Utah Repents!
McCary
It seems they have decided to eliminate the parts of their religious
doctrine in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints which imply
that blacks are inferior. Apparently they finally realize that as they
have been coming out in droves to worship Karl Malone every night, they
might as well end the hypocrisy. Smart move.
Ken McCary
Modern Day Genius
Roger Williams
Actually, yes - the hypocrisy in the history of the Mormon church has
been as in your face as any religion in modern history. Change within
church doctrine has come only after external pressures, which lead to
startling, and very timely, revelations. When the US government put the
screws down on Mormon polygamy, the elders of the Church had a very sudden
"revelation" that led to the church officially abandoning polygamy.
Ditto the churches decision to exclude blacks from the mormon ministry.
When the US government threatened to revoke the tax exempt status of the
church, a "revelation" led to the lifting of the ban. Mormonism is as
wacky, and perhaps more reflective of the history of America, as anything
in her entire history. Although, it does bear noting that there are a fair
number of Mormons seeking to reform the church from within for what can
only be decribed as non-cynical reasons.
The only thing the Mormon church can do to stop promoting the idea that
blacks are "wicked" would be to actually change their liturgical texts. A
link, which I must fairly note as anti-Mormon, shows the historical
context of how blacks fit into the Mormon scheme of things:
http://www.exmormon.org/blacks1.htm
Not that this really has anything to do with the Jazz, anyways. As far
as I know, the only Mormon in the NBA is Shawn Bradley. Travis Knight is
Utah born and bred, but I don't know if he's a Mormon.
> Ken McCary
> Modern Day Genius
--
{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{} \|/
{} RogerW rog...@newsguy.com {} 0< -- Ljutefisk!
{} http://www.parrot.net ad...@parrot.net {} ^^^^(*)^^^^
{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{} ^^ / \ ^^
Ed Sayre
Roger Williams (rog...@shell1.tiac.net) wrote:
: Not that this really has anything to do with the Jazz, anyways. As far
: as I know, the only Mormon in the NBA is Shawn Bradley. Travis Knight is
: Utah born and bred, but I don't know if he's a Mormon.
And a lot of Jazz fans ain't Mormons, period. :)
gee...@ci.long-beach.ca.us
In article <6js34r$8...@enews2.newsguy.com>,
> as I know, the only Mormon in the NBA is Shawn Bradley. Travis Knight is
> Utah born and bred, but I don't know if he's a Mormon.
>
> > Modern Day Genius
>
> --
> {}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{} \|/
> {} RogerW rog...@newsguy.com {} 0< -- Ljutefisk!
> {} http://www.parrot.net ad...@parrot.net {} ^^^^(*)^^^^
> {}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{} ^^ / \ ^^
>
>
Please notice that some fundamentalist Christian organizations, e.g. Bob Jones
University, still to this day academically "segregate" Whites from Blacks, and
teach the latter to be inferior to Whites.
In his introduction to a brief summary of anthropologist Tom McIver's new book
"Creationism and Racism" writer Jim Lippard recites the following as part of
McIver's new book:
"McIver goes on to look at the racism that arises from a particular
interpretation of Noah's three sons and the curse on Ham, from
polygenism (inferior pre-Adamite people), connections with the Ku Klux
Klan, Anglo-Israelism, and the Christian Identity movement, etc. Some
interesting points of connection:
Prominent fundamentalists connected with the KKK: Bob Shuler, Billy
Sunday, and Bob Jones, Sr. (McIver says that "Perhaps 40,000
fundamentalist ministers joined the Klan.")
Prominent creationists affiliated with Bob Jones University: Emmett
Williams, former editor of the Creation Research Society Quarterly and
George Mulfinger, CRS board member.
Gerald Winrod, founder of Defenders of the Christian Faith, published
the "openly racist" magazine Defender, which published creationist
articles by George McCready Price, W.B. Riley, and A.I. Brown. For a
time, it also published Harry Rimmer's newsletter in its pages. (Riley
was the leader of the World's Christian Fundamentals Association, a
prominent fundamentalist group in the 1920's. He openly advocated
white supremacy.)
Charles Totten, the Yale military science instructor who came up with
alleged calculations proving "Joshua's Missing Day" (later turned into
an urban legend about NASA by Harold Hill), was also an advocate of
British-Israelism (promoted in his journal Our Race) and a
pyramidologist.
