In this thread regarding the murder of the Mormon bishop in Visalia, CA twickster suggests that “it does not appear” that Prop 8 is relevant to the matter of the murder.
I am local to the event in question, and I expressed that in fact, the murder DID take place in an environment where the public’s still red-hot feelings about Prop 8 are a factor. I demonstrated that that very neighborhood in Visalia, even prior to the murder, is relevant to the national discussion not only of Prop 8 but equal civil rights for gays nationwide. I don’t think I need to point out here the role Mormons in general had,but I will note briefly that local Mormons acted uniquely even above and beyond the broader pattern.
It goes without saying that the murder is awful, no one deserves to be killed, and so forth.
But there is more than meets the eye to the distant public, and I wonder why Twickster would use fuzzy language such as “it does not appear relevant”, and then when shown the relevance, deny it?
I know the thread is in IMHO, but the OP doesn’t actually express an opinion. So maybe the better moderation option is to move it to GD if it is getting out of IMHO territory?
The OP requested the thread be closed. Rather than cut off conversation, if people still had things to say, I asked that everyone stay on the topic of that man’s murder.
Since you admit the man was not himself involved in Prop 8 activities, as far as you know, I think that Prop 8 does not appear to be relevant to his murder.
I’m not trying to cut you off from whatever you want to say about Mormons and Prop 8 – I invited you, twice, to start your own thread and link to the existing one.
The thread started out as a press release about a Mormon bishop in California being killed in a murder-suicide. The day after the murder, news reports were that the killer had no connection to the LDS Church. Then the next day, it was revealed that the killer was a lapsed Mormon with PTSD from his service in Iraq, and the killer still had no connection to this particular bishop.
Any connection to the gay community was speculation by the uninformed, and it has since been discredited. It would have sufficed to say “despite rumors, this killing was not related to Prop 8” and then to continue to rail against the Mormons in the current CS thread about the movie 8: A Mormon Proposition.
There was another slight hijack in the thread, which I admit I had participated in, regarding whether it was cult-like behavior for Mormons to use words like “lay,” “bishop,” and “priest” in not quite the same context that other denominations use the words.
I thought it was reasonable for Monty to request that the thread be closed. Little was being said relevant to the murder, and much was being said off-topic dissing the religion of the deceased. If the thread is worth keeping open, then I agree that arguments about Prop 8 and about the definition of lay clergy should continue in different threads.
Oops my mistake. Doesn’/t change what I said though. Substitute as needed.
I admit no such thing, To the extend I am in a position to know what the local Mormon Churches did without exception or public dissent, my understanding is
exactly the opposite: This man was involved in organized Prop 8 activities.
Except as you apparently chose not to read several times, it was exactly what even Mormons were posting at the earliest stages on online commentary: That it was a revenge murder for Prop 8.
That it wasn’t, in fact that it appears to be a revenge murder for Church improprieties of some sort, doesn’t change the fact that local commentary, including form Mormons, was the first to bring Prop 8 into it.
Right, you are acting to cut off the existing discussion and force it to restart elswhere instead of continuing in place, simply because you don’t want to accept that there is in fact a Prop 8 connection. Maybe not from wherever you are, but here, where the murder actually happened, there certainly is.
From far away it seems that way. But on the ground here, people believe what they believe. Mormon or otherwise, 80% voted in favor of Prop 8 here, the highest in the state, a local Mormon City Councilman wrote a Resolution which his city passed, becoming the only City in CA to pass a resolution in favor of Prop 8. In fact, the wording of that resolution was to urge the voters to vote a certain way, the tail wagging the dog, for the voters to be urged to do the dirty work of the Mormon Church has not gone down smoothly locally. This is still very hot, as though it happened yesterday. There is danger in the air now.
The only thing that was too much in that thread was the not-so-slight bit about “lay”. The rest of it was an accurate report from a place where there are probably no other Dopers.
I don’t think people were debating Prop 8. They were simply pointing out, albeit in a very roundabout way, that karma is a bitch.
But karma didn’t kill the bishop; gunshots from a mentally unstable man killed the bishop. If you really think that some supernatural retaliatory karma force was a factor in the crime, then, well I guess in that sense it is relevant to the thread but pretty callous. As if karma has restored balance to the universe by eliminating a minor leader of a group that has participated in hatemongering.
Do you have reason to believe that the killer was offended by Prop 8?