Comments on: Mormons want you to read their old documents http://www.thestreisandeffect.com/200805/mormons-want-you-to-read-their-old-documents/ When trying to block information backfires Thu, 05 Aug 2010 16:09:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: David http://www.thestreisandeffect.com/200805/mormons-want-you-to-read-their-old-documents/comment-page-1/#comment-113 David Sun, 18 May 2008 00:12:49 +0000 http://www.thestreisandeffect.com/?p=91#comment-113 I think you're right in that the LDS Church doesn't understand how these things work in that by suing it only draws attention to the documents they are unhappy about being public. I would much rather have had them simply use it as a platform to describe why they have the policies they do, which would give them an opportunity to explain their beliefs and actually break down suspicion and ignorance. The documents really don't share anything earth-shattering but when the news only reports that they are suing it comes across as "having something to hide" in our modern world. On a broader vein, I understand the need for transparency, particularly having an interest in human rights professionally, but where is the line of simple courtesy and kindness? Should every individual's personal journal be public information? Is there a difference between something being publicly accessible to those who ask and those that steal the paper and wave it around in a manner that is only meant to embarrass or create suspicion, no matter what is actually on the paper. I would personally believe the line would be somewhere around the point that innocent suffering is highly probable or likely and the accused is completely defiant. Neither which are applicable in this case. I think you’re right in that the LDS Church doesn’t understand how these things work in that by suing it only draws attention to the documents they are unhappy about being public. I would much rather have had them simply use it as a platform to describe why they have the policies they do, which would give them an opportunity to explain their beliefs and actually break down suspicion and ignorance. The documents really don’t share anything earth-shattering but when the news only reports that they are suing it comes across as “having something to hide” in our modern world.

On a broader vein, I understand the need for transparency, particularly having an interest in human rights professionally, but where is the line of simple courtesy and kindness? Should every individual’s personal journal be public information? Is there a difference between something being publicly accessible to those who ask and those that steal the paper and wave it around in a manner that is only meant to embarrass or create suspicion, no matter what is actually on the paper.

I would personally believe the line would be somewhere around the point that innocent suffering is highly probable or likely and the accused is completely defiant. Neither which are applicable in this case.

]]>