James Gray, editor of the Moody Monthly and head of the Moody Bible
Institute, was a firm believer in the genuineness of the anti-Semitic
fraud Protocols of the Elders of Zion. When Henry Ford publicly
apologized for a series of articles by A.J. Cameron (another
British-Israelite) about the Protocols in Ford's Dearborn, Mich.
newspaper, Gray claimed that Ford's apology was itself evidence of
Jewish conspiracy.
Jarah Crawford, a Vermont Assembly of God minister, claims that
scientific creationism isn't creationist enough because it allows for
evolution of races.
Herman Otten, editor of Christian News, is now an advocate of
Holocaust revisionism.
There's lots more (36 pages in this chapter), but you'll have to wait
for the book (or at least the Skeptic article).
All this shows that racism is perfectly happy to rely for its
foundation on creationism rather than evolution."
Lippard's entire brief review is located at:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/racism.html
Which all is produced here in order to "stop" this infernal purportedly
"Christian" attack upon what they (mis)perceive as Mormon Christian racism.
In light of Mormon Christian foundational theology wherein every person born
on earth no matter at what time nor into what county/ethnic group/language,
etc. it is clear that Mormon Christians have been egalitarian from their
earliest days and most fundamental theological pronouncements.
As I've noted earlier in several posts last year, the early Mormon Christians
were "thrown out" of Missouri, a slave state, because among other things
Mormon Christians accepted freed Blacks into their midst, to the total shock
and hatred of native Missouians who owned Black slaves.
Indeed, in light of the June, 1998, Southern Baptist Convention which will
have its national meeting this year in Salt Lake City, we must remind the
Southern Baptist Convention of the "Southern" aspect of their name, a racially
-based title from an unfortunate period in American history.
However, wholly irrespective of Mormon historical egalitarianism, let Mormon
Christians put the quietus to those "Christian" current practitioners of
racism by halting the latter's currect attacks upon Mormon Christianity, see
above, by the firm pronouncement: "Cleanse ye first your own house befor
pointing any fingers at others!"
Respectfully,
Gerry L. Ensley.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Roger Williams
Yes, and that has what to do with the specifics of what Ken or I were
talking about? Was the exclusivity of the Mormon doctrine regarding blacks
ever claimed?
> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/racism.html
What a lovely strawman. What has this to do with the historical
teachings of the Mormon church about Blacks? A: nothing. Are other
Christian denominations harboring racists? More than likely. Have any of
them been threatened with revocation of their tax exempt status like the
Mormons were before the stunning "revelations" that overturned years of
preaching about the "curse of Ham"? Mais non.
> Which all is produced here in order to "stop" this infernal purportedly
> "Christian" attack upon what they (mis)perceive as Mormon Christian racism.
Which was "produced" here to change the topic from the Mormon church,
apparently. There is not much to "mispercieve" as to the historical racist
leaninggs of the Mormon church. Blacks bore the "curse of Ham". The 1966
edition of "Mormon Doctrine" quotes "apostle" Bruce R. McConkie as saying:
"Negroes in this life are denied the priesthood; under no circumstances
can they hold this delegation from the Almighty".
The threat of having the LDS tax exempt status yanked changed things in
a big hurry. That is the point being made.
> In light of Mormon Christian foundational theology wherein every person born
> on earth no matter at what time nor into what county/ethnic group/language,
> etc. it is clear that Mormon Christians have been egalitarian from their
> earliest days and most fundamental theological pronouncements.
Except if they're black. Except if they want to join the Mormon clergy.
Well, that's changed now, the same way the church had a stunning (and
strangely timed) "revelation" about polygamy. The moral? When the US govt.
stepped in to end Mormon hijinks, God spoke to the LDS in an awful hurry.
Not bad.
> As I've noted earlier in several posts last year, the early Mormon Christians
> were "thrown out" of Missouri, a slave state, because among other things
> Mormon Christians accepted freed Blacks into their midst, to the total shock
> and hatred of native Missouians who owned Black slaves.
And because of a certain bank scandal. Wonder what those illusory freed
slaves thought of the whole "curse of Ham" thing?
> Indeed, in light of the June, 1998, Southern Baptist Convention which will
> have its national meeting this year in Salt Lake City, we must remind the
> Southern Baptist Convention of the "Southern" aspect of their name, a racially
> -based title from an unfortunate period in American history.
