Comments on: General Conference Open Thread

By: rick

rick — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 21:05:12 +0000

I think if we look past what the publications have written, we can see that the actions of the church (and its’ membership) have definitively been racist. Young was just one of the most vocal of these proponents of institutionalized racism.

By: Ray

Ray — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 21:00:44 +0000

“The bigger question is, why do you put some people on pedestals?” The only person I out on a pedestal is the Savior Jesus Christ. I look at others from history and try to evaluate their statements with an open mind.

By: Ray

Ray — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 20:58:09 +0000

Did you read the book about Luke? The Book is titled The Son of Ham meaning Noah’s son Ham(who married a canaanite) I think I am going to take his word for it. (He is black) He states that he never knew of racism from the LDS church or it’s leaders. He goes back to the churches history and talks about the churches teachings. He states that the teachings of the LDS church in history do not segregate blacks and never have. While it is true that the blacks were not able to hold the priesthood, he states the reason for that.

Aside from the instances you mention, which am not disagreeing with or discounting, I am sure that Luke knows what he is talking about.

By: rick

rick — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 19:53:09 +0000

The values have and always will exist.

Jefferson was a racist, as was Hamilton.

Christ was a sexist, if he meant it literally.

The bigger question is, why do you put some people on pedestals?

I don’t care if it wasn’t the way it was done ‘back then’.

Besides, Young (and the church for that matter) held fast to racist viewpoints well after the rest of the western world had begun their enlightenment.

By: Ray

Ray — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 19:51:45 +0000

Rick you are coming across as an anti Mormon (whether in the church or not) who has already made up your mind and nothing that anyone says will ever change your closed mind. You are right and everyone else is wrong!

All I can say is Enjoy your hateful attitude.

By: Ray

Ray — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 19:45:42 +0000

“BY was a bigot. Period.” So What name will you call Christ for calling the Canaanite woman a dog? Same rule same result, unless you think that you can choose and pick who is judged harshly and who is not?

By: Ray

Ray — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 19:42:32 +0000

You are arguing a point that extends to the point that everyone in history has to be held to our values of today. This means that we can tear through the mud all of the names from history that we might have something against. Thomas Jefferson owned slaves, as did Alexander Hamilton. So we can, in spite of their efforts to give us a free government, ruin their names. Once again; they are not to be held to the values they didn’t know of.

Christ died also for those that did not have the law. They are not held responsible for a law they did not have. This is the mercy and love of Christ. Who are we to hold someone to something that Christ has paid the price for.

By: rick

rick — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 19:19:53 +0000

See #29

…and Brigham condemned himself.

By: Ray

Ray — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 19:18:02 +0000

Rick; Perhaps you should read things a bit deeper before you condemn someone?

â€œAnd in 1863 Brigham Young taught, For their abuse of [the Black African] race, the whites will be cursed, unless they repent." (Journal of Discourses, Vol.10, p.110)

By: rick

rick — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 19:17:45 +0000

Since you're so familiar with that page of the Journal of Discourses, you may want to read:

"Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." (Journal of Discourses, Volume 10, page 110.)

or maybe:

"You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable, sad, low in their habits, wild, and seemingly without the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind. The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be and the Lord put a mark on him, which is the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race â€” that they would be the 'servant of servants;' and they will be, until that curse is removed; and the Abolitionists cannot help it, nor in the least alter that decree." (Journal of Discourses, Volume 7, pages 290 291)

BY's position is quite clear.