Only For Those Who Were 30 Years Old And Up

[busybee]

I was a teenager in Apartheid South Africa at the time. Even with the prevailing views of society in South Africa at the time, I distinctly remember the feeling of excitement that the members of the church experienced in hearing about the revelation.

It would be nearly 20 years before we were able to all worship together. I know the timing was perfect for that revelation in South Africa. It paved the way (in South Africa) for the church to grow rapidly in the country so that when Apartheid ended the church was way ahead of the pack. It is one of my cherished memories. Announced in Sacrament meeting on my 15th birthday.

Edited March 3, 2014 by busybee

[Spammer]

I was twelve and sitting next to the bishop's son on the deacon's bench in suburban SLC when the bishop read the announcement over the pulpit in sacrament meeting.  The bishop's boy whispered "I'm not passing the sacrament with no n****r."  I'm sure people were happy and relieved that day, but that's my only memory of the event.

[cdowis]

Please understand that I'm not claiming racism. 

 

Yes you are.  

 

This accusation has been made against the church as an institution, and against the members individually.  You have  made yourself crystal clear.

 

Best of luck to you.

Edited March 3, 2014 by cdowis

[thesometimesaint]

BUT YOU WERE CALLOUS! The day before God "changed his mind about black people," every "good" saint would have barred the doors to the temple to ANY black member who wanted to enter. That doesn't demonstrate some great "compassion" to me. The people who cared faced down attack dogs, water hoses, angry club-wielding mobs and assassins' bullets to allow black people to get a lousy cup of coffee at a lunch counter. And yet, the saints weren't willing to risk their TRs to even suggest to their leaders that blacks be allowed into the House of The Lord. And so forgive me if I'm too pathetic or idiotic to see how the saints demonstrated their great concern for their "bruthas and sistas." I just don't see it.

 

Temple Recommend holding George Romney argued, and demonstrated for the Civil Rights of blacks.

[thesometimesaint]

I was twelve and sitting next to the bishop's son on the deacon's bench in suburban SLC when the bishop read the announcement over the pulpit in sacrament meeting.  The bishop's boy whispered "I'm not passing the sacrament with no n****r."  I'm sure people were happy and relieved that day, but that's my only memory of the event.

 

I would have kicked his butt so hard his head would spin.

[cdowis]

I was twelve and sitting next to the bishop's son on the deacon's bench in suburban SLC when the bishop read the announcement over the pulpit in sacrament meeting.  The bishop's boy whispered "I'm not passing the sacrament with no n****r."  I'm sure people were happy and relieved that day, but that's my only memory of the event.

 

I remember shortly after the announcement that some had left the church.  I felt a profound sense of relief that such hate filled individuals were no longer in the church, and perhaps this young boy later separated himself as well.

 

It was a time to separate the goats from the sheep.

Edited March 3, 2014 by cdowis

[busybee]

I think it rather presumptuous of Mormonweb to claim that people didn't react the way that they have said they did when the ban was lifted. I remember it as clear as if it happened yesterday. I was sitting at the organ during Sacrament Meeting and even at that young age felt the confirmation of the Spirit that this was the will of the Lord for His people. At a time when racism was totally acceptable in the country, the members of the church WERE happy at the news. You have no right claiming that people didn't really feel the way they felt. It is one of my clearest memories. There haven't been too many earth shattering events in my life. THIS was one of them.

Edited March 3, 2014 by busybee

[wenglund]

Are you talking about the priesthood ban or our stance on SSM? Because this is exactly what I hear some members saying today about SSM. I wonder if they see the irony.

 

 

It might be ironic were skin color equatable with sexual perversion. Now, you might view it as such, but I certainly don't. To each their own.

 

Even still, and since you so much enjoyed my last travel log, perhaps some day I will regale you with stores from days gone by about my sentiments and actions in favor of civil treatment of homosexuals--a disposition that continues strong even today, though some may see it differently given my passion for preserving the sanctity of marriage as rightly understood.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[thesometimesaint]

I remember shortly after the announcement that some had left the church.  I felt a profound sense of relief that such hate filled individuals were no longer in the church, and perhaps this young boy later separated himself as well.

 

It was a time to separate the goats from the sheep.

 

I didn't see any of it my neck of the woods. I can totally agree that we are better off without those hate filled individuals, if the refuse to repent.

[Thinking]

Deleted.

Edited March 3, 2014 by Thinking

[wenglund]

I suspect that the level of joy, or not, felt when the ban was lifted may be manifest in the ease at which, or not, one has been able to leave the past and move on to bigger and better things.

 

I pray for the balm of Christ to heal the hearts of those whose heads are twisted backwards and still decades later stuck in the receding past and who are intent on picking old wounds.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Calm]

What?

He wasn't talking about the US. Read his previous post.

