Kanye West Was Right. Ces Doesn't Care About Black People.

[why me]

IMO, mostly men because there have been so many changes and mistakes in the church throughout it's existence. But finally I think the leaders are close to getting alot right.

If this is true, the lds church is no different than any other church. Most members would claim that heavenly father leads his church. But he doesn't control the minds of its members, including the leaders. We are free to learn and make mistakes.

[Stargazer]

I don't think you are a racist, but you still haven't given me ONE statement by ETB in which he spoke in FAVOR of integration. So why do YOU believe that he was in support of it?

I didn't say that I believed he was in support of integration. I have no idea whether he was or not. At the time Elder Benson was politically active as a member of the Quorum of the Twelve, the primary or sole political focus of the Church leadership was warning about the communist threat to the United States, which was (and is) seen as the Home Base for the promulgation of the restored Gospel worldwide. In short, the restored Gospel itself was threatened by the threat of Communism. If that threat had not existed, I think it is doubtful that the Church would have had much to say politically. You can count on the fingers of one hand the national issues the Church itself has weighed in on over the last half-century: the Communist threat to the US; the MX missile system; the Equal Rights Amendment; and Same Sex Marriage. I don't know of any others.

As far as I know, every single political work that Ezra Taft Benson ever wrote dealt with the preservation of the Union, and was intended to either warn people about threats to it, or to educate people about the proper role of government.

I already quoted what he wrote about civil rights -- that he was in favor of civil rights -- and do you really need to hear him enumerate every bullet point that comes under the heading of "civil rights"?

 

He rejected those working towards integration because he thought their movement was co-opted by the communists. I get it. Did he support any capitalist civil rights movements? Or even SUGGEST that one be created? If not, then he was willing to allow blacks to continue as second-class citizens until some future undetermined date. That's not supposition on my part, but rather the logical conclusion drawn from the situation.

1. Blacks were second-class citizens.

2. Benson opposed all those trying to change that fact.

3. He had no alternative plan for equality.

Ergo, he was willing to accept #1.

What have I gotten wrong?

In a word, Everything.

1. First of all, blacks were NOT second-class citizens. They were first-class citizens who were being treated in many places as if they were second-class. And why were they so treated? Because of racial bigotry. All the rule-making in the world did not (and has not) defeated this. Only gradual education will eventually erase this. By the way, I do not doubt that many of the laws brought into being at the behest of the Civil Rights Movement have in fact made things better. But attitudes among the general white population have been slower to change, and I don't know that the civil rights laws have influenced that as much as many people think.

2. Benson did not oppose changing #1, but did oppose the communist-inspired and -directed movement, because those hidden behind the movement were not interested in equality, but the eventual overthrow of the US.

3. Benson's job as an Apostle of the Lord was administering the Church, not abandoning his God-given task to promote an alternative civil rights movement.

As to #3, just what do you think would have happened if Elder Benson had come up with an alternative? He was a well-known conservative who endorsed and was associated with the John Birch Society. No program that he could have come up with would have gotten the slightest traction with the media (which had already been completely infiltrated by the Left). They would either have given him no publicity at all, or would have excoriated any proposal he came up with. And just what do you think that Martin Luther King, Jr, Louis Farrakhan, Malcolm X, Stokely Carmichael and the Black Panthers would have said about any imaginable program put forward by Ezra Taft Benson? "Here's a White man trying to tell Black leaders how to do it! And a Conservative Republican no less! Who does he think he is?" Any black who gave any credence to a Benson-proposed plan would have been instantly labelled an Uncle Tom, or worse. It would have been worse than useless. The same would have been true for any other alternative civil rights plan, had Benson endorsed it. His endorsement would have been the kiss of death, in fact.

This is getting too political, but can't you see what you're asking? In order to get a pass from you on the subject of civil rights for blacks, Ezra Taft Benson has to essentially abandon his calling as a Apostle just so he can propose a plan that has no hope of ever making the slightest difference.

