Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

I'm brown-skined because my daddy was bad

19 views
Skip to first unread message

jack_the_mormon

unread,
Dec 18, 2002, 8:50:44 PM12/18/02
to
The BOM says, in 2 NE 5:21, that Lamanites were cursed with a skin of
blackness because they were bad. Now I, a descendant of Meso-American
Indians, have dark skin. My whole life, being raised Mormon, I
struggled with this tenant of Mormonism. Why is it that no one in the
church has a problem with this? Can't they see this blatant racism in
the "most correct book" on earth? Or are they afraid that if they see
it they have to ask hard questions and they are afraid of the answers?

Throughout Seminary I would ask my teachers the same question - they
told me to pray harder because my testimony was weak. Throughout my
mission I was told if I didn't believe in the church to go home -
whenever I asked this question. I JUST WANTED AN ANSWER! At BYU my
religion professors shied away from this topic and refused to give me
a direct answers. When I ask other active dark-skinned Mormons, if I
catch them in a truly sincere and introspective moment, they agree
that it bothers them but they say they try not to think about it too
hard. The whole thing makes me sick.

Mike W

unread,
Dec 18, 2002, 9:11:19 PM12/18/02
to
> "jack_the_mormon" <Jack_th...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:4f8f6ffd.02121...@posting.google.com...

Some day there might be revelation that the language is cruel, not to
mention ridiculous in this day and age. You'd think we hadn't landed a man
on the moon the way things are going.

Meanwhile... "meanwhile" takes on a whole new definition. Meanwhile, back
at cruel Moses & Jehovah. Well... too much is sickening when you take it at
face value.

Mike


grouch

unread,
Dec 18, 2002, 9:21:46 PM12/18/02
to
>Subject: I'm brown-skined because my daddy was bad
>From: Jack_th...@yahoo.com (jack_the_mormon)
>Date: 12/18/2002 7:50 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: <4f8f6ffd.02121...@posting.google.com>

So, what does all this lead you to conclude? G

jack_the_mormon

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 2:48:42 AM12/19/02
to
bak...@aol.com (grouch) wrote in message news:<20021218212146...@mb-cb.aol.com>...

It leads me to doubt the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. I hate
to say that because I have had many good experiences while pondering
and spending time in the BOM - but saying that God put more melanin in
my skin so that my people would be less attractive to white people -
it makes me sick.

dangerous1

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 3:14:08 AM12/19/02
to
jack_the_mormon wrote:

You didn't "become white and delightsome"? None of my elementary school friends who were yanked
out of their homes by the Lamanite placement program did either.

The book is a fraud regardless of the good feelings it produced. Good fiction can do that.

I didn't turn dark and shriveled up like they said I would when I left the church either. You
know why your skin is the color it is. And it has nothing to do with your testimony or your
ancestor's sins. Throw the book away. It is worthless.

--
Best,
Dangerous1

D1 @ Dangerous1.com
Don Marchant


You step in the stream,
but the water has moved on.
This page is not here.

Haiku error message


€ R.L. Measures €

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 7:55:00 AM12/19/02
to
In article <4f8f6ffd.02121...@posting.google.com>,
Jack_th...@yahoo.com (jack_the_mormon) wrote:

> The BOM says, in 2 NE 5:21, that Lamanites were cursed with a skin of
> blackness because they were bad. Now I, a descendant of Meso-American
> Indians, have dark skin. My whole life, being raised Mormon, I
> struggled with this tenant of Mormonism. Why is it that no one in the

> church has a problem with this? ...

** For the same reason that Thomas Jefferson and George Washington had no
problem with their owning slaves when the words "all men are created
equal" were boldly penned in the Declaration of Independance -- i.e.,
Denial of Reality, the greatest human Malady. - Why did it take over 2
centuries for the (white) Jeffersonian Society to admit that the love of
Jefferson's life was a slave woman who was half African? -- Sally
Hemings, whose male decendants carry a rare Jefferson-family DNA
sequence. When the results of the DNA testing were published, the
Jeffersonian Society caved in and invited Hemings' decendants to join.

So if "God" hates people with dark skin, howcome he gave niggah wimmen
such delightsome posteriors?

--
Rich Measures, 805-386-3734, www.vcnet.com/measures
^^ is a spam trap in adr

€ R.L. Measures €

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 7:57:29 AM12/19/02
to
In article <v02am73...@news.supernews.com>, "Mike W"
<Circle_314...@hotmail.com> wrote:

** all of which suggests that organized religions were invented on Earth,
not way up yonder.

cheers, Mike

€ R.L. Measures €

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 8:02:41 AM12/19/02
to
In article <4f8f6ffd.02121...@posting.google.com>,
Jack_th...@yahoo.com (jack_the_mormon) wrote:

** One survey of mormons showed that members value the social aspect of
the faith more than the doctrine. Next time you are visiting a mormon
home, remove some mormon books from the bookshelf and see if the spine has
ever been cracked by having been opened.

