USA Today on Mormons, Mitt, and Racism

[pellegrino]

My thinking on this--and I do research the media--is not that hard news shows are going to suddenly go tabloid and drag the temple ceremony through the mud. Rather, I expect that some special interest groups will pick up certain parts of the ceremony that will help them push their agenda.

I could see women's rights groups, in particular, taking an interest and trying to push coverage of a story or two. Such stories could have significant political importance, and so they could have airtime on hard news shows.

agreed, and the church won't respond in any way.

[scottie]

I could be wrong, but I thought that was dropped at about the time of the Reed Smoot hearings.

I hope so. What was it that was dropped in the late 80s?

[jay santos]

I hope so. What was it that dropped in the late 80s?

The depictions of how you would be killed if you disclosed the secret information in the ceremony.

[pellegrino]

I hope so. What was it that was dropped in the late 80s?

creepy minister, disembowelment signs and punishments for those who break their covenants.

[scottie]

The depictions of how you would be killed if you disclosed the secret information in the ceremony.

Ha, okay -- my bad for posting what I did.

[pellegrino]

Ha, okay -- my bad for posting what I did.

great, now the media's going to read that and run with it.

[Omaha 680]

If George Bush can be elected while being a part of the skull and bones society then Romney doesn't have to worry.

Romney can just claim he never heard any of the objectionable stuff when he was at church. It has worked in past campaigns.

[UtahDan]

I agree. BY said so much on the subject, and JS so little, it was probably natural just to run with faith that BY had it right. Too bad they ran with it 100+ years, without (apparently) questioning it...

I would say it had a lot to do with this:

Moses 7:7-8, 21-22

7 And the Lord said unto me: Prophesy; and I prophesied, saying: Behold the people of Canaan, which are numerous, shall go forth in battle array against the people of Shum, and shall slay them that they shall utterly be destroyed; and the people of Canaan shall divide themselves in the land, and the land shall be barren and unfruitful, and none other people shall dwell there but the people of Canaan;

8 For behold, the Lord shall acurse the land with much heat, and the barrenness thereof shall go forth forever; and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people.

21 And it came to pass that the Lord showed unto Enoch all the inhabitants of the earth; and he beheld, and lo, Zion, in process of time, was btaken up into heaven. And the Lord said unto Enoch: Behold mine abode forever.

22 And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them.

As well the fact that the Book of Mormon teaches the idea of dark skin being the mark of a heavenly curse. In the end, that is what makes an apology so hard. You don't just have to say your leaders are wrong, you have to say your canon is wrong.

[pellegrino]

I would say it had a lot to do with this:



As well the fact that the Book of Mormon teaches the idea of dark skin being the mark of a heavenly curse. In the end, that is what makes an apology so hard. You don't just have to say your leaders are wrong, you have to say your canon is wrong.

yeah, and that's bound to be a problem when half of your canon was written in the 19th century.

[Jeff Lebowski]

As well the fact that the Book of Mormon teaches the idea of dark skin being the mark of a heavenly curse. In the end, that is what makes an apology so hard. You don't just have to say your leaders are wrong, you have to say your canon is wrong.

IIRC, there used to be a section in the D&C indicating that polygamy was an abomination and would never be allowed. It was added in response to rumors that the church was secretly practicing polygamy. Then once the church went public with polygamy it was promptly removed. Would be a lot tougher to change the canon today I suppose.

Anyone know about this?

[SCcoug]

IIRC, there used to be a section in the D&C indicating that polygamy was an abomination and would never be allowed. It was added in response to rumors that the church was secretly practicing polygamy. Then once the church went public with polygamy it was promptly removed. Would be a lot tougher to change the canon today I suppose.

Anyone know about this?

I remember something to that effect.

Per Wikipedia:

In 1876, Section 101 from the 1835 Edition (and subsequent printings) was removed. Section 101 was a Statement on Marriage as adopted by a conference of the church, and contained the following text:

Inasmuch as this Church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication and polygamy, we declare that we believe that one man should have one wife, and one woman but one husband, except in the case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again.

It was superseded by section 132 of the modern LDS edition, which contains a revelation received by Joseph Smith on eternal marriage and teaches the doctrine of plural marriage

[Clark Addison]

This is the first I have heard of this...



Is that documented somewhere?

I am disappointed, however, the author didn't point out that George Romney was a strong supporter for civil rights even after he received a letter on church letter head from the apostle Delbert L. Stapley suggesting he reconsider his position:

http://www.boston.com/news/daily/24/delbert_stapley.pdf

Sorry to bring this up again, but this letter showed up on CB today, so I read through it again, and had a question. In one section Stapley says:

When I reflect upon the Prophet's statements and remember what happened to three of our nation's presidents who were very active in the Negro cause, I am sobered by their demise. They went contrary to the teachings of the prophet Joseph Smith -- Unwittingly, no doubt, but nevertheless, the prophecy of Joseph Smith, "...those who are determined to pursue a course, which shows an opposition, and a feverish restlessness against the decrees of the Lord, will learn, when perhaps it is too late for their own good, that God can do his own work, without the aid of those who are not dictated by His counsel," has and will continue to be fulfilled.

Who are the three presidents he references? My guess for two of them would be Lincoln and Kennedy. Though Kennedy, as President, was not extremelly active in civil rights, he had worked on it while in the senate, and was known, I believe, to be sympathetic to its cause.

If these are two of them, who is the third? Roosevelt? I wouldn't describe him as "very active in the Negro cause", wherever his sympathies may have been. And also, unlike Lincoln and JFK, he was not struck down by an assassin's bullet in the prime of his life. I can't think of anyone else who would be a better fit, though.

There are many cringe-worthy things in that letter, but identifying John Wilkes Booth and Lee Harvey Oswald as fulfilling the purposes of the Lord rank right up there among the worst.

[Flystripper]

[Solon]

It seems like (at least since I've been paying attention as in like the last decade or two), these kind of national stories on Mormonism have all been fairly positive and have not delved very deep into the tough issues.

As the stakes get higher in this election, I predict the gloves come off, and these stories start to get nasty.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/10/religion-race-and-double-standards.html

[pellegrino]

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast....standards.html

especially the last line.