Thomas S. Monson's Obituary

            Thomas S. Monson passed away on January 2, 2018, and his obituary appeared in many newspapers. As President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, President Monson deserves honor because of his position. As a truly good man, he deserves respect. Most of the articles showed the proper honor and respect, but the New York Times showed neither.

            I was a little shocked as I started to read the obituary in the Times. Here are the first few paragraphs in the article. What do you think?

Thomas S. Monson, who as president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints since 2008 enlarged the ranks of female missionaries, but rebuffed demands to ordain women as priests and refused to alter church opposition to same-sex marriage, died on Tuesday at his home in Salt Lake City. He was 90…

Facing vociferous demands to recognize same-sex marriage, and weathering demonstrations at church headquarters by Mormon women pleading for the right to be ordained as priests, Mr. Monson did not bend. Teachings holding homosexuality to be immoral, bans on sexual intercourse outside male-female marriages, and an all-male priesthood would remain unaltered.

            It sounds like a hit piece to me even though it seems to get better toward the end – the part that no one reads. Within the very first sentence, the writer makes the obituary of a man who lived his life giving service to others into a political statement. Members of the Church are not the only people to see the agenda in the obituary. Ben Shapiro, editor-in-chief at The Daily Wire makes a point to call out the Times. He shares the following tweet from the Times:

Here’s what they reported about Monson’s life:

Facing vociferous demands to recognize same-sex marriage, and weathering demonstrations at church headquarters by Mormon women pleading for the right to be ordained as priests, Mr. Monson did not bend. Teachings holding homosexuality to be immoral, bans on sexual intercourse outside male-female marriages, and an all-male priesthood would remain unaltered.

            Shapiro then shares the Times’ obituaries for Huge Hefner and Hugo Chavez and states that the Times “had no such harsh treatment for Hugh Hefner” and Hugo Chavez.

So it’s much worse, from the Times’ perspective, to be a religious person who abides by religious dictates on female ordination and same-sex marriage than to be a sexual profligate who trafficked in pornography, or to be a socialist dictator who destroyed an entire country. Monson was obviously a monster.

            Obviously, Shapiro believes that the Times was in the wrong in making the obituary into a political statement. A petition circulated calling for the obituary to be rewritten, and it collected 100,000 names. There was so much criticism of the obituary that the Times finally acknowledged the problem. William McDonald, the editor for obituaries in the Times put out a statement but in the end defended the obituary. The only conclusion that I can reach is that the Times has an agenda that cannot be seen to acknowledge the goodness of a religious man who stands on his principles.