McSorley

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 11:17:25 AM12/19/02
to

<snip>

>
> So if "God" hates people with dark skin, howcome he gave niggah wimmen
> such delightsome posteriors?

Where does it say that "God hates people with dark skin"? They just say its
a curse, wouldn't you say for the most part it has been. Did you see the
Oscar's? Yes two Black or dark skinned people won but that not my point, it
is that even now we still make a big deal over the color of skin. I see
them as great actors, but to the world and to themselves they were great but
*black* actors. Who cares that they are black? everyone. That's the curse.
We cannot see past the color of peoples skin, at least as a whole.

Mike Riley


Duwayne Anderson

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 11:47:27 AM12/19/02
to
"Mike W" <Circle_314...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<v02am73...@news.supernews.com>...

> > "jack_the_mormon" <Jack_th...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:4f8f6ffd.02121...@posting.google.com...
>
> > The BOM says, in 2 NE 5:21, that Lamanites were cursed with a skin of
> > blackness because they were bad. Now I, a descendant of Meso-American
> > Indians, have dark skin. My whole life, being raised Mormon, I
> > struggled with this tenant of Mormonism. Why is it that no one in the
> > church has a problem with this? Can't they see this blatant racism in
> > the "most correct book" on earth? Or are they afraid that if they see
> > it they have to ask hard questions and they are afraid of the answers?
> >
> > Throughout Seminary I would ask my teachers the same question - they
> > told me to pray harder because my testimony was weak. Throughout my
> > mission I was told if I didn't believe in the church to go home -
> > whenever I asked this question. I JUST WANTED AN ANSWER! At BYU my
> > religion professors shied away from this topic and refused to give me
> > a direct answers. When I ask other active dark-skinned Mormons, if I
> > catch them in a truly sincere and introspective moment, they agree
> > that it bothers them but they say they try not to think about it too
> > hard. The whole thing makes me sick.
>
> Some day there might be revelation that the language is cruel,

A revelation that the revelation was cruel? That's quite the house of
cards you have, Mike.

> not to
> mention ridiculous in this day and age. You'd think we hadn't landed a man
> on the moon the way things are going.
>
> Meanwhile... "meanwhile" takes on a whole new definition. Meanwhile, back
> at cruel Moses & Jehovah. Well... too much is sickening when you take it at
> face value.

Well, you can always hope for a revelation saying that revelation was
wrong, too.

Duwayne Anderson

American Quarter Horse: The ultimate all-terrain vehicle

Mike W

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 11:48:55 AM12/19/02
to
> "? R.L. Measures ?" <^2^@vc.net> wrote in message
> news:^2^-1912020...@207.178.185.100...

Or that way up yonder has sunk in yet. We're still stuck here on Earth,
muddling through.

cheers, Rich!

--
Mike

Hold on - wait, maybe the answer's looking for you.


Mike W

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 11:53:57 AM12/19/02
to
> "Duwayne Anderson" <duwa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:a42139e3.0212...@posting.google.com...

Always got to have a way to politely change one's mind. The world would
turn to chaos if that couldn't be done.

Mike
--
Atheism: Never having to ask forgiveness


Jack

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 12:32:29 PM12/19/02
to

This is antecdotal evidence but if it's such a curse, look at Denzel
Washington, the black guy (negro for those TBMs over 40) you mentioned
that one the oscar. He is a celebrity loved by millions of people,
and is financially secure despite not paying his tithing. He seems
sincerely happy in his marriage despite not being married in the
temple. Meanwhile, thousands of TBMs in Utah are filing for bankruptcy
or trying to get their friends and family into the latest pyramid
scheme before their trailer gets reposessed.

charles

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 1:05:22 PM12/19/02
to
Jack_th...@yahoo.com (jack_the_mormon) wrote in message news:<4f8f6ffd.02121...@posting.google.com>...

> The BOM says, in 2 NE 5:21, that Lamanites were cursed with a skin of
> blackness because they were bad. Now I, a descendant of Meso-American
> Indians, have dark skin. My whole life, being raised Mormon, I
> struggled with this tenant of Mormonism. Why is it that no one in the
> church has a problem with this? Can't they see this blatant racism in
> the "most correct book" on earth? Or are they afraid that if they see
> it they have to ask hard questions and they are afraid of the answers?
>
> Throughout Seminary I would ask my teachers the same question - they
> told me to pray harder because my testimony was weak. Throughout my
> mission I was told if I didn't believe in the church to go home -
> whenever I asked this question. I JUST WANTED AN ANSWER!

What specifically is the question?

It appears that your question is: I think Mormons are racist, and why
don't they agree with me?

Perhaps the answer is that they do not agree with you, that you are
full of baloney, and you are just not willing to accept that answer.

McSorley

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 1:16:16 PM12/19/02
to

"Jack" <ja...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f2040vgfhktjkikug...@4ax.com...