You know, this whole thing reminds me of something that happened while I was on my mission in Germany. We happened upon a man while tracting who seemed interested that we represented a Church based in the United States, and he asked us what the Church's stance was on the continued confinement in Spandau Prison of the former Nazi Germany second-in-command, Rudolf Hess, who was sentenced at Nuremberg to life imprisonment. We said that as far as we knew, the Church had nothing to say on the matter. Well, this was unacceptable to the man, who considered Rudolf Hess to be one the greatest Germans of the war period because in 1941 he had secretly flown to Scotland to try to broker a peace treaty between Britain and Germany -- against Adolf Hitler's wishes. The man told us that he would not be interested in learning about a Church that refused to recognize the gross injustice being perpetrated in Hess's case. He told us we could come back to teach him once the Church officially called for Hess's release.

It seems to me that you are doing the same thing in regard to Ezra Taft Benson. You have set some strict and narrow conditions regarding your willingness to teach the doctrines that Elder Benson taught, and those conditions cannot be met. It's quite unfortunate.

I find this rather interesting for a particular reason: I'm one of the two instructors in my High Priests group this year, and I will be teaching from the manual in question. In my case I am reveling in the opportunity to present President Benson's teachings. I am sorry that this is not the case for you.

Edited January 10, 2015 by Stargazer

[Coreyb]

Wait, wasn't Malcolm X also oppossed to the civil rights movement as we like to remember it? He opposed racial integration and condoned (and participated in ) violence, and yet I spent hours of school time listening to the teacher extol his virtues (in those hippie Colorado schools mind you). Everyone needs to grow up and realize that all people are both flawed and virtuous, and we can learn from both aspects of their character. Otherwise we can opt to live in a world where we have no one to look up to. No George Washington (slaveholder), no Thomas Jefferson (slaveholder, but at least he had sex with them), no Joseph Smith (secret polygamist), no Brigham Young (racist), no Ulysses Grant (violent drunk), no Joseph F. Smith (liar), no FDR (adulterer), no JFK (adulterer), no MLK (adulterer), no Malcolm X (violent racist), no J. Reuben Clark (anti Semite), no Ezra Taft Benson (passive racist?), and sure as hell no Bill Cosby!! (Well, I'll wait on that one)

[Avatar4321]

I've never been a member of the JBS, nor really much cared about it one way or another, but this discussion caused me to do some checking up on them.

 

See my post here: http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/64779-kanye-west-was-right-ces-doesnt-care-about-black-people/#entry1209454121 which discusses the JBS connection with Mormon leaders.

 

So what is so horrible about the John Birch Society?

their efforts to expose gadianton rob ers

[Avatar4321]

I've rad through the thread and I have to say a few things are clear:

1) Joseph Smith was correct. We can know a man is on his way to apostasy when he criticizes our leaders and tells himself he knows better.

2) there is no evidence that president Benson was racist in any way. Quite the opposite. It's also clear that he was keen on warning us against gadiantons in our midst. A message the nation and sadly this people are ignoring.

3) we have a man lost in apostasy tying to entice us to criticize president Benson. See number 1 of he succeeds.

president Benson was Gods Prophet. He loved this people and this nation. We should not be believing the words of traitors over his

[ERayR]

The Kanye reference was simply an amusing way to start the conversation. However, you let your maniacal hatred of a rapper lead you into mocking the speech of a young black man, bringing (very mild) rebuke from other posters. Plain and simple. You brought that on yourself.

 

Oh and I thought it was an endorsement for Kanye to set Church policy. 

[Kenngo1969]

Another of MormonNewb's Greatest Hits:

 

MormonNewb:

First of all, it is you who wasn't dealing with the substance of the conversation. This is not a thread about Kanye West. It is about the Church's approach to racial issues. The Kanye reference was simply an amusing way to start the conversation. 

 

As hard as I find it to believe, I'll take you at your word as to your proffered reason for bringing Kanye West into the conversation, but Mr. West is a polarizing figure.  Bringing him up when you don't intend him to have anything to do with the conversation seems to be the rough rhetorical equivalent of walking into a room full of strangers naked and saying defiantly, "What're you lookin' at?!"

 

However, you let your maniacal hatred of a rapper lead you into mocking the speech of a young black man, bringing (very mild) rebuke from other posters. Plain and simple. You brought that on yourself.

