Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,503,155 times
Reputation: 6671
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur
Of course it's not in the Bible. It's not in The Book of Mormon either. But if you think the idea that it is originated with the Mormons, you've got another think coming. Pretty much every conservative Protestant denomination has, at one time or another, believed that black skin was a curse from God. Google it if you doubt I know what I'm talking about.
To put things in context, the LDS ban on black priests that didn't end until 1978.... it lasted more than a dozen years after public segregation officially ended with the Civil Rights Act in 1964!
And as noted in this article in USA Today, the LDS church has neither formally apologized for the priesthood ban nor ever publicly repudiated many of the theories used to justify it for more than 125 years... a conspicuous silence which still irks many African-Americans, among others.
BTW, everyone makes mistakes, but hard to say which explanation is more insulting... using the tired old "others did it too" excuse, or to just say "whoopsie, sorry about that (despite the fact that we knew it was wrong all this time)"?!
To put things in context, the LDS ban on black priests that didn't end until 1978.... it lasted more than a dozen years after public segregation officially ended with the Civil Rights Act in 1964!
Well, you may disagree with me, but I don't see religious right as being the same thing as civil rights. Whether they abuse the privilege or not, churches do have the right to make policies which discriminate. Even today, there are many Christian churches (including the LDS Church and the Catholic Church) which do not permit woman to serve as priests. Is the right to be a priest a "civil right"? I don't think it is. The fact that the LDS Church banned black men from holding the priesthood was denying them a right and privilege I believe they should have always has. But... the Civil Rights Act did not require churches to modify any policies affecting their members' membership status, etc. Oh, and incidentally, Mormon congregations never were segregated. While it's true that prior to 1978, there were very few black Mormons, those African-Americans who did join the LDS Church attended integrated services (this was true all the way back to the 1830s).
Quote:
And as noted in this article in USA Today, the LDS church has neither formally apologized for the priesthood ban nor ever publicly repudiated many of the theories used to justify it for more than 125 years... a conspicuous silence which still irks many African-Americans, among others.
I couldn't agree more. It irks me as well.
Quote:
BTW, everyone makes mistakes, but hard to say which explanation is more insulting... using the tired old "others did it too" excuse, or to just say "whoopsie, sorry about that (despite the fact that we knew it was wrong all this time)"?!
Sorry you find it insulting, but pointing out that other Christian denominations were guilty of racism was not an "excuse." There was no excuse, in my opinion, for the policy prohibiting black men from holding the priesthood. The only reason I even mentioned the fact that "others did it too," is that, as a Mormon, I find it very tiresome to constantly be reminded of my Church's faults by people who belong to churches that are every bit as guilty as mine. People seem to be aware of the LDS policy against African-Americans; perhaps they need to be made aware that this religious intolerance against Mormons is nothing short of the pot calling the kettle black.
I don't think the danger is blacks (or other liberals for that matter) voting for Romney. The key issue is whether or not people are going to be motivated to vote at all. I'm losing my motivation quickly. I think the whole f*cking political system is broken and am beginning not to give a sh*t. Canada, Scandinavia, and other places around the world are looking better all the time.
To put things in context, the LDS ban on black priests that didn't end until 1978.... it lasted more than a dozen years after public segregation officially ended with the Civil Rights Act in 1964!
And as noted in this article in USA Today, the LDS church has neither formally apologized for the priesthood ban nor ever publicly repudiated many of the theories used to justify it for more than 125 years... a conspicuous silence which still irks many African-Americans, among others.
BTW, everyone makes mistakes, but hard to say which explanation is more insulting... using the tired old "others did it too" excuse, or to just say "whoopsie, sorry about that (despite the fact that we knew it was wrong all this time)"?!
Since the Mormons NOW let dark skin people to be priests; who cares about the past? Things change for bad AND good in life.
I think the issue is "accountability"... or isn't that something conservatives still value anymore ("Dubya who?!"...LOL)?
I think "accountability" is a worthwhile value, but I don't believe Romney should in any way be held "accountable" for his Church's leaders not having issued an apology for a past racist policy.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,503,155 times
Reputation: 6671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur
I think "accountability" is a worthwhile value, but I don't believe Romney should in any way be held "accountable" for his Church's leaders not having issued an apology for a past racist policy.
Agreed. Although IMO it is relevant and not a matter of "Mormon-bashing", to raise questions about a candidate's religion, when unlike any other mainstream religion, it actually places a very high value on the acquisition of wealth and "material prosperity", in fact considering it akin to Godliness?!
Well, you may disagree with me, but I don't see religious right as being the same thing as civil rights. Whether they abuse the privilege or not, churches do have the right to make policies which discriminate. Even today, there are many Christian churches (including the LDS Church and the Catholic Church) which do not permit woman to serve as priests. Is the right to be a priest a "civil right"? I don't think it is. The fact that the LDS Church banned black men from holding the priesthood was denying them a right and privilege I believe they should have always has. But... the Civil Rights Act did not require churches to modify any policies affecting their members' membership status, etc. Oh, and incidentally, Mormon congregations never were segregated. While it's true that prior to 1978, there were very few black Mormons, those African-Americans who did join the LDS Church attended integrated services (this was true all the way back to the 1830s).
I couldn't agree more. It irks me as well.
Sorry you find it insulting, but pointing out that other Christian denominations were guilty of racism was not an "excuse." There was no excuse, in my opinion, for the policy prohibiting black men from holding the priesthood. The only reason I even mentioned the fact that "others did it too," is that, as a Mormon, I find it very tiresome to constantly be reminded of my Church's faults by people who belong to churches that are every bit as guilty as mine. People seem to be aware of the LDS policy against African-Americans; perhaps they need to be made aware that this religious intolerance against Mormons is nothing short of the pot calling the kettle black.
Your right. Most people should not judge LDS policies past or present. Because there are many hypocritical Christians out there. Catholic Church, need i go on.
Most Churches as in everything else, have some good as well as bad points . I find not one is better then another, just that those who belong to a specific Church, feels there's is the best or the right one to belong too.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,503,155 times
Reputation: 6671
Quote:
Originally Posted by california-jewel
Your right. Most people should not judge LDS policies past or present. Because there are many hypocritical Christians out there. Catholic Church, need i go on.
Most Churches as in everything else, have some good as well as bad points . I find not one is better then another, just that those who belong to a specific Church, feels there's is the best or the right one to belong too.
Funny how just pointing to someone else's wrongdoing always seems to be the standard "get out of jail card" these days for Republicans (aka, the party of "personal accountability" and "family values"... LOL)!
"George, did you chop down that cherry tree?" "Why, what difference does it make, Tommie did it too?!"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