Denzel is great no matter what, but he will always be a "Black " actor and
the fact that people can't see passed that, is the curse. Despite his
celebrity, financial security, and/or how happily married (till dead do they
part) he is to his wife, that will always be an issue, first *black* this or
best *black* that. Again, *that* is the curse. Nice try but my point still
stands, you actually helped me define it. The rest of your Utah crap is
another issue of people with problems but not related directly to race and
personal in nature. My family members who live in Utah *do not* live in
trailers and are not on the brink of bankruptcy. Also you could *never* get
me to do any of those schemes. So the best you can do is shovel up
stereotypical bs or can you really provide a solid point.

Mike Riley


Jack

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 1:41:49 PM12/19/02
to

Oh come on. If I could show you how to become financially secure while
freeing up more time to spend with you family wouldn't you be
interested?;-) But seriously, I know I was offering negative
stereoptypes of white Utah mormons against a positive example of a
non-member black guy, but I was trying to point out how stupid the
churches racial policies are. Can the church think of an even less
sensitive way of telling black people why they are black? Actually it
used to tell them that it was because they were less valiant in the
pre-existence so at least they are making some progress. Maybe in
about 100 years the church (if it's still around) will finally declare
that black skin is not a curse from God and God doesn't care what
color our skin is.

Mike W

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 2:23:34 PM12/19/02
to
> "Jack" <ja...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ps340vs5a7oq1v90c...@4ax.com...

> Can the church think of an even less
> sensitive way of telling black people why they are black? Actually it
> used to tell them that it was because they were less valiant in the
> pre-existence so at least they are making some progress. Maybe in
> about 100 years the church (if it's still around) will finally declare
> that black skin is not a curse from God and God doesn't care what
> color our skin is.

Which leaves me wondering how it all started. Could it be Egyptian? Ra...
the sun god. Too much time buggin' Ra and look what happens?

I don't know... it's still crazy in this interconnected world but history...
history... it gets you wondering.

Mike


peacebeuponyou2000

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 3:01:02 PM12/19/02
to
so anyone who doesn't like you is bad??

give me one good reason why i should like you.

McSorley

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 4:56:02 PM12/19/02
to

"Jack" <ja...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ps340vs5a7oq1v90c...@4ax.com...

Not anymore. I want to buy my stuff at the store, not from Bob.

But seriously, I know I was offering negative
> stereoptypes of white Utah mormons against a positive example of a
> non-member black guy, but I was trying to point out how stupid the
> churches racial policies are.

Church racial policies? - I think it is any Bible accepting church that
believes this.

Can the church think of an even less
> sensitive way of telling black people why they are black?

you are the one who says it insensitively.


Actually it
> used to tell them that it was because they were less valiant in the
> pre-existence so at least they are making some progress.

Stupid rumors.

Maybe in
> about 100 years the church (if it's still around) will finally declare
> that black skin is not a curse from God and God doesn't care what
> color our skin is.

God does not care what color are skin is, but some people on this planet are
born with different color skin and the bible and BOM teach that it has been
a curse from God in some instances. I think it is always a curse.

Mike Riley

Tommy

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 5:02:35 PM12/19/02
to
> Actually it
>> used to tell them that it was because they were less valiant in the
>> pre-existence so at least they are making some progress.
>
> Stupid rumors.

Heh...it always cracks me up when a member knows so little about their own
church. How long have you been a member?

TheJordan6

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 5:19:32 PM12/19/02
to
>From: Jack_th...@yahoo.com (jack_the_mormon)
>Date: 12/18/2002 8:50 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <4f8f6ffd.02121...@posting.google.com>

It's good to see that there's at least one Amerind Mormon who is disgusted with
the racist doctrine (although I've corresponded with another mixed-race
Amerind/black Mormon, who is a columnist with a national publication, who
abandoned Mormonism in part over the issue).
A couple of weeks ago, a pro-Mormon poster on ARM cited an alleged publication
where 14 African-American Mormons stated that they had no problems with the
church's past teachings and policies concerning Negroes. The article was
designed to silence critics of such doctrines on the basis of "If black Mormons
don't have a problem with it, why are critics still bringing it up?"
And then Lee Paulson, a non-Mormon poster on ARM, recounted her experience with
some black Mormon friends who told her that when they learned about the actual
specific teachings and policies about Negroes, they were very disturbed and
were contemplating whether they should continue their involvement in Mormonism.
The reason I write this is that I will personally not believe that any black or
Amerind Mormon "doesn't have a problem" with the church's teachings about their
races until I know firsthand that those black and Amerind Mormons know exactly
what LDS leaders have taught about them. I highly suspect that such black and
Amerind Mormons are not even aware of those teachings, and I believe that
because I was born and raised Mormon, was very active in it until I was 35
years old, and I myself was not exposed to those teachings, because they are
not mentioned in the modern curriculum that church leaders publish for Mormons
to study. I had to go outside of modern church-published materials to learn
the facts. When I DID learn the facts, I was disgusted (even as a white
American Mormon), and learning those facts was part of why I resigned from the
LDS church.
So, I'll believe that black and Amerind Mormons have no problems with such
doctrines as soon as I know personally that they are aware of the doctrines in
the first place.

