Keith Olbermann declares Elder Oaks one of the worst people in the world

14 October 2009 @ 9:30 pm | 105 comments

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Hall of shame or badge of honor? I’ll take the latter, but it just goes to show what power the Associated Press has in setting the standard media message. It lifts one sentence from a talk, distorts the meaning behind it, grossly exaggerating it out of context and news outlets across the country relay it unquestioningly. Then Mr. Olbermann gets to call out Elder Oaks as one of the “worst people in the world” (I guess it lasts for only a day so don’t be too concerned).

Quick aside: are all those who are so concerned about Glenn Beck okay with Keith Olbermann and his brand of “civility”?

Unsurprisingly, the Church-owned Deseret News didn’t follow suit. But the local City Weekly takes umbrage that the DN refused to copy and paste the AP’s characterization of Elder Oaks’ talk and decided to write its own story instead. More outrage.

Curious to hear Elder Oaks explain himself? Ignore the video above and see below.


(Possibly) Related posts:

  1. Elder Oaks on Religious Freedom and the Proposition 8 Aftermath
  2. Why Elder Oaks’ Civil-Rights Analogy Works
  3. Listen to Elder Oaks talk, “Religious Freedom”

Tags: , ,





  1. Alan’s avatar

    Alan on 6 November 2009 at 4:41 pm

    Matt:

    With all due respect, you are lamenting religious freedom being “under fire” after the Mormon and Catholic Churches (among others) spearheaded the movement to take away marriage equality in California.

    It is unclear to me what rights you have lost or how the right to practice your religion has been impacted. Mormons, Catholics and other religious groups still have the right to fully practice their religion in California, Maine and the other 48 states of the United States. On the other hand, because of the actions of supporters of Proposition 8 (in California) and Question 1 (in Maine), gays and lesbians have lost a real, tangible right — the right to marry. There is simply no comparison.

  2. gloria LeSueur’s avatar

    gloria LeSueur on 7 November 2009 at 6:02 pm

    My comments are balanced……. Just not tipping the scales to your point of view BENJAMIN!!!!! lol………

  3. Alan’s avatar

    Alan on 8 November 2009 at 8:59 pm

    Well, Ms. LeSueur:

    I don’t know you really are, but I know that I am not Benjamin.

    While Benjamin’s comments may have been a little out there, people can get a little cranky when their rights are taken away–as happened to gays and lesbians in California and Maine in the past year.

  4. Shane’s avatar

    Shane on 6 December 2009 at 4:57 pm

    It would seem to me that one of the fundamental questions of this issue is; Are the rights of the gays and lesbians being taken away? and the follow up question; “Is it a right to marry?”

    It would seem that the right to marry would fall under the right to the pursuit of happiness, and may be part of the right to religious freedom for some. But, like all of these rights, there are certain laws put in place to help protect individuals and like-wise our communities and families.

    For example, people are free to drink alcoholic drinks, but the law limits the age in which someone can drink, and also it limits people from driving while under the influence of alcohol. I think most would agree that these laws are there to protect individuals and like-wise our families and communities.

    In marriage, there are similar limitations. For example, there are laws that prevent people from marrying there brother or sister, or even 1st cousins in some places. There is evidence that having children in these types of relationships can cause biological disorders. Also there are laws limiting the marriage of young children, meaning they have to have reached a certain age. Again these laws are set for our protection.

    I and many others believe that same sex marriage is destructive to families and therefore communities, and falls under the same laws limiting marriage as the one listed above. The right to marry is not being taken away, it is just given boundaries for our own sake. Just like someone may be upset that they are not free to take harmful drugs, doing so would in the end bring destruction and misery upon themselves and possibly others. Doing that which is contrary to the laws of God, will never bring happiness.

    Some may argue that they don’t believe homosexuality is contrary to God’s laws, but some things are true whether you believe them or not.

  5. Stephen’s avatar

    Stephen on 6 December 2009 at 8:24 pm

    Shane, with the hetrosexual divorce rate hovering around 50 percent in most states, your argument that allowing same sex marriage will somehow be “destructive to families and therefore communities” defies credibility. How will allowing two committed gay or lesbian consenting adults to marry impact your (presumably) hetrosexual marriage in any way? The answer, of course, that it will not impact you in any way.

· 1 · 2 · 3