 

Maniacal hatred?   Please!  (Engage in hyperbole much?)  I save my maniacal hatred for targets that are truly deserving of it, such as (as an ardent Utah Jazz fan) the Los Angeles Lakers.  I rarely bother to think of Mr. West, and, on the rare occasions he has somehow entered my consciousness, I can't say I'm much more than indifferent to him.  I don't have a great deal of respect for Kim Kardashian, either, or for any number of high profile people.  But it doesn't have anything to do with race; has more to do with what they say and how they act.  Incidentally, Ms. Kardashian and Mr. West apparently  saw the smash Broadway hit, The Book of Mormon: The Musical a couple of years ago: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/30/kim-kanye-broadway_n_1721195.html

 

 

More pertinently, this is not the first time that we've been down this road. Somehow the mention of race on the board seems to bring out the worst in you. I have no doubt that you are a kind and gentle man in most respects, but your visceral reaction in these matters seems to be a case of "thou protesteth too much."

 

You got me Newb.  I admit it; I'm just a closet racist.  

 

Let me tell you a little story (about the guy you're so convinced is a racist).  In 1988, my high school selected me to attend the Congressional Young Leaders Conference.  (I'm not trying to trumpet that as any sort of an achievement or anything; maybe those responsible for the selection were, for some reason, simply desperate.  I dunno.)  There were about 500 of us, who had come from one end of the country to the other to attend.  One night, we attended a dinner.  To the best of my knowledge, there was no assigned seating (or, if there was, I didn't get the memo).  When I went into the room, I simply selected the table closest to the entrance and sat down.  One or two of my fellow attendees, who happened to be black, sat down beside me.  (I didn't realize this at the time, but apparently, the gathering was supposed to be segregated ... de facto, if not de jure.)  Before I knew it, I was the only white person at that table.  

 

Was I uncomfortable?  Well, I've always believed that if you're comfortable in your own skin, there's no reason for you to give other people permission to make you feel otherwise.  Maybe I'm way off base, but given the way you sometimes bring up race (and the way you sometimes turn other threads to it) there are times when, to be perfectly honest, I wonder if you're comfortable in your own skin.  As for that dinner, was I uncomfortable?  Well, I did find the situation enlightening; It may have been an accident of seat selection more than than a conscious choice, but as near as I could tell, I was the only person in that room who bothered to integrate.  We can pass (and have passed, and I support them, if it really needs to be said) laws barring de jure segregation; but there's no law that can force "birds of one feather" to mingle with "birds of every other feather." 

 

I've dated, and had other social interactions with, girls of every racial and cultural stripe: Filipina, mixed-race, black, Chilena, Dominicana ...  If you want to pigeonhole me as a racist, that's your problem.  I stand by my statement that I suspect your reason for doing so is because you don't want to be bothered with having to deal with the substance of what I say.
 

Everyday, someone comes onto this board and attacks the truths you hold most sacred. And you manage to weather the attack with good grace (and even a sense of humor). So what is it about the issue of race that drives you over the edge?

 

Oh, you don't even know the half of it!  It's a good thing you've limited your Cyber interactions with me to this forum!  It's not the only place on the Internet where race has driven me "over the edge"!

 

DON'T CLICK ON THIS LINK (IF YOU CAN'T HELP YOURSELF, AND IF YOU CLICK ANYWAY, STAY AWAY FROM PAGE A4: http://www.etypeservices.com/SWF/LocalUser/Tooele1/Magazine21925/Publication/Magazine21925.pdf
 

OR THIS ONE: https://www.greatgourdini.wordpress.com/2014/01/20/letter-from-birmingham-jail/

 

OR THIS ONE: https://www.greatgourdini.wordpress.com/2012/08/08/in-praise-of-mlk-jr/

 

AND DEFINITELY NOT THIS ONE: https://www.greatgourdini.wordpress.com/2013/08/29/mlks-dream/

 

And do yourself a favor, and don't answer that too quickly, nor in Ebonics (sooty, I really couldn't help myself there).

 

 

Not to worry; each of the foregoing responses was said with perfect diction, each word well-enunciated.