Randy J.

Chad Shaw

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 5:17:52 PM12/19/02
to

"Mike W" <Circle_314...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:v0475mo...@news.supernews.com...


Ok D1 (Don) how many times am I supposed to hit my head on the sidewalk?
Can I use a brickwall or does it have to be a sidewalk?

Just kiddin' Mike -- but do you give out aspirin with your posts?

TheJordan6

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 5:48:53 PM12/19/02
to
>From: "McSorley" mizl...@netscape.com
>Date: 12/19/2002 11:17 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <ehmM9.64$W25....@news.uswest.net>

>
>
><snip>
>>
>> So if "God" hates people with dark skin, howcome he gave niggah wimmen
>> such delightsome posteriors?

>Where does it say that "God hates people with dark skin"?

It doesn't say God hates them, but since the god of Mormonism is supposedly
omnipotent, he should have been able to perceive that turning the Cainites' and
Lamanites' skins dark would cause them to be discriminated against by
lighter-skinned people, which it has. IOW, the god of Mormonism is an
incompetent fool for creating the conditions by which entire races of his own
children have been discriminated against, reviled, and persecuted, for
millenia.


>They just say its
>a curse, wouldn't you say for the most part it has been.

Dark skin has only been a "curse" to dark-skinned people because
lighter-skinner people have discriminated against them solely because of their
dark skin color.
Of course, the whole "god turned their skins dark" is just another silly Mormon
teaching to begin with. The fact is that Negroes' and Amerinds' skins have
been just as dark as they are today, for eons before the time of the "curses"
that the god of Mormonism allegedly placed upon them. That being the case, the
whole Mormon business about dark skin being a "curse from God" is merely a
man-made falsehood, which has been invented and perpetuated solely so that
light-skinned people can discriminate against dark-skinned people. And that,
my friend, is called "racism."

And it should go without saying that that also means that the alleged reason
for withholding the LDS priesthood from Negroes was bogus from the outset.


>Did you see the
>Oscar's? Yes two Black or dark skinned people won but that not my point, it
>is that even now we still make a big deal over the color of skin. I see
>them as great actors, but to the world and to themselves they were great but
>*black* actors. Who cares that they are black? everyone. That's the curse.
>We cannot see past the color of peoples skin, at least as a whole.
>
>Mike Riley

The reason it was noteworthy that two black actors won Oscars is that it shows
how far our nation has progressed in racial issues since the Civil Rights era.
IOW, the conversation about the winners' race is a *positive* thing.

On the flip side, the Mormon doctrines of how Negroes' and Amerinds' skin
became dark is factually false, offensive, and repugnant, and LDS church
leaders have never removed nor disavowed any of those racist teachings.
Thus, by continuing to perpetuate their false dogma concerning the origins of
that dark skin, as outlined in the Book of Mormon, Book of Moses, Book of
Abraham, and the many statements of LDS leaders on the subject, the LDS church
is perpetuating the 19th-century racism which our more enlightened (pardon the
pun) modern society is attempting to disavow and correct.

Therefore, the only way the LDS Church can align themselves with enlightened
21st-century society is to admit that their racist teachings are false, disavow
their past leaders who disseminated such dogma, and expunge all material from
their canon that perpetuates the false teachings.

Until the LDS church does that, they will continue to receive cricitism on the
subject until time immemorial. The ball is in LDS leaders' court. If they
don't want to be thought of as a racist religion, they need to remove and
disavow all vestiges of their racist dogma.

Randy J.

Duwayne Anderson

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 6:05:57 PM12/19/02
to
"Mike W" <Circle_314...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<v03ud6e...@news.supernews.com>...

Not really. Lots of people manage to repent. But the fat heads in
SLC certainly seem to think that repentance will cause them to have
heart failure.

Duwayne Anderson

American Quarter Horse: The ultimate all-terrain vehicle.

TheJordan6

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 6:18:12 PM12/19/02
to
>From: Tommy to...@spiinc-tx.com
>Date: 12/19/2002 5:02 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <Xns92E9A47D57F54...@64.154.60.187>

Maybe he joined up in '79. :-)

Randy J.

TheJordan6

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 6:21:17 PM12/19/02
to
>From: "Chad Shaw" Chs...@utah-inter.net
>Date: 12/19/2002 5:17 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <yOrM9.22492$K5.14241@fe01>

<chuckle> Now you know why I rarely respond to Mike.

Randy J.

jack_the_mormon

unread,
Dec 19, 2002, 7:27:45 PM12/19/02
to
> What specifically is the question?

Good point. I was just stating my story and not really aking a
question. OK then, I will ask a question. What does 2 Nephi 5:21
mean? Don't Mormons consider it racist? Why or why not?


>
> It appears that your question is: I think Mormons are racist, and why
> don't they agree with me?
>

My frustration is that nobody would ever speak frankly about this
obvious hole in Mormon theology with me.

