6 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

Wow.

On this, of all weeks, Smac decides to launch a new thread attempting to spin Mormons as the persecuted minority, and gays and lesbians as the over-privileged class.

A day after a thread is closed by mods on the murder of 49 LGBT citizens, with over 50 wounded.

While a threat to justice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, and there certainly is a time and place to discuss such things, this timing boggles the mind.

Yeah... Latter-day Saints are the real victims in this country, today...

I'm assuming the timing is more related to it having been the subject of Paul Rolly's column today in the Tribune. 

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

Gee, and I thought I was agreeing with you. 

Agreeing or not, you made an inaccurate statement that bore correction.

Moutsos didn't refuse to perform the service. He asked to trade shifts with another officer who didn't mind doing the motorcycle choreography. And then, when the police chief went ballistic, Moutsos relented and said he would do the parade routines. But by then, the police chief had gotten his head down and, come hell or high water, was determined to make an example of Moutsos. That's when Moutsos resigned.

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

Agreeing or not, you made an inaccurate statement that bore correction.

Moutsos didn't refuse to perform the service. He asked to trade shifts with another officer who didn't mind doing the motorcycle choreography. And then, when the police chief went ballistic, Moutsos relented and said he would do the parade routines. But by then, the police chief had gotten his head down and, come hell or high water, was determined to make an example of Moutsos. That's when Moutsos resigned.

As I said, I hadn't followed the case, so I stand corrected. Either way, I agreed that the treatment of Moutros was excessive, and that of Stayner was too light.

[Daniel2]

6 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I'm assuming the timing is more related to it having been the subject of Paul Rolly's column today in the Tribune. 

I didn't mean to suggest such timing isn't related to the timing of the article (and I don't doubt that it is...), but the juxtaposition of the two actions is tragically ironic.

[Scott Lloyd]

2 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

As I said, I hadn't followed the case, so I stand corrected. Either way, I agreed that the treatment of Moutros was excessive, and that of Stayner was too light.

Noted. Thanks.

I'm only making a point of it, because there was a lengthy thread on this board at the time Moutsos came forward and too many people were exhibiting invincible ignorance regarding what Moutsos actually did and did not do.

 

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

Noted. Thanks.

I'm only making a point of it, because there was a lengthy thread on this board at the time Moutsos came forward and too many people were exhibiting invincible ignorance regarding what Moutsos actually did and did not do.

I don't think I was here when that was being discussed. 

[Scott Lloyd]

I don't know what bearing this might have on the matter, but the police chief who brought pressure to bear that resulted in Moutsos's resignation is no longer in office. In an unrelated matter, he was fired by the mayor (who has since lost re-election) for his lack of responsiveness when ordered to deal with sexual discrimination in the department.

 

[smac97]

25 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

Wow.

On this, of all weeks, Smac decides to launch a new thread attempting to spin Mormons as the persecuted minority, and gays and lesbians as the over-privileged class.

A day after a thread is closed by mods on the murder of 49 LGBT citizens, with over 50 wounded.

While a threat to justice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, and there certainly is a time and place to discuss such things, this timing boggles the mind.

Yeah... Latter-day Saints are the real victims in this country, today...

First, I am not condemning Officer Steyner because he is gay.  I am critcizing him and his superiors because A) he has publicly expressed hatred for a large portion of the population he is sworn to protect and serve, B) his superiors are letting him off without any repercussions whatsoever, C) his superiors are apparently letting him off because he is gay and/or because the target of his hatred are Mormons, and D) meanwhile, an LDS police officer had his career destroyed by those same superiors because he initially objected to being ordered to participate in a Gay Pride parade (though he later relented, but by which point the destruction of his career was a fait accompli).

Second, I have said nothing whatsoever in comparing this issue in Utah to the tragedy in Orlando.

Third, I find it incredibly crass for you to use (exploit, really) the tragedy in Orlando in this way.  It is quite possible for a person to A) be horrified at the tragedy in Orlando and to mourn and pray for the victims, and B) take exception to the mistreatment of Mr. Moutsos and the preferential treatment of Officer Steyner.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited June 15, 2016 by smac97

[Scott Lloyd]

22 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

Wow.

On this, of all weeks, Smac decides to launch a new thread attempting to spin Mormons as the persecuted minority, and gays and lesbians as the over-privileged class.

A day after a thread is closed by mods on the murder of 49 LGBT citizens, with over 50 wounded.

While a threat to justice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, and there certainly is a time and place to discuss such things, this timing boggles the mind.

Yeah... Latter-day Saints are the real victims in this country, today...

 

 

I was unaware of the thread that was closed, but I quite disagree that there is a problem with timing. The incidents are unrelated, and each warrants discussion in its own right if, for no other reason than, as you so aptly put it, "a threat to justice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

[smac97]

3 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

I'm assuming the timing is more related to it having been the subject of Paul Rolly's column today in the Tribune. 

Yep.  I saw Rolly's column this morning and wrote up the OP.  It's that simple.

Daniel, when can I expect you to publicly denounce Rolly and the Trib as founts of homophobic hatred for having published the story in the OP about Officer Styner "on this, of all weeks"?

Or lemme guess: You'll saying nothing critical at all.  Because the Trib . . . isn't Mormon.  So it's okay for it to talk about this story.  But if a Mormon does so, well . . . then we get an incoherent guilt trip where you crassly invoke Orlando.  

-Smac

Edited June 15, 2016 by smac97