Yes, the Southern Baptist organization seems to be held over from the
late 50's at the latest. Your point about the Mormon church's shockingly
well documented racist exclusionary policies is, what... it's ok because
other churches are bad too?
> However, wholly irrespective of Mormon historical egalitarianism, let Mormon
> Christians put the quietus to those "Christian" current practitioners of
> racism by halting the latter's currect attacks upon Mormon Christianity, see
> above, by the firm pronouncement: "Cleanse ye first your own house befor
> pointing any fingers at others!"
Oh please. You're preaching to an atheist. Had you bothered to read
what I posted in the first place, you'd note I said that the Mormon church
was just as hypocritical as any other church in America regarding race.
Take this ludicrously self righteous whitewashing elsewhere, and certainly
off of rec.sport.basketball.pro (note the adjustment in the newsgroups
line). I'm not saying Mormons are racist; I'm saying the church leadership
was racist, and worse, stunningly hyprocrtical and cynical about the
timing of their "relevation". I find it hard to believe that God only
hands down changes to "immutable" doctrine when billions of dollars are at
stake. Had the Mormon leaders any "loyalty" to their "sacred texts"
whatsoever, they'd have fought the government tooth and nail for the right
to keep their racist rules in check. Nothing doing. They proved that
doctrine and dogma bend in the breeze when money is at stake.
> Respectfully,
> Gerry L. Ensley.
sl...@cc.usu.edu
In article <6k2oc7$i7$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, gee...@ci.long-beach.ca.us writes:
> In article <6js34r$8...@enews2.newsguy.com>,
> Roger Williams <rog...@shell1.tiac.net> wrote:
>>
>> McCary <kmc...@NOSPAMamaroq.ces.ncsu.edu> wrote:
>> > It seems they have decided to eliminate the parts of their religious
>> > doctrine in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints which imply
>> > that blacks are inferior. Apparently they finally realize that as they
>> > have been coming out in droves to worship Karl Malone every night, they
>> > might as well end the hypocrisy. Smart move.
Despite what you may have read in the LA Times, or what you may have heard,
the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has made no decision to
change their doctrine, as there is no need. They believe that all men are
equal regardless of race.
gee...@ci.long-beach.ca.us
In article <6k64bd$2...@enews4.newsguy.com>,
Roger Williams <rog...@shell1.tiac.net> wrote:
>
> gee...@ci.long-beach.ca.us wrote:
> > In article <6js34r$8...@enews2.newsguy.com>,
> > Roger Williams <rog...@shell1.tiac.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > McCary <kmc...@NOSPAMamaroq.ces.ncsu.edu> wrote:
> > > > It seems they have decided to eliminate the parts of their religious
> > > > doctrine in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints which
>imply that blacks are inferior. Apparently they finally realize that as
>they have been coming out in droves to worship Karl Malone every night,
>they might as well end the hypocrisy. Smart move.
> > >
> > > Actually, yes - the hypocrisy in the history of the Mormon church has
> > > been as in your face as any religion in modern history. Change within
> > > church doctrine has come only after external pressures, which lead to
> > > startling, and very timely, revelations. When the US government put the
> > > screws down on Mormon polygamy, the elders of the Church had a very
>sudden "revelation" that led to the church officially abandoning polygamy.
A "selective" reading of Mormon Christian 19th century history? Perhaps I
shouldn't hold an admitted "atheist" to the high academic standards of
"objective" history, but then again, why should I allow an atheist to vilify
Mormon Christianity in the false belief that they have been historically
racist, when the truth is that they have not.
> > > Ditto the churches decision to exclude blacks from the mormon
>ministry. When the US government threatened to revoke the tax exempt status
>of the church,
Any factual support for this slanderous statement?
>a "revelation" led to the lifting of the ban. Mormonism is as
>wacky,
Any factdual suppport for this equally false and slanderous statement?
>and perhaps more reflective of the history of America, as
>anything in her entire history. Although, it does bear noting that there are
>a fair number of Mormons seeking to reform the church from within for what
>can only be decribed as non-cynical reasons.
"Reform" it how? Toward your view of atheism?
> > > The only thing the Mormon church can do to stop promoting the idea
>that blacks are "wicked" would be to actually change their liturgical texts.
