Packer Supports Diversity
The argument that Elder Boyd K. Packer’s statement, “If they throw the word diversity at you, grab hold of it and say, “I am already diverse, and I intend to stay diverse.” If the word is tolerance, grab that one, too, saying, “I expect you to be tolerant of my lifestyle-obedience, integrity, abstinence, repentance.” If the word is choice, tell them you choose good, old-fashioned morality. You choose to be a worthy husband or wife, a worthy parent.” is an archaic brand of ideological chauvinism, a rejection of all outside views, is preposterous. The LDS church does not claim to have a monopoly on truth. Consider church leaders who state: “We do not have a monopoly on goodness.” and “no group in society has a monopoly on goodness, wisdom, talent, knowledge, or energy.” President Hinckley at this same conference stated, “There are many not of our faith but who feel as we do.”Packer’s stance was not to reject outside views blindly. It was to not give into permissiveness merely for the sake of permissiveness. The stance is that one need not choose to cut their finger off merely because that choice exists. The stance is that no one needs to accept any ideas simply because they are diverse. The rejection of any given idea does not decrease the diversity of an individiual. Ideological diversity, by definition, is different people having different ideas.And to assume that people who adhere to certain religious beliefs are chauvinistic is somewhat patent. I would not adhere to any beliefs unless I felt they were superior to others that had been presented to me. But chauvinism is a bit too strong of a word, since determining if my devotion is excessive, or undue, is up for debate. Now, if some people do not look around at outside beliefs because they think there couldn’t possibly be anything better, that is an individual failing. It is not, however, the doctrine presented by Elder Packer.Forgive the gross over-simplification of the argument, but it seems the argument is that someone must be permissive of any and all ideological persuasions or else they are close-minded, ultra-conservative, and blind. Consider that all reasoning individuals are permitted to peruse the plethora of paradigms throughout the world and choose from among them. This choice is indeed precious. But having made a choice does not mean that one is automatically closed off, or close-minded.
David Saundersstudent number – 529772163phone – 4357134120