Just wanted to add, The “church” also sends conflicting messages. While many people celebrated Oaks bringing up BLM at BYU last year, he also brought up protests resulting in damage to private property. Those who support the status quo couldn’t have been any happier. While I don’t condone the destruction of private property, the fight for racial equality and social justice are not the same. Insurance can rebuild buildings but insurance cannot rebuild the lives that have been destroyed by racist attitudes, policies, and practices. The message he was (attempting) to convey was an anti-racist message. But it became conflicted when he brought up private property damage. Another example was Oaks April conference talk about the constitution which was celebrated by Trumpers and progressives alike. I think it does the church and society a disservice being so vague and cryptic in messaging. His “both sidesing” BLM just cripples any chance to address the issue and further divides church membership.