Since Mormons have NEVER had "liturgical texts," how could the latter be
"changed"?
>A link, which I must fairly note as anti-Mormon, shows the historical
> > > context of how blacks fit into the Mormon scheme of things:
Here you admittedly quote blatantly and admittedly anti-Mormon sources AS IF
they were accurate history. Why? Why not trouble yourself to learn the truth
before assuming your responsbility of perverting internet basketball lovers
away from the truth of Mormon Christianity and into, perhaps, your own(?)
admittedly atheistic nonsense?
"Historical context"? Give me a break. A flat out distortion of Mormon
"historical context"! You want "historical context," how about the
slave-holding mobs in Missouri 1833 who swore a oath to "run the Mormons out"
of their fine slave-state because the Mormons were ACCEPTING in to their midst
and members free Blacks in Missiouri:
"THE MANIFESTO OF THE MOB. We, the undersigned, citizens of
Jackson county, believing that an important crisis is at hand, as regards
our civil society, in consequence of a pretended religious sect of people
that have settled, and are still settling in our county, styling
themselves "Mormons;" and intending, as we do, to rid our society,
"peaceably if we can, forcibly if we must," and believing as we do, that
the arm of the civil law does not afford us a guarantee, or at least a
sufficient one, against the evils which are now inflicted upon us, and
seem to be increasing, by the said religious sect, deem it expedient, and
of the highest importance, to form ourselves into a company [i.e. a "mob"]
for the better and easier accomplishment of our purpose--a purpose which
we deem it almost superfluous to say, is justified as well by the law of
nature, as by the law of self-preservation.
It is more than two years since the first of these fanatics,
or knaves, (for one or the other they undoubtedly are) made their first
appearance amongst us, and pretended as they did, and now do, to hold
personal communication and converse face to face with the Most High God;
to receive communications and revelations direct from heaven; to heal the
sick by laying on hands; and, in short, to perform all the wonder-working
miracles wrought by the inspired Apostles and Prophets of old.
We believed them deluded fanatics, or weak and designing knaves and
that they and their pretensions would soon pass away; but in this we were
deceived. The arts of a few designing leaders amongst them have thus far
succeeded in holding them together as a society; and since the arrival of
the first of them, they have been daily increasing in numbers; and if
they had been respectable citizens in society and thus deluded, they
would have been entitled to our pity rather than to our contempt and
hatred; but from their appearance, from their manners, and from their
conduct since their coming among us, we have every reason to fear that,
with but very few exceptions, they were of the very dregs of that society
from which they came, lazy, idle, and vicious. This we conceive is not
idle assertion, but a fact susceptible of proof, for with these few
exceptions above named, they brought into our country little or no
property with them and left less behind them, and we infer that those
only yoke themselves to the "Mormon" car who had nothing earthly or
heavenly to lose by the change; and we fear that if some of the leaders
amongst them, had paid the forfeit due to crime, instead of being chosen
ambassadors of the Most High, they would have been inmates of solitary
cells. But their conduct here stamps their characters in their true
colors. More than a year since, it was ascertained that they had been
TAMPERING WITH OUR SLAVES, and endeavoring to sow dissensions and raise
seditions amongst them. Of this their "Mormon" leaders were informed, and
they said they would deal with any of their members who should again in
like case offend. But how spacious [specious?] are appearances. In a late
number of the Star, published in Independence by the leaders of the sect,
there is an article INVITING FREE NEGROES AND MULATTOES FROM OTHER STATES
TO BECOME "MORMONS," and remove and SETTLE AMONG US. This exhibits them
in still more odious colors. It manifests a desire on the part of their
society, to inflict on our society an injury that they know would be to
us entirely insupportable, and one of the surest means of driving us from
the country; for it would require none of the supernatural gifts that
they pretend to, to see that the INTRODUCTION OF SUCH A CASTE amongst us
would CORRUPT OUR BLACKS, and instigate them to bloodshed.
They openly blaspheme the Most High God, and cast contempt
on His holy religion, by pretending to receive revelations direct from
heaven, by pretending to speak unknown tongues, by direct inspiration, and
by divers pretenses derogatory to God and religion, and to the utter
subversion of human reason.
