Guest Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 8 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Then would you consider it accurate to call all the leaders of the Church and even the Church itself racist until the lifting of the ban in 1978? Because regardless of levels of love or absence of hate, clearly everyone from Joseph Smith on down to 1978 believed in treating the races differently. Yes they did, just as everyone else (well almost everyone else). So they would indeed fit that mold to a large degree, except for President Kimball, and all who followed him.
JLHPROF Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 3 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said: Yes they did, just as everyone else (well almost everyone else). So they would indeed fit that mold to a large degree, except for President Kimball, and all who followed him. Well, in all fairness President Kimball was a member of the quorum for 35 years before the revelation. So for 35 years, I suppose that would make him a racist as well.
Guest Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 36 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Well, in all fairness President Kimball was a member of the quorum for 35 years before the revelation. So for 35 years, I suppose that would make him a racist as well. His son tells of issues he had with for most of his life. But "in all fairness" do Apostles present revelations or do Prophets?
cdowis Posted September 25, 2017 Author Posted September 25, 2017 4 hours ago, Tacenda said: I believe all races are the same when they are born, not some that will rise to be just as everyone else. Yes, I'm sure you do, and I contend that Joseph Smith felt the same way. You are twisting his meaning ==>> virtually all blacks at that time and place were either slaves or servants. He was not addressing free blacks in Africa and elsewhere.
strappinglad Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 I'm not sure what gene gives people the need to separate themselves into " us " and " them ". It happens in sports and politics and other pursuits. If there happens to be a distinctive physical attribute , so much the easier. Barbarians were the ' bearded ones ' as opposed to the clean shaven ones. Most white Westerners are hard pressed to tell the difference between Asian peoples but don't call a Japanese person Chinese by mistake. If one wishes to see racism, read how black children were treated in Vietnam. Access to good nutrition and good schooling will level all races. If deprived of either for generations ,an ' inferior race ' will develop , be that white , black, or in between. The people of Central America were about the same size as the Spanish when they arrived. After years of slavery and disease and malnutrition the average Latin American was inches shorter. It took centuries to get back to where they started. A pernicious form of racism is to tell a people that they cannot take charge of their own lives but need constant intervention and help to survive in the civilized world. That removes faith and hope and leaves just a most basic form of charity.
cdowis Posted September 26, 2017 Author Posted September 26, 2017 3 hours ago, JLHPROF said: Then would you consider it accurate to call all the leaders of the Church and even the Church itself racist until the lifting of the ban in 1978? Because regardless of levels of love or absence of hate, clearly everyone from Joseph Smith on down to 1978 believed in treating the races differently. Is the "church and leaders misogynists for treating women differently than men?
cdowis Posted September 26, 2017 Author Posted September 26, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said: Yes they did, just as everyone else (well almost everyone else). So they would indeed fit that mold to a large degree, except for President Kimball, and all who followed him. Is the church and leaders misogynists for treating women differently than men. even today. No exception. Edited September 26, 2017 by cdowis
Guest Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 17 minutes ago, cdowis said: Is the church and leaders misogynists for treating women differently than men. even today. No exception. No they are not, they are just following scriptural doctrines from Adam to our day.
Atheist Mormon Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 Quote Was Joseph Smith a racist? I don't think he was; what do you think about BY? (I think he was).
Atheist Mormon Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 24 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said: No they are not, they are just following scriptural doctrines from Adam to our day. Is that right?
Guest Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 1 hour ago, Atheist Mormon said: Is that right? Yes, do you have scriptural evidence that suggests otherwise?
carbon dioxide Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 14 hours ago, cdowis said: Elder Hyde inquired the situation of the negro. I replied, they came into the world slaves, mentally and physically. Change their situation with the whites, and they would be like them. They have souls, and are subjects of salvation. Go into Cincinnati or any city, and find an educated negro, who rides in his carriage, and you will see a man who has risen by the powers of his own mind to his exalted state of respectability. The slaves in Washington are more refined than many in high places, and the black boys will take the shine off many of those they brush and wait on. Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith p269 Nothing racist there but just truth. Anyone, regardless of race, are born into slavery are going to be challenged mentally and physically. I can promise you the poor people locked away in those North Korean prison camps are all challenged mentally and physically. The environment people are raised in has a great effect on them of what they do and how they are.
