Thank you for visiting Mormon Inquiry. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Most Recent Mormon Story on Beliefnet Recent prayer post on Prayables Most Recent Inspiration blog post Happy Reading!
Here is a follow-up to my earlier post on this topic. The LDS Newsroom put up a second post regarding financial disclosures in connection with in-kind contributions to the Yes on 8 campaign by the LDS Church (as opposed to voluntary contributions by individual Mormons): “Media Reports on Proposition 8 Filing Uninformed.” The post includes a table that lays out all reports by date and amount reported. Seems pretty straightforward. Hard to figure out what all the squawking is about.
As long as I’m on the topic, go read Get Religion’s “Are you now or have you ever been a Prop 8 supporter?” Reading the post (by a journalist, not a Mormon) helps correct the shameless misuse of terminology by post-election commenters. It notes that “opponents of the measure were quite angry” … not those who supported Prop 8. It reviews “targeted harassment” of some Prop 8 supporters who were publicly identified. It expresses surprise that the media isn’t more interested in “blacklisting of Mormon, Evangelical, Catholic and other supporters of Prop. 8.” It states that “some Prop. 8 donors have received death threats and envelopes containing white powder, and their businesses have been boycotted.” It quotes the New York Times commentary that the use of disclosure laws to post identity information of contributors to Yes on 8 “may be undermining the same democratic values that the regulations were to promote.” You can venture your own opinion to what adjective best describes the anti-democratic values displayed by those (anonymously) posting the information, but isn’t it fair to say we prefer democratic values?
While the story raises ethical questions about that particular use of publicly disclosed contribution data, the real focus of the post is why the media hasn’t shown more interest in the story. And for those who read the comments at the GR post, the “Dave” who was very active in the comments was not me.