> Perhaps the answer is that they do not agree with you, that you are
> full of baloney, and you are just not willing to accept that answer.
>

Why am I full of baloney? Please respectfully explain why? The
problem is - Mormons cannot answer this race question - so they, 1)
avoid it or 2) the more mean-spirited ones, like you, revert to name
calling (baloney) instead of addressing the issue.

You say I am "not willing to accept the answer" - but you never say
what the answer is. Please tell me - I am sincerely interested. If
any Mormon can genuinely explain this verse in the BOM then I will
listen and give their answer honest introspection. BUT NOBODY CAN.
WHY NOT?!?!?

Manning Helper

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 5:59:09 AM12/20/02
to
Jack_th...@yahoo.com (jack_the_mormon) wrote in message news:<4f8f6ffd.02121...@posting.google.com>...

White _and_ fair _and_ delightsome, vs. a skin of blackness.

Consider how the facial skin of a heavy smoker appears as opposed to
the facial skin of a non-smoker (who doesn't have to work in a
smoke-filled office).
If you've ever known a heavy smoker who quit, you might have noticed
the skin becoming lighter the longer they abstain.

(No Duwayne, I don't have surveys and numbers and glossies. Just
informal observation.)

The Nephites thought white and fair was delightsome apparently, so God
darkened the skin of the Lamanites, or perhaps allowed the skin to
darken through the natural effects of their lifestyle.

Jacob 3: 8, by the way, points out that the Nephites could lose their
precious whiteness by sinning, and that the Lamanites would become
whiter than the Nephites should they repent.

But, while 3 Nephi 2: 15, 16 does say that they became white and fair,
you should note that it doesn't say it happened overnight. The first
conversions, however, had occurred at least ninety years previous to
the mentioning that of the lifting of the curse. So the lifting of the
curse apparently took some time.

(Yes, Duwayne, more than ninety years have passed since the first
native Americans were converted to Christianity. I am aware of that.)

Now, if the Lehites had been an olive-skinned race, and thought olive
was cool, one might suppose that the curse could have been a curse of
paleness.

The important issue was not the skin color. Compare the number of
verses talking about skin color to the number of verses talking about
calling those stupid back-sliding Nephites to repentance.

Take it for what it costs you.

Joel, the sock puppet.

€ R.L. Measures €

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 8:17:36 AM12/20/02
to
In article <ehmM9.64$W25....@news.uswest.net>, "McSorley"
<mizl...@netscape.com> wrote:

> <snip>
> >
> > So if "God" hates people with dark skin, howcome he gave niggah wimmen
> > such delightsome posteriors?
>
> Where does it say that "God hates people with dark skin"?

** according to "Prophet" Smith, God gave 'em dark skin as punishment for
some real bad stuff they did in the "preexistance".

>They just say its
> a curse, wouldn't you say for the most part it has been. Did you see the
> Oscar's? Yes two Black or dark skinned people won but that not my point, it
> is that even now we still make a big deal over the color of skin.

** I went to college with a number of foreign students from Africa. None
of 'em had skin like Halle Berry. 99% of us white guys would probably
crawl over Anna Nicole to get to Halle.

>I see
> them as great actors, but to the world and to themselves they were great but
> *black* actors. Who cares that they are black? everyone. That's the curse.
> We cannot see past the color of peoples skin, at least as a whole.
>

** During the Summer months in Africa, white skin carries a curse called
Melanoma.

cheers, Mike

€ R.L. Measures €

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 8:23:34 AM12/20/02
to
In article <v03u3q...@news.supernews.com>, "Mike W"
<Circle_314...@hotmail.com> wrote:

** Only the future will tell.


>
> --
> Mike
>
> Hold on - wait, maybe the answer's looking for you.

** I see it as significant that all of this planet's computer viruses and
99% of the $alvation plans were invented by guys.

€ R.L. Measures €

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 8:24:57 AM12/20/02
to
In article <63267aa5.02121...@posting.google.com>,
peacebeup...@yahoo.com (peacebeuponyou2000) wrote:

> so anyone who doesn't like you is bad??
>
> give me one good reason why i should like you.

Clueless

Duwayne Anderson

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 9:56:50 AM12/20/02
to
god7...@yahoo.com (Manning Helper) wrote in message news:<c55acee6.0212...@posting.google.com>...

<snip>


> The Nephites thought white and fair was delightsome apparently, so God
> darkened the skin of the Lamanites, or perhaps allowed the skin to
> darken through the natural effects of their lifestyle.

<snip>

Instead of listening to Manning Helper tell you what he thinks the
Book of Mormon says, let's just quote the damned thing:

"And he [the evil LDS god] had caused the cursing to come upon them,
yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they
had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto
a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and
delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord
God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them." [2 Nephi 5:21]

charles

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 10:45:33 AM12/20/02
to
Jack_th...@yahoo.com (jack_the_mormon) wrote in message news:<4f8f6ffd.02121...@posting.google.com>...
> > What specifically is the question?
>
> Good point. I was just stating my story and not really aking a
> question. OK then, I will ask a question. What does 2 Nephi 5:21
> mean? Don't Mormons consider it racist? Why or why not?