They declare openly that their God hath given them this county of land,
and that sooner or later they must and will have possession of our lands
for an inheritance; and, in fine, they have conducted themselves on many
other occasions, in such a manner, that we believe it a duty we owe to
ourselves, our wives, and children, to the cause of public morals, to
remove them from among us, as we are not prepared to give up our pleasant
places and goodly possessions to them or to receive into the bosom of our
families, as fit companions for our wives and daughters, the DEGRADED AND
CORRUPTED FREE NEGROES AND MULATTOES THAT ARE NOW INVITED TO SETTLE AMONG
US.
Under such a state of things, even our beautiful county would
cease to be a desirable residence, and our situation intolerable. We,
therefore, agree that after timely warning, and receiving an adequate
compensation for what little property they cannot take with them, they
refuse to leave us in peace, as they found us--we agree to use such means
as may be sufficient to remove them, and to that end we each pledge to
each other our bodily powers, our lives, fortunes and sacred honors.
We will meet at the court house, at the town of Independence,
on Saturday next, the 20th inst., [July], to consult on subsequent
movements.
Among the hundreds of names attached to the above document
were: Lewis Franklin, jailor; Samuel C. Owens, county clerk; Russel
Hicks, deputy county clerk; R. W. Cummins, Indian agent; James H.
Flournoy, postmaster; S. D. Lucas, colonel and judge of the court; Henry
Chiles, attorney-at-law; N. K. Olmstead, M. D.; John Smith, justice of the
peace; Samuel Weston, justice of the peace; William Brown, constable;
Abner F. Staples, captain; Thomas Pitcher, deputy constable; Moses G.
Wilson and Thomas Wilson, merchants."
B.H. Roberts, History of the Church, vol. 1, ch. 27
beginning at 375, emphasis added.
The Mormon neighbors replied in writing, July 1833, against their above
threatened forcible eviction for Mormon anti-slavery conduct and/or
published anti-slavery sentiment, indeed the admitted written invitation
from Mormons to all "Free Negroes and Mulattoes" to "settle among us."
This marks in my view the historical beginning of "official equivocation"
by Mormon Christians on the "Negro question." Notice this Mormon
Christian "equivocation" is based wholly upon the laws of Missouri then
extant and the Mormons' stated intent to obey those laws. The Mormon
written reply to the above-quoted Missouri "Manifesto of the Mob"
follows:
"FREE PEOPLE OF COLOR.
To prevent any misunderstanding among the churches abroad,
respecting free people of color, who may think of coming to the western
boundaries of Missouri, as members of the Church, we quote the following
clauses from the laws of Missouri:
'Section 4.--Be it further enacted, that hereafter no free negro or
mulatto, other than a citizen of someone of the United States shall come
into or settle in this state under any pretext whatever; and upon
complaint made to any justice of the peace, that such person is in his
county, contrary to the provisions of this section, if it shall appear
that such person is a free negro or mulatto, and that he hath come into
this state after the passage of this act, and such person shall not
produce a certificate, attested by the seal of some court of record in
someone of the United States, evidencing that he is a citizen of such
state, the justice shall command him forthwith to depart from this state;
and in case such negro or mulatto shall not depart from the state within
thirty days after being commanded so to do as aforesaid, any justice of
the peace, upon complaint thereof to him made may cause such person to be
brought before him and may commit him to the common goal [jail] of the
county in which he may be found, until the next term of the circuit court
to be held in such county. And the said court shall cause such person to
be brought before them and examine into the cause of commitment; and if it
shall appear that such person came into the state contrary to the
provisions of this act, and continued therein after being commanded to
depart as aforesaid, such court may sentence such person to receive ten
lashes on his or her bare back, and order him to depart the state; and if
he or she shall not depart, the same proceedings shall be had and
punishment inflicted, as often as may be necessary, until such person
shall depart the state.
'Sec. 5.--Be it further enacted, that if any person shall, after
the taking effect of this act, bring into this state any free negro or
mulatto, not having in his possession a certificate of citizenship as
required by this act, (he or she) shall forfeit any pay for every person
so brought, the sum of five hundred dollars, to be recovered by action of
debt in the name of the state, to the use of the university, in any court
having competent jurisdiction; in which action the defendant may be held
to bail, of right and without affidavit; and it shall be the duty of the
attorney general or circuit attorney of the district in which any person
so offending may be found, immediately upon information given of such
offenses to commence and prosecute an action as aforesaid.'
