But it is judgmental, because they are not sufficiently distinguishing between malevolence and ignorance. While malevolence is clearly a sin to be punished, ignorance is more of a handicap to be corrected. The following video from Mormon Messages illustrates how, at times, our own perception of someone else's faults can be skewed by our own judgmentalism:
The full transcript of President Thomas S. Monson's address is available HERE.
Are we looking at Professor Bott through a clear perspective unclouded by judgmentalism, or through a perspective clouded and smeared by our own preconceived notions? An anti-racist bias can be just as counterproductive as a racist bias; both are extremist. On Things of my Soul, Papa D makes the following suggestion:
Address the words, not the person - and avoid characterizations that label either. Keep it concise and on point. Don't say, "That's stupid" - or anything like that phrasing. In the Priesthood ban case, I might say something like, "I like what Elder Holland said in the PBS documentary - that he never understood the reason for the ban, but that the key is not perpetuating the former justifications for it."
Condemn the sin, NOT the sinner.