 

 

sooty

 

Auto-Correct strikes again?

Edited January 10, 2015 by Kenngo1969

[mfbukowski]

My point was that mormonnewb tends to bring up race in every thread he starts and makes it known that he is black. I tend to believe that this is done for a reason. And most people on this site are probably white giving the racial makeup of the church. In every thread about race, the race issue is raised and discussions, debates, disagreements begin between different races and usually ends with nothing accomplished or achieved, until the next thread is started again. I think that it would be much better for mormonnewb to join genesis and get a black perspective on these issues. They would certainly understand his feelings and intents better than whites etc who have had different experiences because of the color of their skin. I only say this because of the amount of race threads mormonnewb starts and continues to start to rile up the board.

 

I do agree that conversations are welcome here too but since there have now been countless threads about racism and the lds church started by mormonnewb, he may find it useful to get perspectives from the genesis group. It may help him find some peace. If i were a critic of the church, I could come to this board and nitpick my way through the past and attack the church to my hearts content. All churches could be attacked in such ways. But the conversation will go nowhere because my sole intent would be for people to defend from my attacks. And since we are speaking about the past, it would be endless because we  can only offer interpetations about why this happened or why a past leader believed or said what he believed or said.

 

But what about the present? It would be wonderful to discuss race relations in the church in the present tense.

I have met Marvin Perkins on several occasions and had chances to sit down and talk with him and he is a well-rounded individual who sees all of humanity as one race- we are all brown, just different shades.  Frankly, I think that newbie and Marvin would differ quite a lot in their opinions about how this problem should be approached.

 

Here is a presentation Marvin gave at the last Fair Conference.  Great presentation.   http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2014-fairmormon-conference/blacks-scriptures

 

Every time you use the term “black” or “white” relative to man you are putting a brick of deception on the wall that separates man from understanding that there is no difference between us.

Edited January 10, 2015 by mfbukowski

[Kenngo1969]

Avatar4321:
 

1) Joseph Smith was correct. We can know a man is on his way to apostasy when he criticizes our leaders and tells himself he knows better.

 

 

I'll let Newb, his leaders, and the Savior determine whether (and, if so, how far) Newb has gone down the road to apostasy; I'll also leave it to them to determine what, if anything, should be done about it. All of his views relative to things related to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints may not be totally orthodox or mainstream, but if we were going to use that as an excuse to start throwing people out of the Church, 90% of Church members on this Board would find themselves in Church disciplinary proceedings this Sunday. If Newb did something to try to garner himself a following, rather than simply expressing his views here (and occasionally stirring the pot), that might be a different story, but even if that were so, it wouldn't be up to any of us to decide what to do about it. I've disagreed with Newb, slightly, a time or two , but I actually think we'd get along pretty well if he gave me a chance. He's probably worried about what having too close of an association with such an unhip white dude will do to his street cred, and I can't blame him.

 

And even if your assessment of what is happening to MormonNewb is correct, he may seem lost to you, or to me, or even to the Church and to its leaders, but even if so, he's still the Good Shepherd's Lamb, and the Good Shepherd always knows where he is, and often can have surprising ways of bringing wandering lambs back into the fold.

 

2) there is no evidence that president Benson was racist in any way. Quite the opposite. It's also clear that he was keen on warning us against gadiantons in our midst. A message the nation and sadly this people are ignoring.

 

 

I don't think President Benson was racist, either, but it's not as though he's never said nor written anything which, considered in isolation and/or out of full context, could not be construed to leave someone with that impression. And the most effective antidote against any Gadiantons of our day, with all due respect, isn't someone who, lacking any authority to do so, does the rhetorical equivalent of climbing up on a Rameumptom, pointing a finger, and saying, “You know those Gadianton robbers the Book of Mormon warns us about? See that guy right there? He is one!” The most effective antidote to the modern equivalent of Gadianton robbers is someone who listens to the still, small voice of the Spirit, as well as to others whose duty it is to issue such warnings and who are also listening to the Spirit. See Doctrine and Covenants 45:57.
 

3) we have a man lost in apostasy tying to entice us to criticize president Benson. See number 1 of he succeeds.