Give us your definition of racism.


> >
> > It appears that your question is: I think Mormons are racist, and why
> > don't they agree with me?
> >
> My frustration is that nobody would ever speak frankly about this
> obvious hole in Mormon theology with me.
>
> > Perhaps the answer is that they do not agree with you, that you are
> > full of baloney, and you are just not willing to accept that answer.
> >
> Why am I full of baloney? Please respectfully explain why?

I have two daughters married to Hispanics. We have missionaries going
throughout the world, to virtually every nation that will receive us.

Almost half of the LDS population is hispanic. We have General
Authorities who are of many races.

You are full of baloney.

€ R.L. Measures €

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 11:24:27 AM12/20/02
to
In article <a42139e3.0212...@posting.google.com>,
duwa...@hotmail.com (Duwayne Anderson) wrote:

** this is pretty damn delightsome, Duwayne. Thanks

McSorley

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 12:28:35 PM12/20/02
to

"Tommy" <to...@spiinc-tx.com> wrote in message
news:Xns92E9A47D57F54...@64.154.60.187...

> > Actually it
> >> used to tell them that it was because they were less valiant in the
> >> pre-existence so at least they are making some progress.
> >
> > Stupid rumors.
>
> Heh...it always cracks me up when a member knows so little about their own
> church.

You are lame. I am saying that people in the church we spreading rumors
when they taught that, unless you can quote a GA teaching that.

>How long have you been a member?

Forever.
>

It always cracks me up when you guys leave the church and become nothing.
Maybe I'm wrong. What do you believe? Are you Catholic, Jewish, maybe
Buddhist, probably Joe's Christian Church #4123.


McSorley

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 12:29:17 PM12/20/02
to

"TheJordan6" <thejo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021219181812...@mb-ms.aol.com...

I was born in 76 - Do the math.


McSorley

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 12:45:49 PM12/20/02
to

"? R.L. Measures ?" <^2^@vc.net> wrote in message
news:^2^-2012020...@207.178.185.100...

> In article <ehmM9.64$W25....@news.uswest.net>, "McSorley"
> <mizl...@netscape.com> wrote:
>
> > <snip>
> > >
> > > So if "God" hates people with dark skin, howcome he gave niggah wimmen
> > > such delightsome posteriors?
> >
> > Where does it say that "God hates people with dark skin"?
>
> ** according to "Prophet" Smith, God gave 'em dark skin as punishment for
> some real bad stuff they did in the "preexistance".

Punishment <> Hate

How do you discipline *your* kids.

I'm not going to waste time with you half-cocked theories.

<snip more waste of newsgroup readers time>


McSorley

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 1:01:08 PM12/20/02
to

"TheJordan6" <thejo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021219174853...@mb-ce.aol.com...

Why does it even matter, oh because the curse seems like its lifting.

>
> On the flip side, the Mormon doctrines

not *just* Mormon

of how Negroes' and Amerinds' skin
> became dark is factually false,

oh come on, is evolution factual?

> offensive,

Your offensive, but that doesn't stop you.

and repugnant, and LDS church
> leaders have never removed nor disavowed any of those racist teachings.

the would get flake from you for trying to change the Bible.

> Thus, by continuing to perpetuate their false dogma

prove its false or say I believe its false.

concerning the origins of
> that dark skin, as outlined in the Book of Mormon, Book of Moses, Book of
> Abraham, and the many statements of LDS leaders on the subject, the LDS
church
> is perpetuating the 19th-century racism which our more enlightened (pardon
the
> pun) modern society is attempting to disavow and correct.
>
> Therefore, the only way the LDS Church can align themselves with
enlightened

Doesn't work that way.

> 21st-century society is to admit that their racist teachings are false,

Maybe they are not, and what you can science, is really Gods work.

disavow
> their past leaders who disseminated such dogma, and expunge all material
from
> their canon that perpetuates the false teachings.
>
> Until the LDS church does that, they will continue to receive cricitism on
the
> subject until time immemorial.

from you, but who cares about that?

The ball is in LDS leaders' court. If they
> don't want to be thought of as a racist religion, they need to remove and
> disavow all vestiges of their racist dogma.
>

Fine, you *think* the Mormon church is some brainwashing Corp, out to rule
the world, like Cobra, and here you come, GI Joe to save the day. Whatever.
What church should I join. It would have to be a church that doesn't
believe Gen 4:15 I guess.

