I have written a few posts about things being blown out of proportion because of something in the background (here) or interpreted in a way that was never meant to be the forerunner (here) and will share a piece of the latter.
I believe it was Corey’s senior year in high school when the student
directory came out. On the cover was an art student’s work depicting the mascot
and school spirit. [The artist] had signed his artwork “Zion” as he had with many (if not
all) of his other pieces. It wasn’t meant to stand out as the main theme of his drawing
but rather blend into the design. However an instructor who was anti-religion especially
anti-LDS had discovered the “hidden” Zion and made such a great fuss over it
that it drew much more attention to the drawing and the word than was intended.
I don’t remember what year I had attempted to share Tara Parks video – though it feels like it may have been three years ago. I meant to put it on the RS page but had posted to the ward page instead (they both have the same area name) At the time I was in a different presidency than I am currently and had added the 1st counselor to my monitoring list. I did not get the approval for ward posting – which is fine as I had not intended to share with the ward but rather just the sisters.
My current bishop called the 1st counselor to see if I had posted the video to the RS page and requested that the video be removed. I didn’t even notice the word “damn” had been used in the video until the third time I watched it – and only because I was looking for it. So we took it down as it might be offensive to some members. I think that is when our bishop decided to join the RS page – which is why I think it was three years ago (as that is how long he’s been a member of the RS page). I think many members get so caught up in the letter of the law that they miss the big picture. But okay. I get it – but do they? I thought Called to Share (here) did a great job with it. Wish I had had it to refer to back then.
I know the video had had at least one view before it was taken down (here 2nd example). It was from a sister who had been inactive for and was returning to church and wanted to share the video with her husband. Sometimes those who have struggled, are returning, or are unbaptized members who may express interest in the church. How many of those people do we offend by removing said post? What about Tara Parks?
Yesterday I noticed the cover on the RS page still had a Christmas theme going and so I decided to change it. I clicked on a photo that had been posted by another. She had posted the picture in June with a message that she was willing to share her lavender with anyone who wanted one. That is the photo I used as the cover on the Relief Society page. Today I received a message from the bishop which indicated that he “loves the flowers on the RS page” but pointed out the gay pride flag in the background and perhaps I could crop it. I explained the picture was from another member in the congregation and don’t feel I have the liberty to crop as I would be offending her and her household and countless others.
So where is the greater offense? To those who might have a Pharisee attitude
or those who recognize the diversity and want to fellowship with those who may
not be as righteous at one affiliated with the letter of the law of the
Latter-Day Saint?