 

 

See my answers to your 1) and 2). Again, while you and I might not agree with such criticism of President Benson, it's not as though he's never said nor written anything that might, when viewed in a certain light, justify such criticism.
 

President Benson was Gods Prophet. He loved this people and this nation. We should not be believing the words of traitors over his

 

 

As much as I agree with your first and second sentences, I don't know where you're coming from with the third. And as much as I agree with much (most) of what President Benson wrote and what he said, I don't know anyone who's encouraging us to believe the words of traitors over those of President Benson.

Edited January 10, 2015 by Kenngo1969

[saemo]

In the 1940s a family member was an usher at a movie theater in SLC. A teenager at the time. When Black patrons came to movies, they were ushered to the mezzanine. When the lights went down for the movie, some in the mezzanine moved to better seating. No one did or said anything.

 

In my mind, with the influence the LDS church has in politics in Utah, if there was a thought that the goals of the CRM were good, but up to the states, and CR were to be the better solution, then someone who had the type of influence the LDS Church had in Utah, in the 1940s, should have said so.

[ERayR]

In the 1940s a family member was an usher at a movie theater in SLC. A teenager at the time. When Black patrons came to movies, they were ushered to the mezzanine. When the lights went down for the movie, some in the mezzanine moved to better seating. No one did or said anything.

 

In my mind, with the influence the LDS church has in politics in Utah, if there was a thought that the goals of the CRM were good, but up to the states, and CR were to be the better solution, then someone who had the type of influence the LDS Church had in Utah, in the 1940s, should have said so.

 

When I was a teen we all used to prefer the mezzanine seating.  All these years that I have not realized it was second class seating.  Ah well one never quits learning.

[thesometimesaint]

It's a really complex issue, and still open to controversy.

SEE http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_racial_issues/Mark_E._Peterson_claims_that_Blacks_become_servants_in_heaven/Maher_claims_that_blacks_go_to_heaven_as_slaves

[why me]

In the 1940s a family member was an usher at a movie theater in SLC. A teenager at the time. When Black patrons came to movies, they were ushered to the mezzanine. When the lights went down for the movie, some in the mezzanine moved to better seating. No one did or said anything.

 

In my mind, with the influence the LDS church has in politics in Utah, if there was a thought that the goals of the CRM were good, but up to the states, and CR were to be the better solution, then someone who had the type of influence the LDS Church had in Utah, in the 1940s, should have said so.

There is a separation of church and state and a private business is a private business. Not much any faith can do in such situations. Also this was a long time ago and memory can be a little hazy especially with a teenager.

[why me]

I have met Marvin Perkins on several occasions and had chances to sit down and talk with him and he is a well-rounded individual who sees all of humanity as one race- we are all brown, just different shades.  Frankly, I think that newbie and Marvin would differ quite a lot in their opinions about how this problem should be approached.

 

Here is a presentation Marvin gave at the last Fair Conference.  Great presentation.   http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2014-fairmormon-conference/blacks-scriptures

 

I don't think that mormonnewb would be interested in the genesis group. To discuss these issues that he brings up here and bring them up among genesis members, may take the bite out of his opinions. In my neck of the woods his threads would be called

'race baiting'. If true, it would be hard to race bait with members of the genesis group. I dont see this thread as a discussion thread at all between people who are in dialogue. And if I am right, it is unfortunate. One must be open to other opinions for a discussion to be successful.

[thesometimesaint]

There is a separation of church and state and a private business is a private business. Not much any faith can do in such situations. Also this was a long time ago and memory can be a little hazy especially with a teenager.

 

TTBOMK Utah didn't have Jim Crow laws concerning movie theaters.

[Stargazer]

I was with you right up to the very end. I can see conflating ISIS with US Muslims (sort of), but how does one conflate the Soviets with a black girl wanting to go to public school in Arkansas?

There's a name for this particular logical fallacy. I just can't come up with it.

You are confusing goals with methods.