Mike Riley


wilbur

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 1:17:15 PM12/20/02
to

"TheJordan6" <thejo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021219174853...@mb-ce.aol.com...
>
> Therefore, the only way the LDS Church can align themselves with
enlightened
> 21st-century society is to admit that their racist teachings are false,
disavow
> their past leaders who disseminated such dogma, and expunge all material
from
> their canon that perpetuates the false teachings.
>

I'm just curious about expunging the material from the canon... expunging
this material from the Book of Mormon would pretty much require dropping the
entire book, would it not? What about the bible? Do they edit out the
story of Cain?
Or, does it make more sense just to admit that these books are literature
and as such they contain errors and just leave the texts alone. I mean,
would you really like to see the church release its own edited versions of
the BoM and Bible? And call them what, the Non-Racist Version? It will
just never, never happen. The quorum of the twelve are either con men or
true believers. If they are con men, what would motivate them to make these
changes? They're making pretty good money now by slowly changing the
product to fit society while not making radical changes that scare off the
existing base. You want them to "do the right thing" and risk a negative
effect on the income stream? Hard to imagine. Yes, you could say that
doing the right thing now would be better for the long term, but most of
these guys won't be around for the long term, and they need secure income
for now. If the quorum of the twelve is made up of true believers, you are
asking them to change their true beliefs about the nature of scripture, are
you not. And it seems that once they make that change, and stay in the
church, they slip over into the con man category.
What advice would you give a general authority looking to repudiate racism
yet still have scriptures and tradition left to have a church left when he
was done? How would you sell a revision of the canon to the existing
membership base?

Tommy

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 2:12:39 PM12/20/02
to
>> >> Actually it
>> >>> used to tell them that it was because they were less valiant in
the
>> >>> pre-existence so at least they are making some progress.
>> >>
>> >> Stupid rumors.
>> >
>> >Heh...it always cracks me up when a member knows so little about
their
> own
>> >church. How long have you been a member?
>>
>> Maybe he joined up in '79. :-)
>>
>> Randy J.
>
> I was born in 76 - Do the math.
>
>
>

Well...then that explains why you might know little beyond what the
church *currently* teaches. Believe me...I've been in many an Elders
Quorum meeting where the concept of blacks being less valient in the
pre-existance came up. I remember one specifically (would have been
right after my mission - maybe 1994) where this was discussed and the
only person in the room who disagreed (though not very loudly) was a
friend of mine who had served among the blacks in inner city Detroit.

""There is a reason why one man is born black and with other
disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantage. The
reason is that we once had an estate before we came here, and were
obedient, more or less, to the laws that were given us there. Those who
were faithful in all things there received greater blessings here, and
those who were not faithful received less.... There were no neutrals in
the war in heaven. All took sides either with Christ or with Satan.
Every man had his agency there, and men receive rewards here based upon
their actions there, just as they will receive rewards hereafter for
deeds done in the body. The Negro, evidently, is receiving the reward he
merits." -Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol.1, pages
66-67"

Mormon Doctrine and other widely used (though some less so lately) LDS
books say much on this subject. I would do a wee bit o' research before
opining the obligatory "Stupid rumors" line.

Tommy

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 2:19:25 PM12/20/02
to
>> > Actually it
>> >> used to tell them that it was because they were less valiant in
>> >> the pre-existence so at least they are making some progress.
>> >
>> > Stupid rumors.
>>
>> Heh...it always cracks me up when a member knows so little about
>> their own church.
>
> You are lame. I am saying that people in the church we spreading
> rumors when they taught that, unless you can quote a GA teaching that.

I did in my other post to you. Let me know if you didn't see it and I'll
repost it here.

There are MANY references to find on this subject. I guess I shouldn't be
surprised that the church is now trying hard to cover up such remarks and
beliefs. Not very helpful to missionary efforts in African I would
imagine.

>>How long have you been a member?
>
> Forever.

Reminds me of the song "Forever is a long, long time..." in the very lame
Saturday's Warrior remake - Star Child.

> It always cracks me up when you guys leave the church and become
> nothing. Maybe I'm wrong. What do you believe? Are you Catholic,
> Jewish, maybe Buddhist, probably Joe's Christian Church #4123.

That's like saying "It cracks me up when one get's out of prison and
doesn't go find another prision...". Why in the world would I shackle
myself to another organized religion? I search for truth every day...but
just because I haven't jumped head first into the next God scam doesn't
mean I'm "nothing". Far from it.

jack_the_mormon

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 4:54:36 PM12/20/02
to
cdo...@my-deja.com (charles) wrote in message news:<e877bb3f.0212...@posting.google.com>...

> Jack_th...@yahoo.com (jack_the_mormon) wrote in message news:<4f8f6ffd.02121...@posting.google.com>...
> > > What specifically is the question?
> >
> > Good point. I was just stating my story and not really aking a
> > question. OK then, I will ask a question. What does 2 Nephi 5:21
> > mean? Don't Mormons consider it racist? Why or why not?
>
> Give us your definition of racism.
>
Better yet - I'll give you Oxford's American Dictionary's definition
(my comments are in parenthesis): Belief in the Superiority of a
particular race (ie. Nephites superior over Lamanites, white more
beautiful than dark skin); antagonism between people of different
races; the theory that human abilities are pre-determined by race."

> > >
> > > It appears that your question is: I think Mormons are racist, and why
> > > don't they agree with me?
> > >
> > My frustration is that nobody would ever speak frankly about this
> > obvious hole in Mormon theology with me.

> > Why am I full of baloney? Please respectfully explain why?


