OCR Text |
Show Page 22—THE HERALD. Provo. Utah, Friday, January 18, 1980 Opinions: What the Herald thinks, what the columnists say and what our readers think Ati Letters to The Daily Herald Editor Letter from The Editor Thanks,Folks; That’s Enough Readers, Herald: If you've read our Letters to the Daily Herald Editor columnat all during the past few weeks, | think you'll have to agree that I’ve been zealousto a fault in letting everyone make use of this forum. Theletters-forum of a newspaperis intended to give the readers a chance to be exposed to all shades of opinion on current issues of the day; to let them make informed decisions. Butas far as the Equal Rights Amendment — Sonia Johnson controversy is concerned, the forum long since has ceased to be an exchange of ideas and has become instead a medium for ego-tripping ‘‘metooism’’ on both sides of the question, exchanges of vitriol between letter writers or worse yet — for attempts at oneupping each other in new extremes of piety or apostasy. My few, well-meaning attempts to waive the 400-word length requirement stated so prominently in the regular ‘‘About Letters” box on this page have been abused by others who think they have an automatic right to verbal overkill. So far as the ERASonia Johnson issue is concerned, the Herald has done morethan right by its obligation to lend an airing to all sides of it. Recentletter writers have explored just about every aspect of church doctrine except its application to the feeding habits of North Tibetan Yaks. It obviously is time to set down a few ground rules for any future letters on this subject or others on issues of widespreadinterest. If you have anything to submit in this regard, your letter must meet the following requirements: It must relate to new developmentsin the matter, present hitherto unpublished information, or address issues not previously addressed by other writers. If someonebeat you to the punch in pointing out a prevously unknown fact or issue, save your paper. I see no more point in. drubbing the same statements into the public consciousness over different signatures. — If your letter is intended to take the statements of some previous writer to task, take it up with them personally and directly. Don’t inflict it on the readers unless you bring out a new aspect of the issues as they apply to the readers and not to your literary nemesis. — It must conform to length requirements. I was hoping we’d avoid having to count words on each letter like a miser, but the time has come.If your epistle from here on doesn’t fit the length requirement, please try againor sendit to a local bindery instead of The Daily Herald. Finally, I would like to thank all our readers for their patience in bearin; with this complex, difficult issue so far. Please take: solace in knowing that your difficulty in reading through it all was surpassed by minein trying to translate it all into nonlibelous, English sentences and paragraphs for you. On this and anyfuture continuing controversies I will try to strike a better balance between the right of individual readers to express themselves and the entire readership’s right to a forum free of repetitive ideological diatribes, misdirected personal correspondence orotheronlyfaintly relevant ramblings. I would like to commend those whose letters appear on today’s Opinions Page for their generally well-reasoned, rational approaches to the issue regardless of their viewpoints. Too bad a few who have gone before them didn’t exhibit similar thought, reflection an temperance. : Sincerely yours, Ben Hansen, Managing Editor About Letters: The Daily Herald welcomesletters to the editor on any subject of broad reader interest. Letters preferably should be type-written, double-spaced and not exceed 400 words (about two typed, doublespaced pages) Without exception, every letter mustbe signed in ink with the writter’s full name, home address and phone number (Phone numbers won't be published.) Names can be withheld f r good reason but only after personal consultation with the editor The editor reserves the right to edit any letter to removepotentially libelous material, material in poor taste and to makeletters conform to the length requirements. Length requirements can be waived in unusual cases where excess material provides exceptionally pertinent information or insights on a matter of broad communityinterest. As nearly as possible,all letters which meet the above requirements will be published in the order they are received, although handwritten letters may be delayed for typing, and letters containing questionable statements may be held back to be verified. Mortals Should Leave Judgment to God Editor, Herald: I spent half an hour talking to Sonia Johnson when she was in Provolast October, and have spoken by phone with her close co-worker Teddie Wood in Virginia. Since October I have been reading and ae Sonia's case and the eu) revealsthat she did not apply “‘savage misogyny” to the LDS Church. Unfortunately