"In fact, using overstatement to make a religious point is a time-honored tradition. Preachers use overstatement to knock the cobwebs from the heads of sleepy listeners."

Let's be real: There is no amount of perspective that can make Wright's hateful racist remarks acceptable. You media types are giving Obama a pass on this and it is misplaced. He should be held accountable for his failure to act.

If anyone should know about hyperbole, it would be you, Jerry.

Oh, and of course, Paul Dunn, that MASTER of LDS Hyperbole!

Is that what we are to conclude from all of this debate? That you really cannot trust what you hear from religious leaders, preachers, and teachers because it is a form of language the educated call "hyperbole" [but the rest of us common folk call it LIES]??

Would you, Jerry, be so understanding and willing to overlook this "hyperbole" had these been anti-black comments by a white preacher?

So, the fiery comments by Fred Phelps, from the Westboro Baptist Church, are also simply hyperbole? Not that big of a deal? He's just trying to wake up his sleepy congregation?

I'm confident many (if not most) of us would walk out of any congregation where the preacher, like Rev. Wright or Fred Phelps, spews hate from the pulpit. Those who are filled with similar hatred will stay, however. And that's disappointing.

I don't believe excusing racism and hate speech is wise or in our best interest.

I am embarassed for you, Jerry, to be condoning racist rhetoric and rationalizing it as "hyperbole".

You must consider yourself a kindred spirit to Rev. Wright or Fred Phelps, and you are protecting your own.

But I see through your hyperbole, and the truth does not reflect well on you.

Disgraceful. Amazing that there is not one comment from anyone over the larger fact that this columnist just implied the Savior (as well as prophets of scriptures) was a liar and a propagandist. Acceptance of this type of reasoning is to accept propagandist tactics when it suits your purpose. "The end justifies the means?" A little lie or exaggeration can be used if it grabs your audiences attention? This has never been taught by reasonable Christians. Men who loved this country and loved the truth so much they died for it are rolling over in their graves; this includes the forgotten and misunderstood great men who sacrificed to establish the Mormon religion. The agenda is now on the table; anything in the scriptures you cannot comprehend with a reasonable degree of intelligence will now be dismissed by Johnson and his ilk as "exaggerations"; there is no longer a people any where who do not fear truth enough to spin it as some form of exagerration or hyperbole.

As this column appears in a directly connected church owned newspaper and has no disclaimer attached from any authoritive Church source, is it not accurate to say that the LDS Church once established by great but forgotten men is now extinct? To fear truth enough to spin it as some form of exagerration or hyperbole; is it not now a fairly simple and logical progression of this line of reasoning moving the LDS closer to meld into a Unitarian style religion where the "Truth is what you make of it", i.e., strong and true established principles which built our country into the greatest on earth "may have been an exaggeration?" If the LDS columnists and other representatives cannot be counted on to defend the establishment of truth, who can be counted on?

Jerry's position is a common one being assumed by religious "moderates". While religious moderation may seem a reasonable position, in light of all we have (through science) learned about the universe, such moderation offers no bulwark against religious extremism, bigotry, and violence - the spirit of which was manifest in Rev. Wright's sermons.

From the perspective of the faithful, the religious moderate is nothing more than a failed fundamentalist. The problem that religious moderation such as Jerry's poses for all of us is that does not permit anything very critical to be said about religious literalism, bigotry and fanaticism, being, as he argues, merely hyperbole after all.

Religious moderation is the product of secular knowledge and scriptural ignorance, which Jerry manifests so well. But such religious moderation will do nothing to lead us out of the wilderness.

Racist speach, religious bigotry, etc. must not be tolerated. Obama spoke out against his religious leader, and so have many others. Walk out, speak up, take action. Your silence condones such extremism and radicalism. I walked out of October Conference when Elder Holland started attacking Catholic beliefs. That kind of religious bigotry and hate speach has no place in a house of worship.

Without intending to beat a dead horse, Randy gives far too much credit to Obama in saying that he spoke out against his religious leader.

Obama listened to the venom of Rev. Wright for 20 years and acknowledged him to be his mentor and spiritual advisor.

He spoke out only when it became a political crisis for him, and even then has been ambiguous in his renouncement of the hateful speech of Wright. He also said he had not spoken with Rev. Wright about the rants seen and heard on the video.

He first said he didn't know of the offensive remarks - a statement which is totally incredulous and insulting to the intelligence of the American electorate. In his now-famous speech, he acknowledged that he did hear offensive sermons but wouldn't disown his mentor.

Finally, when the appeared on The View he added comments that he would have left the church if Wright had not acknowledged the hurtful content of his speech.

Obama has his finger in the air trying to gauge the political temperature and is saying what he thinks fits the moment.

Christ meant what he said. He did not lie. He did not exagerrate. Only a rich man, or those aspiring to be rich would try to spin Christ's statements to suit their own purposes. When Christ said that it is easier for a camel to thread the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven, He most assuredly meant that it is impossible for rich man to enter into heaven. How can a man die with his riches while there are those around him that live in the most humble conditions of poverty and despair?

It is a little ironic that since most of the religious leaders in the LDS Church are wealthy men, that the Church is being led by those whom the Savior said cannot enter heaven. The author of this column could spin anything written in the Scriptures to be an "exaggeration."

My sense is that Obama's preacher meant exactly what he said as well.

Jerry, you're treading on thin ice with your comments. To quote you, "(Jesus) didn't mean for the words to be taken literally." Oh really? Where in the scriptures did you learn that we shouldn't take Savior at his word?

In fact, you even pontificate that we should follow the example of Time magazine. We shouldn't take Rev Wright at his word.

It is a shame that we have a presidential candidate that listened to this hate speech for 20 years and never complained. It is shameful that Rev Wright was even hired as a spiritual advisor to Sen Obama. It is shameful that Time magazine is making excuses for Rev Wright's racist comments. It is shameful you have chosen to speak for the Savior and implied to know what is truth and what is hyperbole.

Jerry is right on the money, especially when it comes to LDS preachers. Paul Dunn never meant for anything he said to be taken literally. And the LDS reading of Genesis is that Eve was never meant to take God's commandment (thou shalt not eat the fruit) literally. And Nephi was never meant to take the commandment - Thou shalt not kill - literally when he killed Laban.

I think Jerry is on to something. It is ALL hyperbole, figurative language, and symbolic meanings. Nothing is real or true or literal.

You know, THAT is a religion I can believe in!

Jerry,

You really missed the boat on this one. This is as close to blasphemy as I think you can come and still write for the DN or a Mormon media outlet. Should we be saying adeiu?