Slaves are real estate in this and other states, and wisdom would
dictate great care among the branches of the Church of Christ on this
subject. So long as we have no special rule in the Church, as to people of
color, let prudence guide, and while they, as well as we, are in the hands
of a merciful God, we say: Shun every appearance of evil."
Id., emphasis added.
Mormon Christianity, therefore, BEGAN equivocating its anti-slavery
position in 1833 Missouri--despite its plainly revealed egalitarian
principles of common Divine Parentage in our common pre-existence before
our mortal birth out of [1] timely necessity for its own self-preservation,
because [2] it sought to obey the laws of the land, which then required Black
slaves to be excluded from their locality in [3] divinely postponing, but
never intending to deny forever, the blessings of the Priesthood to Black
slaves.
*************************
I respecfully suggest you obtain the whole article, indeed an entire
series of articles by myself, Arden Eby, D. Charles Pyle, Kerry Shirts,
and others discussing the absurdity of calling the Mormon Church "racist"
even before 1978, a date which ought to render our entire discussion
moot, but apparently hasn't.
It's important in my view to understand the "plainly egalitarian"
official "other side" of nineteenth-century Mormonism co-existing with
Missouri period racist pressures, which understandably but unfortunately
caused "equivocation" in some Mormon hierarchy, which properly and eventually
(1978) superseded any official anti-Black geographically-acquired attitudes.
Because of Mormonism's overwhelming theological revelation of every human's
individual pre-existence from the same Divine Parentage -- a theology which
renders all humans literal "brothers and sisters" whatever their
race/color/nationality/ethnicity/language/time born on earth/etc.,
Mormon polity recognized its own "equivocation," properly abandoning any
Missouri-engendered anti-Black attitudes in recognizing the lawful, if
mistaken, source of such attitudes originating during the Missouri (a
slave state) period.
In recognizing the full egalitarianism of Mormon Christian theology we
must understand that most of the purported "racist" statements reported
in the Journal of Discourses come from a time long after the Missouri
period when Brigham Young, et al. were so angry at the U. S. government
for mistreating Mormon settlers in the Utah Territory that they hoped
both the North and the South would "destroy each other" over the issue of
Black slavery, thereby allowing the Mormon Church thereafter to "save"
our nation from destruction by obtaining unmolested the seat of U.S.
government, which it would immediately transform into a divine theocracy
ruled by God Himself. Keeping Mormon Christianity's unaltered revelation
of egalitarian human "pre-existence" from the same Divine Parentage (male
and female) in mind will "temper" the heated, angry, sometimes racial
rhetoric of Brigham and a few Mormon leaders.
Respectfully,
Gerry L. Ensley.
> > > Not that this really has anything to do with the Jazz, anyways. As
>far as I know, the only Mormon in the NBA is Shawn Bradley. Travis Knight is
> > > Utah born and bred, but I don't know if he's a Mormon.
> > >
> > > > Ken McCary
> > > > Modern Day Genius
> > >
> > > --
> > > {}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{} \|/
> > > {} RogerW rog...@newsguy.com {} 0< -- Ljutefisk!
> > > {} http://www.parrot.net ad...@parrot.net {} ^^^^(*)^^^^
> > > {}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{} ^^ / \ ^^
> > >
> > >
>
> > Please notice that some fundamentalist Christian organizations, e.g. Bob
>Jones University, still to this day academically "segregate" Whites from
>Blacks, and teach the latter to be inferior to Whites.
>
> Yes, and that has what to do with the specifics of what Ken or I were
> talking about? Was the exclusivity of the Mormon doctrine regarding blacks
> ever claimed?
"Exclusivity"? Hey, dummy, it was the law in most states throughout 19th
century America! Reread my quotation above reciting Missouri state law.
> > In his introduction to a brief summary of anthropologist Tom McIver's new
>book "Creationism and Racism" writer Jim Lippard recites the following as
>part of McIver's new book:
>
> > "McIver goes on to look at the racism that arises from a particular
> > interpretation of Noah's three sons and the curse on Ham, from
> > polygenism (inferior pre-Adamite people), connections with the Ku
Klux Klan, Anglo-Israelism, and the Christian Identity movement,
etc. Some interesting points of connection:
> > Prominent fundamentalists connected with the KKK: Bob Shuler, Billy
> > Sunday, and Bob Jones, Sr. (McIver says that "Perhaps 40,000
> > fundamentalist ministers joined the Klan.")
