Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Latter-day Saint
Travel and Religion
Acting the bully in Fairview, Texas?

Acting the bully in Fairview, Texas?

Last updated on: May 5, 2025 at 11:06 am by Dan Peterson

0 Comments

Acting the bully in Fairview, Texas? 2025-05-05T11:06:50-06:00 Dan Peterson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The proposed Fairview Texas Temple in the form that has now been grudgingly accepted by the town’s city council. (Image from Intellectual Reserve Inc. Fair use, I hope.)

I wrote the other day regarding the approval of a temple in Texas about which considerable and acrimonious controversy has swirled. (See “Quick Thoughts Occasioned by the Fairview Texas Temple.”) I’ve received some email responses to my position and I’ve seen some online reactions to the agreement that has evidently been reached, and I think that I want to reply to them, very briefly and perhaps only on a single point.

The Fairview city council has evidently suggested — pretty openly — that it was essentially coerced into accepting the greatly downsized temple plan offered by the Church, solely because it feared that its stance would not prevail in court. It would have preferred something much smaller still, apparently. (Perhaps an earth-sheltered or even completely subterranean version?) And critics of the Church have described this as a case of little David (the city of Fairview) being confronted by a gigantic and menacing Goliath (“Mormon Inc.,” as some like to describe it) that would flatly outspend and out-lawyer the town’s hardworking, worthy, and honest burghers. It was, the critics say, a matter of vicious and coercive “bullying” and, thus, the Church is wholly immoral and deserving of condemnation.

First of all, I see no reason in principle to condemn either party, in a case of genuine legal dispute, for availing itself of the right to have its claims heard in a court of law. That is the reason that such courts exist. They peacefully adjudicate disagreements. And I’m aware of no moral obligation, whether legal or religious, to surrender one’s constitutional rights or legal guarantees.

But, for the sake of discussion, let’s accept the malignant caricature of the “LD$ ‘Church'” proffered by some of its critics: The fact is that, in American courtrooms, massive and powerful corporations fairly often lose to relatively insignificant plaintiffs. Even with its supposedly unlimited supply of hired legal guns, the “so-called Church” could lose in a courtroom, especially if its legal arguments are manifestly flimsy. (The Church has lost a number of verdicts over its history, whatever the merits of the cases may or may not have been.)

Obviously, it could really turn out that poor and defenseless little Fairview might fail to persuade a judge because of the massive legal resources deployed against it by the evil cultic behemoth based in Salt Lake City. But surely there is at least one other conceivable explanation for the city council’s worry that Fairview might not prevail at trial: Perhaps they knew, or at least feared, that their case wasn’t a solid one. Perhaps their lawyers had warned them that they were on shaky ground and that a ruling — in an inevitably expensive judicial process — could easily go against them.

In such a case, one so inclined might even suggest that the bullying, if there really was any, might hypothetically have been on the city’s part rather than on the Church’s part, and that, so understood, it would be the Church that stood up to the city’s attempt at intimidation rather than the other way around. I can’t see into the souls on the Fairview city council, so I’m neither judging nor hurling an accusation. I will say this, though: I know many of the highest leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and I’m confident that they aren’t malevolent bullies.

It would be far preferable, in all such cases, to assume good faith on both sides, and to forego demonizing those with whom we disagree. In proof that the Church has behaved badly in Fairview, one ex-Mormon critic points out that he spent a little bit of time in or near that town back in the 1990s, and that the people that he met there were nice. Perhaps he’s forgotten that, during his time in the Church, several Latter-day Saints were nice people, too. (I’ve met two or three myself!) American public discourse is too frequently toxic today, and not only on the presidential level nor even only in partisan politics.

(A parenthetical postscript: There was bitter opposition on the part of at least some to the construction of the Cody Wyoming Temple — a 9,950 square foot structure, to be located on a very nearly 4.7-acre lot — which, after successfully withstanding multiple legal and political challenges, is now nonetheless well underway. I followed the Cody case more closely than I’ve followed the Fairview case, and I often saw allegations that the Cody Wyoming Temple, if allowed to exist, would loom over the city, dominate its skyline, block views of the surrounding mountains, and obscure the sky. I invite you to examine recent construction photos out of Cody and to judge for yourself how likely those dire prophecies are to be fulfilled.)

Located in front of the Nauvoo Illinois Temple, these 2003 statues of Joseph and Hyrum Smith show them on their way from Nauvoo, Illinois, to Carthage Jail, where they would both be murdered by an anti-Mormon mob on 27 June 1844. The human figures are by Latter-day Saint sculptor Stanley J. Watts and the horses are by the Latter-day Saint sculptor Kim Corpany.
(Wikimedia Commons public domain image)

We have some fairly early photographic images of Brigham Young and, still fairly recently, a very probable image of Oliver Cowdery was found. (From my point of view, at least, he looks remarkably like our “Oliver Cowdery” in the 2021 Interpreter Foundation film Witnesses.) Sadly, though, we have not had a photograph of Joseph Smith, the founding prophet of the Restoration. And the sketches and paintings of him that have come down to us frankly seem, to me anyway, to be all over the map.

Our salvation obviously doesn’t depend upon whether we know what Joseph looked like. For that matter, very few of us today know what Jesus looked like. Right? And yet, notwithstanding what some of our more disingenuous critics sometimes claim, Jesus is far more central to our faith and fundamental to our salvation than is Joseph.

Is it possible, though, that we now do have an authentic daguerreotype image of Joseph Smith? This video interview runs just slightly more than two hours and eight minutes, and I think that many of you will find it to be of interest: “BREAKING New Joseph Smith Photo Evidence! w/ Curtis Weber”

Travel and Religion

History and Religion

Previous Post

May 4, 2025

Book of Mormon anachronisms?

Next Post

May 5, 2025 After a very productive day

Recent Comments

0 | Leave a Comment

"Another class of memories are of individuals who previously lived. Some of these remembered individuals ..."

PlasmaMiasma

Accounts of Premortality?

"Sutherland's lecture sounds interesting. He seems to restate the Washington consensus that trade brings peace ..."

B. Wilson

Learning more about a region of ..."

"In a meeting today, I learned another important reason why accurate (or at least as ..."

the PROBLEM

From Serbia’s “White City,” Belgrade

"I've been watching a lot of video interviews of NDErs and researchers. I think in ..."

brotheroflogan

Accounts of Premortality?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 March 2014 August 2013 February 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was crucified and rose again after three days?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Moses John the Baptist Jesus Paul