[bcuzbcuz]

If judging a person, allowing or disqualifying services,, by the color of one's skin isn't rascism, then come up with a better word for it. Skinnism??

I invited a close friend,, and his family, to attend the re-celebrating of wedding vows between myself and my wife, on the 20th anniversary of our first getting married and he politely declined, because of my choice of venue. He knew, what I didn't know, that that particular location would, although not directly refusing service, pretend that service wasn't needed at certain tables. He knew that the waiters and waitresses would scurry back and forth, hurrying to re-fill glasses, answer to the beck and call of any quest, as long as it didn't include the tables with "certain guests" of "color".

Am I talking "before your time"`? I don't think so. This was 1989. I can clarify by stating this was in a town bordering on two Indian Reserves. This restaurant/catering service/conference hall had only a few years earlier posted a sign (and well within my friends current memory) "No dogs, no Indians allowed".

I knew none of this. Partly because my wife and I had only recently moved to the area, but mostly because my wife and I are white. Had we lived there during the time of the signs posting, we would probably not have seen it. Because we were white. It didn't apply to us, didn't affect us.

What has my post to do with any of the previous posts?? Maybe nothing, but several posters here seem quite upset with being, themselves or their church or their beliefs, labeled as discriminating because of skin color. If the word rascism doesn't fit, then find an appropriate word for it....cause if it walks like a duck and sounds lke a duck........

[mfbukowski]

People complain that the prophets never get revelation anymore and then complain that the revelations come too late.

 

Go figure.

 

The revelation on same sex marriage has already come.  Read the Proclamation on the Family.

 

It is emphasized more every day.

Edited March 3, 2014 by mfbukowski

[wenglund]

If judging a person, allowing or disqualifying services,, by the color of one's skin isn't rascism, then come up with a better word for it. Skinnism??

I invited a close friend,, and his family, to attend the re-celebrating of wedding vows between myself and my wife, on the 20th anniversary of our first getting married and he politely declined, because of my choice of venue. He knew, what I didn't know, that that particular location would, although not directly refusing service, pretend that service wasn't needed at certain tables. He knew that the waiters and waitresses would scurry back and forth, hurrying to re-fill glasses, answer to the beck and call of any quest, as long as it didn't include the tables with "certain guests" of "color".

Am I talking "before your time"`? I don't think so. This was 1989. I can clarify by stating this was in a town bordering on two Indian Reserves. This restaurant/catering service/conference hall had only a few years earlier posted a sign (and well within my friends current memory) "No dogs, no Indians allowed".

I knew none of this. Partly because my wife and I had only recently moved to the area, but mostly because my wife and I are white. Had we lived there during the time of the signs posting, we would probably not have seen it. Because we were white. It didn't apply to us, didn't affect us.

What has my post to do with any of the previous posts?? Maybe nothing, but several posters here seem quite upset with being, themselves or their church or their beliefs, labeled as discriminating because of skin color. If the word rascism doesn't fit, then find an appropriate word for it....cause if it walks like a duck and sounds lke a duck........

 

You think that is bad? Within the last decade I have been refused service on multiple discussion boards on numerous occasions simply because I am a believing and practicing member of the Church.

 

In the 90's, I was refused advancement and leadership positions at work because of my age and because I was a man.

 

I could go on, and I can certainly play the victim card for whatever purpose, and focus on the alarming exceptions, but to what good?

 

Again, I pray for the balm of Christ to heal the hearts of those whose heads are twisted backwards and still decades later are stuck in the receding past and who are intent on picking old wounds rather than help to heal.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited March 3, 2014 by wenglund

[bcuzbcuz]

You think that is bad, within the last decade I have been refused service on multiple discussion boards on numerous occasions simply because I am a believing and practicing member of the Church.

 

In the 90's, I was refused advancement and leadership positions at work because of my age and because I was a man.

 

I could go on, and I can certainly play the victim card for whatever purpose, and focus on the alarming exceptions, but to what good?

 

Again, I pray for the balm of Christ to heal the hearts of those whose heads are twisted backwards and still decades later are stuck in the receding past and who are intent on picking old wounds rather than help to heal.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I liked your other post, about your experiences at school and in later life while in Texas, better.

And reviewing past mistakes isn't always picking scabs.

[Calm]

I knew none of this. Partly because my wife and I had only recently moved to the area, but mostly because my wife and I are white. Had we lived there during the time of the signs posting, we would probably not have seen it. Because we were white. It didn't apply to us, didn't affect us.

What has my post to do with any of the previous posts?? Maybe nothing, but several posters here seem quite upset with being, themselves or their church or their beliefs, labeled as discriminating because of skin color. If the word rascism doesn't fit, then find an appropriate word for it....cause if it walks like a duck and sounds lke a duck........

Perhaps I missed it, but from what I read there has been no denial of racism among church members. But having racist feelings about someone doesn't prevent one from feeling joy for that person. Racism does not always equal hate, doesn't even always have to equal fear.