> > Prominent creationists affiliated with Bob Jones University: Emmett
> > Williams, former editor of the Creation Research Society Quarterly
and George Mulfinger, CRS board member.
> > Gerald Winrod, founder of Defenders of the Christian Faith, published
> > the "openly racist" magazine Defender, which published creationist
> > articles by George McCready Price, W.B. Riley, and A.I. Brown. For
a time, it also published Harry Rimmer's newsletter in its pages.
(Riley was the leader of the World's Christian Fundamentals
Association,a prominent fundamentalist group in the 1920's. He
When I've proved hereinabove that any so-called "Mormon" equivocation upon the
racial question was based upon state law, while simultaneously accepting
Blacks into membership and full fellowship, it appears the only "strawman" is
YOUR suggestion (via Peter Elias' virulent anti-Mormon homepage) that Mormon
Christianity is racist at heart. That's a complete misreading of Mormon
history and complete ignorance of Mormon Christian theology, which as always
and everywhere been egalitarian.
>A: nothing. Are other Christian denominations harboring racists? More than
>likely. Have any of them been threatened with revocation of their tax exempt
>status . . .
You recite no factual support for this slanderous claim. Got any?
>. . . like the Mormons were before the stunning "revelations" that overturned
>years of preaching about the "curse of Ham"? Mais non.
The "curse of Ham" is hardly Mormon. It has been unfortunate ORTHODOX
Christian (not Mormon Christian) exegesis for many centuries.
> > Which all is produced here in order to "stop" this infernal purportedly
> > "Christian" attack upon what they (mis)perceive as Mormon Christian
>racism.
>
> Which was "produced" here to change the topic from the Mormon church,
> apparently. There is not much to "mispercieve" as to the historical racist
> leaninggs of the Mormon church.
Spoken by a person truly ignorant of Mormon Christian history, who HIMSELF
admits his "historical" knowlege of Mormon Christianity comes from an
admittedly "anti-Mormon" (your word!) source.
>Blacks bore the "curse of Ham". The 1966 edition of "Mormon Doctrine" quotes
>"apostle" Bruce R. McConkie as saying:
McConkie was never an "apostle" of the Mormon Church.
Which raises important biases in Mr. Elias' selection of "Mormon" quotations.
of approximately 10 million members of Mormon Christianity nowadays, Elias has
the misleading temerity to "quote" 8 authors (if my count be correct); and in
doing so Elias quotes McConkie more than 6 times-- a man who later admitted he
in print that he was "wrong," by the way.
> "Negroes in this life are denied the priesthood; under no circumstances
> can they hold this delegation from the Almighty".
>
> The threat of having the LDS tax exempt status yanked changed things in
> a big hurry. That is the point being made.
Without factual support, I must add. Let's see your evidence.
> > In light of Mormon Christian foundational theology wherein every person
>born on earth no matter at what time nor into what county/ethnic
>group/language, has "equal opportunity" to grow, learn, and become whatever
>s/he wishes, etc. it is clear that Mormon Christians have been egalitarian
>from their earliest days and most fundamental theological pronouncements.
>
> Except if they're black. Except if they want to join the Mormon clergy.
> Well, that's changed now, the same way the church had a stunning (and
> strangely timed) "revelation" about polygamy.
More exhibited ignorance in Mormon Christian history!
>The moral? When the US govt. stepped in to end Mormon hijinks, God spoke to
>the LDS in an awful hurry.
> Not bad.
Again, a statement contrary to history and wholly misleading.
> > As I've noted earlier in several posts last year, the early Mormon
>Christians were "thrown out" of Missouri, a slave state, because among other
>things Mormon Christians accepted freed Blacks into their midst, to the total
>shock and hatred of native Missouians who owned Black slaves.
See my historical quotation hereinabove.
> And because of a certain bank scandal. Wonder what those illusory freed
> slaves thought of the whole "curse of Ham" thing?
Don't know, but it had nothing to do with Mormon Christianity, did it?
Mormons didn't write "the curse of Ham" at all, did they? Another "strawman"
of yours?
There were free Blacks in Missouri in 1833; they were hardly "illusory" as you
call it. More of your historical rewriting, my friend?