Johnsoi. was misquoted (by UPI reporter Linda Thielke) thus: ‘Pedestals are the pits. It shows most vividly the savage mit y in the Mormon Church.” (Deseret News, 27 Oct. 79). Mostlettersto this column on the The second charge alleged Sonia subject seem bent on oversimplify- taught that Mormon missionaries ing a complex issue. Kither Soni “should not be invited into people's “got what she had coming” and homes.” At ing to a Dec.3 edimust repent, or the LDS Church is tion of the New York Times, Sonia hopelessly naive and oppressive. had offered her bishop a videotape There has beenlittie reason or obof one of her speeches by way of jectivity. clarification. She explained to the If the churchinsists upon excomTimes that, since with the anti-ERA municating everyone who teaches campaign the church had gone into “false doctrine,” many authors of nee lobbying techniques had church bookswill have to go. Incorme appropriate — in other Tect doctrine often comes from the 4 -making. Wi is in pulpit, and none of the speakers are mind she advised a meeting of ERA excommunicated. From the convensupporters to tell the church. in estional wisdom ofourcivilization we sence: “I will listen to you if you preemie to extrapolate the mind of will listen to me.”’ Since this is a known political tactic, it is possible According to the Dec. 9 Herald, to see her point of view without the first charge against Sonia alnecessarily agreeing with her leged that she has claimed the exmethod. istence of ‘misogyny’ in Mormon It is ere to me,in view of society. I have an article from the the LDS policy of individualpolitical Washington Post Dec. 23 in which freedom, that members of the Sonia explains this. She quotes church have not been encouraged to herself: “I wish there were time to _ Study this particular issue (ERA) talk at length about why the — we havesimply been urged to oppedestal as a symbol of women’s impve it. Most of my fellow Mormons mobilization and isolation ... reveals now they are against it but do not our savage misogyny.” She told the really know why. This brings up the Post: ‘‘Neither before nor after this third allegation againstSonia, to the statement did I mention or imply effect that she “taught that the Mormonculture or church leaders.” church is dedicated to imposing the The January Utah Holiday has more prophet’s moral directives upon ail to say. Writer Linda Stillitoe conAmericans, when it is the doctrine firms that ‘‘a tape recording of of the church thatall people are free Johnson's remarks (made at the U to choose for themselves those moral directives by their own consciences." Here doctrine and reality collide. According to Sonia, the church is the force behind covert Political activity to defeat the ERA in all 15 unratified states. If what happened inVirginia recently is any example,shehas told the truth. Thisis essentially what occurred: Breaking with policy the Church organization in Virginia used Churchfacilities to organize an antiERA campaign. Hundreds of Mormon women were organized under the direction of regional representatives to lobby against the ERA during the session of the Virginia state legislature. The members were specifically instructed not to identify themselves as Mormons,in orderto give the impression that “‘concei citizens,” acting independently, were coming from sverranee to speak out against the amendment and Tepresented a majority concensus. The churchfailed to comply with the law requiring it to register as a lobby and did not give a complete accounting of funds. Sonia and other Mormons for ERA were candid with the press about the situation, and some investigative journalism followed. A similar organization is Operating currently in Missouri Church buildings and have been approved for ant activities, but the use of “ in the organization name is prohibited. Membersarenot set apart, but are given a “‘priesthood blessing." One stake official expressed “‘shock”’ upon learning that his stake had been as: $2,000 for the antiERAeffort. (See January 80 Utah Holiday.) Yet the Church public relations departmentai in December that Mormonsare free to support the ERA, so the official anti-ERA stance of the church evidently does not have the force of doctrine. To Sonia the ERA is in the same category as the woman suffrage movementand is an extension of it, while feminism atits best today is in the tradition of our foremothers, Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who fought so courageously to gain women the vote — not to mention numerous well-known 19th-century Mormon feminists. Sonia Johnson has hadthe courage and henesty to say somethingsI've been thinking for 20 years. Butit is most disquieting to have someone pas et ae = has ways for fog. Would that there were room in our culture for dissent and dialogue! In relation to Sonia’s excommunication I heard this slogan Tecited numerous times: “Church courts are courts of love and not of retribution.” That statementis far too generalized to even be credible. Even