Atheist Mormon Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 1 hour ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said: Yes, do you have scriptural evidence that suggests otherwise? No, exactly.......This is the achilles heel for a religion which wants to make headways in civilized society...And We do not have room for that kinda inequity.
sunstoned Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 6 hours ago, JLHPROF said: Well, in all fairness President Kimball was a member of the quorum for 35 years before the revelation. So for 35 years, I suppose that would make him a racist as well. There were also many people and organizations fighting for equality long before 1978. The pre-civil war underground railroad and the 1968 civil rights act comes to mind. Meanwhile, back in Utah, for over 120 plus years the church was on the wrong side of of this issue on this, and it is an embarrassment. We should acknowledge this, apologize and move on.
sunstoned Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 4 hours ago, cdowis said: Is the "church and leaders misogynists for treating women differently than men? What if a organization, such as a large public company, that treated women like the church does, like baring them from upper management positions. Would you consider that misogyny?
Calm Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 44 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said: Nothing racist there but just truth. "Black boys" isn't racist?
strappinglad Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 20 minutes ago, Calm said: "Black boys" isn't racist? If he had used the ' n ' word , would that have been OK ? I refer to the word negro of course. I remember when it was preferred to call African Americans ' blacks '. Then that changed . I don't know what the PC word was back in the 1800's, but I think I know what the most common words were.
Calm Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 I am not making an accusation in the sense of "how horrible!!!", such language was pretty tame. My grandparents used it. It was however still racist.
thesometimesaint Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Atheist Mormon said: No, exactly.......This is the achilles heel for a religion which wants to make headways in civilized society...And We do not have room for that kinda inequity. No one wants to be treated exactly like everyone else when it is in a negative way. The person in a wheel chair has a legitimate complaint when they can't get over the steps into a public building. Edited September 26, 2017 by thesometimesaint
strappinglad Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 Was it racism when people denigrated the Irish , or the Poles , or the Italians? What race were they? Oh ya, white. And why were they discriminated against? If it wasn't the color of their skin, what could it be? Cultural habits, language , they just were not " us " hence they were given all the dirty jobs , ones that the real Americans didn't want to do. We made jokes about the dumb polacks and bohunks because they weren't as sophisticated or whatever and it made us feel superior. It has always been thus and always be thus until society stops dividing itself . I have never met a black racist. I wonder if they even exist.
thesometimesaint Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 32 minutes ago, strappinglad said: Was it racism when people denigrated the Irish , or the Poles , or the Italians? What race were they? Oh ya, white. And why were they discriminated against? If it wasn't the color of their skin, what could it be? Cultural habits, language , they just were not " us " hence they were given all the dirty jobs , ones that the real Americans didn't want to do. We made jokes about the dumb polacks and bohunks because they weren't as sophisticated or whatever and it made us feel superior. It has always been thus and always be thus until society stops dividing itself . I have never met a black racist. I wonder if they even exist. Concepts of race have changed over the years. Yes they can and do exist. Not an admirable trait in anyone.
cdowis Posted September 26, 2017 Author Posted September 26, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, sunstoned said: What if a organization, such as a large public company, that treated women like the church does, like baring them from upper management positions. Would you consider that misogyny? If a large organization be a nonprofit, and its charter only allowed males in the organization, the rules would apply differently than it were a PUBLIC corporation. Each one is run by different rules. So, in the former, no, in the latter, yes. You might read what Paul said about women and the church == head covered and silent. But that does not apply at all in the Restored Church today. Edited September 26, 2017 by cdowis
cdowis Posted September 26, 2017 Author Posted September 26, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, Calm said: "Black boys" isn't racist? Depends on in which century/era it is used. I suppose that JS should have referred to them as African Americans, in order to meet your strict standard of approval. Edited September 26, 2017 by cdowis
rpn Posted September 26, 2017 Posted September 26, 2017 I have read the other posts. But I want to point out that JS's actions show he was not racist. 1) One of the first missions (to which he sent his brother Samuel, if I recall correctly), was to the indigenous people of North America. 2) When Jane Manning James arrived in Nauvoo as a free black woman, she was unable to get a job. JS took her into his home, and she worked for him. That suggests he was trying to give the signal that others who had excluded her were not doing right by her. 3) He asked her if she wanted to be sealed to him just weeks before his death and she was still thinking about it when he died. (From how she described it, she thought it was just like the other dynastic type sealings that they were doing then, that Wilford Woodruff's 1870 revelation said was a misunderstanding of the sealing ordinance that should link each person to their individual ancestors instead of to someone they thought righteous. (Later after years of asking, and she was sealed (by proxy) to JS, in a category they labelled as servant (after the revelation in 1978, she was also sealed to her husband). 4) JS hired other black people in skilled labor positions. JS ordained (had them ordained) black people to the priesthood, and sent them on missions, where the taught white people as well as black people. Elijah Abel served as bishop of a mostly white and fully integrated ward in Ohio (until BY come through on his way back from a mission and told him he could only be bishop for the black part of the congregation thereafter). (2-4 are described with footnotes of resources in the "Standing on the Promises" trilogy.)
Recommended Posts