> > Indeed, in light of the June, 1998, Southern Baptist Convention which will
> > have its national meeting this year in Salt Lake City, we must remind the
> > Southern Baptist Convention of the "Southern" aspect of their name, a
>racially -based title from an unfortunate period in American history.
>
> Yes, the Southern Baptist organization seems to be held over from the
> late 50's at the latest. Your point about the Mormon church's shockingly
How could they be "shocking" when based, as I quoted above, upon THEN STATE
LAW?
> well documented
Ha! From sources you yourself have (correctly) designated "anti-Mormon"!
>racist exclusionary policies is, what... it's ok because
> other churches are bad too?
You seem to be believing your own (or Peter Elias') propaganda.
I have to laugh out loud whenever a Mormon critic states (or quotes) the "Book
of Mormon" to be racist. Since the entire B of M was written by a descendant
of Lehi's (Jewish) family which left Jerusalem about 600 B.C. and which
remained separated from any other indigenous inhabitants of the Western
continent, it is IMPOSSIBLE for any B of M reference to have any "racial"
import at all. That Book concerns itself exclusively with not only a single
"race," but also largely with but a single family of that "race." It is
clear, therefore, than ANY and ALL purported "racial" verses in the B of M are
purely in the mind of the (biased?) reader and nowhere in the text.
> > However, wholly irrespective of Mormon historical egalitarianism, let
>Mormon Christians put the quietus to those "Christian" current practitioners
>of racism by halting the latter's current attacks upon Mormon Christianity,
>see above, by the firm pronouncement: "Cleanse ye first your own house before
> > pointing any fingers at others!"
>
> Oh please. You're preaching to an atheist. Had you bothered to read
> what I posted in the first place, you'd note I said that the Mormon church
> was just as hypocritical as any other church in America regarding race.
What other Christian church has ever taught that Blacks and Whites are equally
literal offspring of the same Father in Heaven before being born to mortal
parents here upon earth? Name one, if you can.
> Take this ludicrously self righteous whitewashing
It's hardly "whitewashing" if Mormon Christianity ALONE is the ONLY Christian
theology in the history of this planet EVER to teach (correctly) that all
human beings are pre-existent Children of the same Divine Parent, thereby
making them all literal "brothers and sisters" no matter where born later upon
earth nor under what conditions.
>elsewhere, and certainly off of rec.sport.basketball.pro
How nice, since YOU are the one who put it there in the first place.
>(note the adjustment in the newsgroups line).
> I'm not saying Mormons are racist;
No, you let admittedly virulent anti-Mormons do it for you.
>I'm saying the church leadership was racist,
By your falling for Peter Elias' narrow and unrepresentative selection of 8
authors out of a Church of 10 million?
>and worse, stunningly hyprocrtical and cynical about the
> timing of their "relevation".
Again, wrong historically. Mormon Christianity has always been egalitarian,
even during its period of "equivocation" I mention above.
>I find it hard to believe that God only hands down changes to "immutable"
>doctrine when billions of dollars are at stake.
Third time you've mentioned that without any historical support for it at all.
>Had the Mormon leaders any "loyalty" to their "sacred texts"
Which "sacred texts"? Since when is McConkie (as repeatedly quoted by Elias)
a "sacred text"? Not so.
> whatsoever, they'd have fought the government tooth and nail for the right
> to keep their racist rules in check.
Again you show your ignorance of Mormon Christian history.
>Nothing doing. They proved that doctrine and dogma bend in the breeze when
>money is at stake.
Fourth time you've mentioned that without any asserted factual support at all.
> {}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{} \|/
> {} RogerW rog...@newsguy.com {} 0< -- Ljutefisk!
> {} http://www.parrot.net ad...@parrot.net {} ^^^^(*)^^^^
> {}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{} ^^ / \ ^^
>
>
Why should I allow you to abuse "rec.sport.basketball" by funneling Peter
Elias' (another conduit for Jerald and Sandra Tanner, the most notorious and
historically unreliable anti-Mormons in the 20th century) malicious and
falsified unhistorical venom onto the 'Net? I cross-posted this reply in
hopes of undoing the false and ignorant (I presume) "damage" you've already
done by your original post to that sports-loving internet constituency.
Wouldn't it be wiser for you to "check" your anti-Mormon propaganda before
allowing yourself to spew it falsely into public discourse?