The Washington Post has a blog On Faith. They post a question and invite their panelists to respond. One of the On Faith panelists is Michael Otterson of the Church Public Affairs Department.
I invite you to read the blog and post comments.
The Washington Post has a blog On Faith. They post a question and invite their panelists to respond. One of the On Faith panelists is Michael Otterson of the Church Public Affairs Department.
I invite you to read the blog and post comments.
I went to the website and while Brother Otterson’s post is very thoughtful and nice, the comments section appears to have been hijacked by anti-LDS (I mean it has some really sacrilegeous things). I fear that any posts of his will only be used to rail upon the Church. It is a shame because he is a very nice man just trying to add to a civil discourse on religious topics.
Yeah, I went there too and found the “discussion” in the comments to be nothing more than a bunch of hateful rantings of apostates and athiests bagging either on the Church or on religion in general. Occasionally there is a thoughtful and intelligent comment made, but that is immediately used as a target for dozens of others to make their spiteful attacks. I don’t see much use in posting comments there, where the audience consists mainly of the same types that scream at us on our way into the Conference Center for General Conference. Any responses just feed their desire to mischaracterize and ridicule what we really believe and teach.
While the entries by Brother Otterson that I read were all very good, I see no value in wasting time reading and responding to the vile comments that follow unless you really have nothing better to do. (And pretty much anything would be something better to do, in my opinion.)
-Doug
Noteably, it’s not Bro. Otterson’s blog that has been hijacked by antagonistic commenters. Something better to do than trying to engage these people, perhaps, would be to contact the producers of On Faith and ask them to make panelist postings available without comments to those who do not want to wade throught the hateful remarks of the majority of commenters. I sent the following email to the On Faith producer at caryle.murphy@washingtonpost.com:
First of all, I express my sincere thanks for providing the On Faith feature to the online community. I believe that intelligent discourse and awareness of each others beliefs is a first step toward increased understanding and community solidarity. I enjoy reading and comparing the panelists responses.
That being said, I’m afraid that by opening up the discussion to any willing participant via the comments feature on these blogs, your aim to help people “engage in a conversation about faith and its implications in a way that sheds light rather than generates heat?” has been thwarted. A perusal of the comments following most of the posts that I’ve seen indicates a largely antagonistic community of commentators that are anything but intelligent and respectful. The aim of the site thus is threatened of being hijacked by anti-religious, anti-Christian, anti-Muslim, sacreligious zealots who are bent on tearing down the fundamental beliefs of the commentators.
Is there a way for a reader to peruse the official comments of the panelists without viewing the comments to prevent being mired down by the hateful antagonisms of those who hide behind anonymity to promote extremism and prevent goodwill?
Thank you.