the existence of an appeal stem is an admission that another jurch official in another time and place might rule differently. Therefore let God be Sonia’s judge.I don’t believe the fallible, finite minds of men have the ability to make judgments stripping an eternal humansoulof her eternalbless- ings. Judith Dick 1796 N. 1350 W., Provo Let’s Get Warring ERA Factions Together Editor, Herald: I believe most of us wish the subject of ERA would dry up and blow away,butit isn’t going to, so I would ike to see it discussed in a calmer way, without even mentioning the nameof that particular person, who has been in the national limelight. Letters to the editor started out a few weeks ago as “Mormons for ERA,” versus ‘Mormons against ERA,” butas time went on, accusations against the Mormon Church and against individuals, on both sides of the matter, took over and the original subject got lost in the shuffle. It might be well at this timeto remind readers that proponentsof the controversial subject want to add the following to the constitution: Section 1: Equality of Rights under the law shall not be abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex. Section 2: The congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriaie iegisiation, the provisions of this article. Section 3: This amendmentshall take effect two years after the date of ratification. Those who are fighting so desperately to get the amendment passed feel very strongly thatthis would correct many injustices to womenthatstill exist. Those who oppose the amendmentsayit would jeopardize many of the rights and privileges now enjoyed by the women of this country. Somelawyers havestated that we don’t know whateffect the amendmentwould haveuntil (or unless) it becomes the law of the land and is tried in the courts. It has also been said that injustices can be corrected within the framework ofthe laws we now have, and an amendmentto the constitution is not necessary. Statistics show that many women in the country are working to suprt themselves and their families. any others have to work to supplementthe PantyRees: Whatever their reasons, they desire to receive equal pay for equal work. ERA backers should be given credit for bringing this fact to national attention. Theyalso should have credit for pointing out that inheritance laws are often unfair to women, and retirement pensions are sometimes fair to wives, also that women often have difficulty getting credit, regardless of how competent and faithful they are in their work. While mentioning these worthy causes,it should be noted that some women’s groups havegotten in on the ERA movement, fighting for causes that don’t deserve to be considered. Representatives who attended the Houston conference can testify to the truthfulness of that. Tactics used by the national group in pressuring states to approve the amendmentare often less than admirable. Men of the Mormon Church have been accused of intimidating the women onthis subject and of keeping them in ignorance. Isn’t it the ERA backers who are guilty of intimidating not only the women of the country, but the men also, by charging everyone who opposes their suggested amendmentof being a traitor to the cause of justice for women? The Mormon Church has been very ably defended in letters to the editor, but I don’t believe it has been mentioned thatthe Relief Society of the Mormon Church wasone of the first women’s organizations in the country, started March 17, 1842. It began as a means of helping poor and destitute families, but soon a fallpeugeot was adopted to fill the needs of women for education, for social experiences outside the home,for spiritual enrichment and an exchange of good home making ideas. It gave womenan opportunity to fulfill their natural desires to help those less fortunate than themselves. Relief Society was not started in defianceof the men in the church, but with their help’ and cooperation. Educationforallofits members has been strongly advocated by the LDS Church from the very beginning. In an article to the Daily Herald January 8, Teddie Wood of McLean, Virginia whois a strong supporter of “Mormonsfor ERA,” wasquoted as saying, ‘‘I was an innocent bystander (in the Civil Rights movement) until I found myself teaching around 60 blacks in New York State who had migrated from Misses to the North. Some of their problems touched mea great deal, just as the problems of women have touched me.” Doesn’tthis ring a bell about the very reason that Relief Society was organized? It seems like the time has come for the ‘‘Mormons for ERA,” and “Mormons opposed to ERA,” to stop throwing rocks at each other and start discussing the subject in a peaceable way.If injustices against womenstill exist, let’s try to correct them,but not at the expense of losing the rights and privileges we now enjoy, and not at the expense of weakening the family (by supporting some of the unworthy women’s movements); and certainly not at the expense of damaging the reputations of