One does not conflate the Soviets with a black girl wanting to go to public school in Arkansas, and neither does Benson. As I have written before, assisting the black girl to go to public school in Arkansas does not NEED an actual association with the Soviets. But when shadowy elements behind a movement are using that movement as a stalking horse to accomplish something sinister that is actually incompatible with the overt goals of the movement, then those shadowy elements must be fought against. And, sorry to say, it will look like there is opposition to the overt goals of the movement, even if those goals are not being opposed.

In "An Enemy Hath Done This" Benson cites two Communist Party (USA) publications in which they explicitly admit to be using the civil rights movement to accomplish the destruction of the US. In American Negro Problems, Communist John Pepper wrote:

 

The Workers (Communist) Party of America must come out openly and unreservedly for the right of national self-determination for the Negroes, but at the same time the Communist Party must state sharply that the realization of this self-determination cannot be secured under the present relations of power under capitalism. National self-determination for the Negro is a bourgeois-democratic demand but it can be realized only in the course of the proletarian revolution. The abolition of the half-feudal, half-slave remnants in the south will also be only “a by-product” (Lenin) of the general proletarian revolution. It would be a major mistake to believe that there can be any other revolution in imperialist America, in the country of the most powerful, most centralized and concentrated industry, than a proletarian revolution.

The Communist Party of America must recognize the right of national self-determination for the Negroes and must respect their own decision about the form of the realization of this self-determination. The Negro Communists should emphasize in their propaganda the establishment of a Negro Soviet Republic.

In plain words, they didn't give a fig about civil rights, except to the extent that it might be possible to use them to lead the United States into a Second Civil War -- because if the Union fought a white South who wished to split the Union into two for the sake of slavery, what makes anyone think that the Union would just peacefully permit a split into two for the sake of anything else?  Lincoln, who opposed slavery on moral grounds, was willing to continue to allow it for the sake of national unity, if push came to shove.  Would a modern Lincoln be willing to allow a Negro Soviet Republic be established?

 

And does it occur to you that in publicizing these intentions and desires, the CPUSA was attempting to convince officials in the US government that the Civil Rights Movement was most explicitly a stalking horse for Communism?  I have no doubt that this was deliberate, for it virtually guaranteed that the CRM would come under strong scrutiny for any hint of disloyalty.  And to take this a shade deeper, what this means is that the communists were feeding both sides of the equation.  They were feeding the government to ensure maximum suspicion, and feeding the movement at the same time, all in order to generate maximum tension.  Couple that with the nutjobs out there in the white sheets, and there we have the perfect formula for maximum public disruption.  Which was entirely the intent.

 

And you think all this would be short-circuited if Benson had only proposed capitalist-based civil rights measures?

[Robert F. Smith]

The way the secret combinations were successfully fought in the BoM was by preaching the Gospel and changing the hearts of the people, so I agree with you in part. But even a secret combination of two people who think they are above it all can cause tremendous sorrow for others who were not the least involved...still I would leave the seeking of such things to professionals who are there to protect the public from criminals and put our effort into supporting them rather than getting into it ourselves because it seems from the conversations I've observed that often those obsessed with such things in order to expose them create their own version of antisocial combination that eats at our communities not in a criminal way, but by destroying the trust and care that binds us together by promoting paranoia, fear and even hate.

There is always a risk when we band together to oppose injustice that bad feelings will come from those who advise us to let well enough alone, or the like.  Still, I think it well worth the risk to see heroes like Morris Dees of the Southern Poverty Law Center go into court like a fabled Perry Mason and obtain heavy judgments against the Klan and against various white supremicists.  The police, prosecutors, and legislators wouldn't do it.  So others who cared enough had to do it, to set things right.  They are the real heroes.  And they are a tremendous threat to the secret combinations out there.

[Bobbieaware]

There's a name for this particular logical fallacy. I just can't come up with it.

You are confusing goals with methods.

One does not conflate the Soviets with a black girl wanting to go to public school in Arkansas, and neither does Benson. As I have written before, assisting the black girl to go to public school in Arkansas does not NEED an actual association with the Soviets. But when shadowy elements behind a movement are using that movement as a stalking horse to accomplish something sinister that is actually incompatible with the overt goals of the movement, then those shadowy elements must be fought against. And, sorry to say, it will look like there is opposition to the overt goals of the movement, even if those goals are not being opposed.

