USA Today on Mormons, Mitt, and Racism

[YOhio]

Until LDS titans repudiate it, it's presumptively believed by millions of Mormons. The burden of proof to prove otherwise is on you, counselor.

MODERN REVELATION. The GAs are always right. That's what LDS rank and file purport to believe.

The church disavowed Bott's comment.

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/racial-remarks-in-washington-post-article

[SeattleUte]

The church disavowed Bott's comment.

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/articl...n-post-article

sophystry. they need to say the priesthood ban is racist. They need to say those passages in the BOM are racist. They expect that LDS members won't believe the priesthood ban is racist, that, say, it's like god's original limitation of priesthood to Israelites.

[Jeff Lebowski]

The church disavowed Bott's comment.

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/articl...n-post-article

SU is his own worst enemy. Even when he is legitimately camped out on the moral high ground, he just can't help but lay on the hyperbole so thick that you can't take him seriously.

[TripletDaddy]

I was in error. I was thinking about the final scene in a flashback when Sonny was badmouthing the Japanese and Michael was announcing he was going to war. But it was actually a dinner scene in the first movie when Sonny referenced the policy banks in Harlem and the people buying new Cadillacs with their winnings.

I knew you were in error. Please don't try to add superfluous clarifying detail ex post facto to give the impression that you are actually familiar with the Godfather movies.

[TripletDaddy]

lol you're more culpable because it was volitional. Some of us didn't choose to be Mormon in the first place.

How am I more culpable? I had to join if I wanted to get a stake dance card.

[DU Ute]

Joanna nails it.

[SeattleUte]

Joanna nails it.

No. She's mischaracterizing Sullivan. He isn't necessarily linking the priesthood ban and racist BOM passages. He's citing those passages to show that the priesthood ban was not isolated, that Mormon theology is shot through with racism.

Why does her fine point matter anyway? It's the progmo compulsion, for all JS's other sins, and the racism in the BOM itself, to make sure that a fire wall is built between JS and the priesthood ban. Only progmos care about this fine point.

[Jeff Lebowski]

No. She's mischaracterizing Sullivan. He isn't necessarily linking the priesthood ban and racist BOM passages. He's citing those passages to show that the priesthood ban was not isolated, that Mormon theology is shot through with racism.

Why does her fine point matter anyway? It's the progmo compulsion, for all JS's other sins, and the racism in the BOM itself, to make sure that a fire wall is built between JS and the priesthood ban. Only progmos care about this fine point.

Did you even read the Sullivan piece?

And Joseph Smith's admirable early abolitionism was soon trumped by Brigham Young who took the Book of Mormon seriously:

I think your well-documented jealousy of JB is clouding your judgement.

[Solon]

I love you progmos. But for all eternity your descendants are going to disrespect you for not standing up against, setting yourself apart from this terrible legacy. They are going to say "he was a good man in many ways, but..." This is the kind of thing that defines you for time and all eternity, as long as people care to look you up.

You can't have it both ways, as Sullivan notes. This is another big reason the LDS Church needs to apogize and repudiate this awful past. So many ignorant people would be enlightented, but also so many already enlightened people would be purged of this unfortunate association.

Maybe progressive Mormons are the real fence-sitters.

[SeattleUte]

Maybe progressive Mormons are the real fence-sitters.

Yes, they are weak.

[SeattleUte]

Did you even read the Sullivan piece?



I think your well-documented jealousy of JB is clouding your judgement.

I'm not sure why Joanna even wrote her article since she and Sullivan don't seem to have material disagreement. JS didn't institute the priesthood ban, BY did. They seem to agree on this point. The BOM has racist passages. I don't detect any disagreement. It's undeniably so. No doubt BY's racism came from a confluence of sources, the BOM and the BOA among them. Sullivan is on solid ground claiming this even if it involves a bit of speculation. The sentence you cite is more rhetorical flourish than anything else, however.