leaders in a churchthat has alwaysstressed the importance of showing honor, respect, love and concern for women. Berniece Everett RFD1, Box 244 Springville Bureaucrats Underlying Threat of ERA Editor, Herald: If the Equal Rights Amendmentis the wonderful boon to mankind that its proponents declare it to be, why have they had so muchtrouble getting it passed in spite of the vast amount of time and money expended in its behalf? Why are some states now seeking to rescind ratification? Why have its proponents had to use unfair methods (boycotts; extention of deadlines beyond legal limits; allowing changes in favor of the amendment, but not against it) to seek its passage. Surely the Mormon Church, a relatively small organization, cannot be given the blame(or credit) for its lack of success, at least outside of Utah. I am forced to the conclusion thatthere are some negative features of ERA thatare of concern to many people of good will. Proponents of ERA would have us believe that it is impossible to believe in equal rights for women and yet oppose ERA. They love to quote the amendment, which is stated in an innocent fashion, and then display amazement that any thinking person could possibly oppose it. Since the LDS Church has spoken out in opposition to ERA,it stands to reason that they desire to brutalize women andkeep them subservient to men. Butis it possible that there are somehidden dangers in ERA,and that the church seesit as potentially harmful to women rather than helpful? I believe thatit is not the amendmentitself that we need fear, but the bizarre and far-reaching interpretations and regulations, that will be made of it by government bureaucrats. Anyone that doubts this has only to look at the Title IX regulations which attempt to prevent sex discrimination in the schools. While many of them are very reasonable, others are almost unbelievable. We have seen an out- lawing of mother-daughter teas, father-son events, and one-sex classes. The girls pep club must be opened up to boys. Dress codes relating to length of hairorofskirts must relate equally to boys and girls. Men’s locker rooms must be opened up to women sports reporters, etc., etc. Look at the problem BYU encountered with HEWbecauseofa desire to maintain separate dormitories, or at least separate wings, for men and women students. HEW ruled that BYU could maintain separate dormitories only if they did not allow non-BYUstudentsto live in BYU approved housing! In other words it was deemed necessary to discriminate against non-BYU students in order to prevent alleged sex discrimination! Ralph Duke made an excellent pointin a recentletter to the editor when he said that passage of ERA with cases involving alleged discrimination. Any thinking person would approve of equal pay for equal work andotherlogicalgoals of the women’s movement. However, suchlegislation has beenoris being enacted, and I have seen no evidence that ERA will contribute significantly to this effort. I think it will turn people against each other rather than promote harmonious relations. To methe most dangerous part of ERA and other government interventionsis that citizensat a state orlocallevel are incapable of making intelligent decisions, so “Big Brother” will do it for them. We would do well to resist any further intrusions of government upon our private lives. Sincerely, James M. Harris 635 Sagewood Ave. Provo would causethe courts to be glutted Friend Defends Tess’s Teaching Work years, Long before she came to On many occasions Tess and I have talked about her teaching which next to her family. is the most important thing in herlife. Many times she has expressed concern about the young people oftoday not being able to think for themselves Utah to attend BYU. In fact. my daughter is her namesakeand I am proud of it. My daughter is also a student in one of her English classes this year. and I think many others, what no other High School Teacher has been able to do, and that is to read and think. And learn the value of just Editor, Herald: T have never written a letter of this kind, but after the letter written by Ruth Blair, January 13. 19801 feel I should stand up and speak for Adrienne Morris (Tess). Thave knownthe real Tess for 30 Tess has done for my daughter, being able to read and think. She was hired to teach English and English is what she teaches. Ask her students! She does a great job. To compare Tess to a tree in fested with diseasereally is unfair Just because she has some ideas that differ from yours (and mine) does not mean she teaches these ideas in the classroom.I know for a fact that she will not teachreligion. Again ask her students! Ruth Blair left out of her letter how hard and long Tess and husband worked to pay for that Interchange Dairy. I know because I was there. It was a daylight till dark job 7 days a week Also I can tell you first hand Tess’s family is doing great She has a wonderful family and they supportherin all she trys to do A Loyal Friend Averil Sidwell Lindon |