In "An Enemy Hath Done This" Benson cites two Communist Party (USA) publications in which they explicitly admit to be using the civil rights movement to accomplish the destruction of the US. In American Negro Problems, Communist John Pepper wrote:

In plain words, they didn't give a fig about civil rights, except to the extent that it might be possible to use them to lead the United States into a Second Civil War -- because if the Union fought a white South who wished to split the Union into two for the sake of slavery, what makes anyone think that the Union would just peacefully permit a split into two for the sake of anything else? Lincoln, who opposed slavery on moral grounds, was willing to continue to allow it for the sake of national unity, if push came to shove. Would a modern Lincoln be willing to allow a Negro Soviet Republic be established?

And does it occur to you that in publicizing these intentions and desires, the CPUSA was attempting to convince officials in the US government that the Civil Rights Movement was most explicitly a stalking horse for Communism? I have no doubt that this was deliberate, for it virtually guaranteed that the CRM would come under strong scrutiny for any hint of disloyalty. And to take this a shade deeper, what this means is that the communists were feeding both sides of the equation. They were feeding the government to ensure maximum suspicion, and feeding the movement at the same time, all in order to generate maximum tension. Couple that with the nutjobs out there in the white sheets, and there we have the perfect formula for maximum public disruption. Which was entirely the intent.

And you think all this would be short-circuited if Benson had only proposed capitalist-based civil rights measures?

Brilliant analysis! This underscores the key difficulty when one tries to defend President Benson. The enemies of conservative government will say, for example, that the opponents of legal abortion are attempting to curtail or outright destroy the freedoms guaranteed to women in the Constitution. Claiming, in effect, that abortion opponents want to enslave women by denying them their unalienable right of freedom of choice. When the argument against legal abortion is framed in this way it becomes difficult, especially in our modern progressive culture, to defend the rights of unborn humans because the opponents of legalized abortion have already widely characterized.and defamed constitutionalists as would -be totalitarians who want to keep women barefoot and pregnant.

So too with ETB's concerns about communist infiltration of the civil rights movement with admitted (by the communists themselves) hidden and sinister goals. In a liberal media culture, who's going to worry about communists in the civil rights leadership, and a supposed hidden agenda, when the widely publicized overt goal of the CRM is the all-important abolishment of unrighteousness racial discrimination? It takes incredible courage to try to expose the full truth under such circumstances.

Edited January 10, 2015 by Bobbieaware

[Robert F. Smith]

I don't think that mormonnewb would be interested in the genesis group. To discuss these issues that he brings up here and bring them up among genesis members, may take the bite out of his opinions. In my neck of the woods his threads would be called

'race baiting'. If true, it would be hard to race bait with members of the genesis group. I dont see this thread as a discussion thread at all between people who are in dialogue. And if I am right, it is unfortunate. One must be open to other opinions for a discussion to be successful.

On the contrary, Newbie would fit right in with the various members of the Genesis group that I have met and listened to.  Indeed, he would find many of his own interests mirrored there, and his own ability to deal with problems amplified by his association with them.

[mormonnewb]

My point was that mormonnewb tends to bring up race in every [emphasis added] thread he starts and makes it known that he is black.... I only say this because of the amount of race threads mormonnewb starts and continues to start to rile up the board.

 

I didn't realize that I created so many race-based threads so I decided to actually look up the last five threads that I started (that is possible, you know).  Other than this one, here are the topics:

 

1)  What are acceptable exit narratives?

2)  Why are we brittle Christians (i.e., leave Christianity altogether when we lose a testimony of the Church)?

3)  Are our prophets really prophets to the world (i.e., speaking on secular matters as well as spiritual ones)?

4)  When do you decide to give your testimony at F&T meeting?

 

Is race really the only issue that I bring up on this board?  If my memory serves me, I have started threads questioning whether we still need the BOM, the desirability of eternal marriage, the WOW, and patriarchal blessings, just to name a few.   Perhaps, YOU best remember my comments on race but as you can see, I can be annoying on a vast number of topics.  It's my thang!