>
> I have two daughters married to Hispanics.

The fact that your daughters married Hispanic men makes my question
all the more relevant. How can you read 2 Nephi 5:21 and not be upset
by what it's implying.

We have missionaries going
> throughout the world, to virtually every nation that will receive us.

And this proves what?


>
> Almost half of the LDS population is hispanic.

Is their skin turning whiter? Do you believe they were given brown
skin so they would be unattractive to white people? If not, then do
you question what it says in the book that is the "cornerstone" of
your religion?

We have General
> Authorities who are of many races.
>

> You are full of baloney.

Why are you so hateful? Why does asking for an explanation in a
respectful manner make me full of baloney? My question is sincere,
please don't respond facetiously.

I believe, that you sincerely believe you are not racist. You are
probably not, in fact. But then why does that scripture not bother
you!?!?!? That is my question!!!! Why will no one answer
it!??!?!?!?!?

Duwayne Anderson

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 5:55:17 PM12/20/02
to
cdo...@my-deja.com (charles) wrote in message news:<e877bb3f.0212...@posting.google.com>...
> Jack_th...@yahoo.com (jack_the_mormon) wrote in message news:<4f8f6ffd.02121...@posting.google.com>...
> > > What specifically is the question?
> >
> > Good point. I was just stating my story and not really aking a
> > question. OK then, I will ask a question. What does 2 Nephi 5:21
> > mean? Don't Mormons consider it racist? Why or why not?
>
> Give us your definition of racism.
>
>
> > >
> > > It appears that your question is: I think Mormons are racist, and why
> > > don't they agree with me?
> > >
> > My frustration is that nobody would ever speak frankly about this
> > obvious hole in Mormon theology with me.
> >
> > > Perhaps the answer is that they do not agree with you, that you are
> > > full of baloney, and you are just not willing to accept that answer.
> > >
> > Why am I full of baloney? Please respectfully explain why?
>
> I have two daughters married to Hispanics.

Even if that could be authenticated, beyond the obvious naked
assertion that it is, what's it got to do with the price of beans in
China?

> We have missionaries going
> throughout the world, to virtually every nation that will receive us.

This is an example of non-racism? You send missionaries out to
reclaim their lost souls, and that is an example of non-racism ....
how?

> Almost half of the LDS population is hispanic.

How does that fix the problem of the Book of Mormon claiming black
skin is used by god as a curse?

> We have General
> Authorities who are of many races.

What a bunch of baloney. LDS general authorities represent one of the
highest concentrations of white Anglo-Saxon old men a person is ever
likely to encounter.


> You are full of baloney.

No, Charles, you are ignoring the history and scriptures of your own
Church.

<snip to end>

McSorley

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 6:26:45 PM12/20/02
to

"Tommy" <to...@spiinc-tx.com> wrote in message
news:Xns92EA87B2DE60...@64.154.60.187...
Its so funny to me that you say that that is what the church teaches, I have
never heard of the "Doctrines of Salvation". You act like its straight from
the Bible or BOM. Both of which teach blackness is a curse. Either way,
why don't you explain what's going on here on earth then and let me laugh at
the holes in your story.

How is having dark skin a blessing on this earth? I think its not, its a
hurdle that people need to get past. What is that called if you don't call
it a curse? Do you disagree that it is a curse?

If it is a curse, do people get it undeservingly?

What is the story then Tom-boy? What does Pastor Joe teach you about it?

Mike Riley


McSorley

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 7:01:41 PM12/20/02
to
<snip>

>
> > It always cracks me up when you guys leave the church and become
> > nothing. Maybe I'm wrong. What do you believe? Are you Catholic,
> > Jewish, maybe Buddhist, probably Joe's Christian Church #4123.
>
> That's like saying "It cracks me up when one get's out of prison and
> doesn't go find another prision...".

HAHAHA *PRISON*. Why is it prison Tommy. Cus ya can't drink coffee. You
can't swear. You can't have sex with whoever. Really! How is it prison...

here that should be enough room for you!

> Why in the world would I shackle
> myself to another organized religion?

Well I *have* gone to other churches too and noticed that there is something
special about the Mormon church and that all others are just not the same to
me but I know that is not what you mean.

> I search for truth every day...

Oh really, what % of the day are you searching and what % are you bashing?

>but


> just because I haven't jumped head first into the next God scam doesn't
> mean I'm "nothing". Far from it.
>

Far from anything though, you still a human being relying on faith. But
hey, maybe your on to something. Call every Church a scam and that way you
can make up your own rules. Yeah, cool... okay and then say na nana *na*
na... and laugh at people who choose to live a certain way and follow who
they believe is a prophet. It accomplishes nothing but sure is fun. Just
create the rule that you don't have to accomplish anything to go to heaven
or whatever *you* want to call it. I can see why you chose that life,
hopefully if you keep teasing the Mormons you will *really* convince
yourself that you are better off and finally leave us alone.

Mike

€ R.L. Measures €

unread,
Dec 20, 2002, 7:21:55 PM12/20/02