[Scott Lloyd]

Maybe Utah in the seventies was different than Utah in the 60's, when I lived there. Maybe the pollyanna fluffiness of flower power influenced attitudes that brought about changes. But somehow, I doubt it.

In my case that had nothing to do with it. As a youth growing up in the Church, I detested the hippie counterculture. That's pretty much how it was in my circle of friends.

 

But I do remember, being a rural boy from small town Canada, who moved to Salt Lake City, a city that was segregated along railway lines dviding east and west SLC, how shocked I was to hear the bishop's son and his pals crack a series of rascist jokes while we were at scout camp. And even the scout leaders laughed. No one was called to task.

 

There were -- and I suppose still are -- people who behaved foolishly in this respect. But it would be wrong to ascribe this broad-brush stereotype to all of Utah in the '60s, just as it is wrong to promulgate racial stereotypes.

[mormonnewb]

I suspect that the level of joy, or not, felt when the ban was lifted may be manifest in the ease at which, or not, one has been able to leave the past and move on to bigger and better things.

I pray for the balm of Christ to heal the hearts of those whose heads are twisted backwards and still decades later stuck in the receding past and who are intent on picking old wounds.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

In my newfound respect for your intellect, I assume that you realize that my concern is TOTALLY about the future. However, let me spell it out for those who are not so "hip to the jive."

Our ship has sailed with regards to American blacks and there's probably nothing we can do about that. And if we keep on our current course, our ship will sail with gays (and their growing allies). And in 36 years, our kids and grandkids will be online trying to convince the son or daughter of gay parents that we were all ecstatic when OD3 was "revealed." And they will even be less convinced than I am.

Just a thought ....

[Scott Lloyd]

I was twelve and sitting next to the bishop's son on the deacon's bench in suburban SLC when the bishop read the announcement over the pulpit in sacrament meeting.  The bishop's boy whispered "I'm not passing the sacrament with no n****r."  I'm sure people were happy and relieved that day, but that's my only memory of the event.

Sad that it should be your "only" memory of the event.

 

Maybe at age 12, one is still young enough to be oblivious to the pervasive content in news reports, especially for an event as singular as this, which, for many people in Church, had a similar impact as when man first walked on the moon.

[Scott Lloyd]

In my newfound respect for your intellect, I assume that you realize that my concern is TOTALLY about the future. However, let me spell it out for those who are not so "hip to the jive."

Our ship has sailed with regards to American blacks and there's probably nothing we can do about that. And if we keep on our current course, our ship will sail with gays (and their growing allies). And in 36 years, our kids and grandkids will be online trying to convince the son or daughter of gay parents that we were all ecstatic when OD3 was "revealed." And they will even be less convinced than I am.

Just a thought ....

Again, Church members fully expected that blacks one day would receive the priesthood. (And I will reiterate what I have said and what Wade has said about the joy with which the Church members at large received the news. You weren't there at the time and have absolutely no standing to doubt our recollection.)

 

On the other hand, the notion of the Church one day accepting gay marriage is totally alien to me and, I suppose, to most believing and faithful Church members.

Edited March 3, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[bcuzbcuz]

In my case that had nothing to do with it. As a youth growing up in the Church, I detested the hippie counterculture. That's pretty much how it was in my circle of friends.

 

There were -- and I suppose still are -- people who behaved foolishly in this respect. But it would be wrong to ascribe this broad-brush stereotype to all of Utah in the '60s, just as it is wrong to promulgate racial stereotypes.

You make valid points. And I haven't lived in Utah since the mid-sixties. I have no idea if SLC (and several other communities) are still separated; culturally, racially and physically by the rail lines that run/ran through town. Back then there were attitudes and pejoratives that clearly marked the borders between the white, east side of town and the west, non-white, side.

I was only referencing to my own, quite myopic, experiences.

[Thinking]

He wasn't talking about the US. Read his previous post.

 

Thanks.

[bcuzbcuz]

Perhaps I missed it, but from what I read there has been no denial of racism among church members. But having racist feelings about someone doesn't prevent one from feeling joy for that person. Racism does not always equal hate, doesn't even always have to equal fear.

Perhaps I missed it, but from what I read there has been no denial of racism among church members. But having racist feelings about someone doesn't prevent one from feeling joy for that person. Racism does not always equal hate, doesn't even always have to equal fear.

Points well taken.

[mormonnewb]

Sad that it should be your "only" memory of the event.

Maybe at age 12, one is still young enough to be oblivious to the pervasive content in news reports, especially for an event as singular as this, which, for many people in Church, had a similar impact as when man first walked on the moon.

OD2 was the Mormon equivalent of a man walking on the moon?

Okay, Moderator, go ahead and close the thread. NOBODY is going to top this one!