 

But what about the present? It would be wonderful to discuss race relations in the church in the present tense.

 

 

That is EXACTLY what this thread is about -- the Church's PRESENT decision to make 2015 The Year of the Benson.  I'm talking about manual lessons that just started LAST Sunday.  How could I possibly be more current than that?

 

My point wasn't to argue about whether Benson was wrong on the race issue in the 60s (I really didn't think that was up for debate).  My point was to point out that the Church's current obliviousness to how SOME blacks feel about Benson will make it difficult to the attract black American converts in the now, and in the FUTURE.

[saemo]

There is a separation of church and state and a private business is a private business. Not much any faith can do in such situations. Also this was a long time ago and memory can be a little hazy especially with a teenager.

http://historytogo.utah.gov/utah_chapters/utah_today/thecivilrightsmovementinutah.html

 

"In Utah, as in most of the West, African Americans, Native Americans, Latinos, and others suffered formal discrimination, but most anti-minority sentiment appeared more insidiously cloaked in the dressing gown of the protection of private property."

 

"African American entertainers and celebrities who visited Utah had difficulty finding hotel rooms, and Blacks who bought tickets to hear them perform or who went to watch motion pictures found themselves listening and watching from the balconies of concert halls, theaters, and resorts."

[why me]

On the contrary, Newbie would fit right in with the various members of the Genesis group that I have met and listened to.  Indeed, he would find many of his own interests mirrored there, and his own ability to deal with problems amplified by his association with them.

I agree but I don't think that he would be interested because he couldnt play the race card there as he does here. This thread has not been very fruitful because as is usual  lds members need to become defensive against attacks on  ETB and other issues of race. No discussion really happening on this thread or other race threads. Just a game of chess.

 

Lets see if he contacts them. I am sure that they are attempting to help th e black community too. I am tired of the race baiting on these type of threads.

[saemo]

When I was a teen we all used to prefer the mezzanine seating.  All these years that I have not realized it was second class seating.  Ah well one never quits learning.

You  had a choice!

[ERayR]

You  had a choice!

 

Yes and that is a big difference.

[why me]

I didn't realize that I created so many race-based threads so I decided to actually look up the last five threads that I started (that is possible, you know).  Other than this one, here are the topics:

 

1)  What are acceptable exit narratives?

2)  Why are we brittle Christians (i.e., leave Christianity altogether when we lose a testimony of the Church)?

3)  Are our prophets really prophets to the world (i.e., speaking on secular matters as well as spiritual ones)?

4)  When do you decide to give your testimony at F&T meeting?

 

Is race really the only issue that I bring up on this board?  If my memory serves me, I have started threads questioning whether we still need the BOM, the desirability of eternal marriage, the WOW, and patriarchal blessings, just to name a few.   Perhaps, YOU best remember my comments on race but as you can see, I can be annoying on a vast number of topics.  It's my thang!

 

 

 

That is EXACTLY what this thread is about -- the Church's PRESENT decision to make 2015 The Year of the Benson.  I'm talking about manual lessons that just started LAST Sunday.  How could I possibly be more current than that?

 

My point wasn't to argue about whether Benson was wrong on the race issue in the 60s (I really didn't think that was up for debate).  My point was to point out that the Church's current obliviousness to how SOME blacks feel about Benson will make it difficult to the attract black American converts in the now, and in the FUTURE.

Since the lds church is discussing past presidents yearly it  may be tough to ignore ETB. He said much that was good. I don't think that black future converts will mind too much. Hard to find a perfect person from the past or present. Lets just say for argument sake that ETB was racist as were many other past lds people and move on to brighter pastures. That should solve all future discussions about race and lds leaders. You can even bring it up in priesthood. Why not? I see no harm in it at all. Heck, if I felt passionately about it, I would bring it up. I do so in priesthood about somethings that I am passionate about when I attend priesthood every now and then. I have no problem at all. However are current church leaders racist? No, I don't think so.

 

If I were ETBs grandson, this thread would make me very sad because I would know my granddad to be a good man. It would hurt to see members speak of him in this way. My point also. We never think of his family members who may read this board.

Edited January 10, 2015 by why me