Mormon doctrine racist against blacks

[Gman]

I didn't like the idea of a heathen President, which is why I didn't like Romney.

Interesting that Romney became the governor of Massachusetts. With Massachusetts being such a liberal state... Not sure if I understand what was the motive here...

[Enginseer]

Racism is a sign of Stupidity. The inability to think rationally.

I will not follow stupid people, sorry mormons.

[RickD]

Racism is a sign of Stupidity. The inability to think rationally.

I will not follow stupid people, sorry mormons.

I would have to disagree here. Are you saying that there are no intelligent racists? I would say racism is a sign of man being sinful. Do you really think that all Mormons are racist? That would be like saying since Islam teaches terrorism, all Muslims are terrorists.

[Enginseer]

Racism is a sign of Stupidity. The inability to think rationally.

I will not follow stupid people, sorry mormons.

I would have to disagree here. Are you saying that there are no intelligent racists? I would say racism is a sign of man being sinful. Do you really think that all Mormons are racist? That would be like saying since Islam teaches terrorism, all Muslims are terrorists.

All muslims are terrorists balah-akbad!

no just kidding, I just do not see why an intelligent person would deny black people souls? They only differ slightly in gene.

I'm not assuming that all mormons are racists, yet some mormon spiritual leaders tolerate it, if not encourage it. I don't agree with this.

[RickD]

Racism is a sign of Stupidity. The inability to think rationally.

I will not follow stupid people, sorry mormons.

I would have to disagree here. Are you saying that there are no intelligent racists? I would say racism is a sign of man being sinful. Do you really think that all Mormons are racist? That would be like saying since Islam teaches terrorism, all Muslims are terrorists.

All muslims are terrorists balah-akbad!

no just kidding, I just do not see why an intelligent person would deny black people souls? They only differ slightly in gene.

I'm not assuming that all mormons are racists, yet some mormon spiritual leaders tolerate it, if not encourage it. I don't agree with this.

I'm guessing that it's the same reason that intelligent people believe that Jews, or unborn babies are less than human. Imo, a philosophical belief in Darwinian evolution may be one reason why some humans are not fully human in someone's eyes.

[Enginseer]

I'm guessing that it's the same reason that intelligent people believe that Jews, or unborn babies are less than human. Imo, a philosophical belief in Darwinian evolution may be one reason why some humans are not fully human in someone's eyes.

It's a known fact that Atheists have no personal god. They do not believe in any spiritual beings. In this way they believe that morality is simply a human emotion and only exists within our minds.

They understand suffering, and joy. Yet there is no obligation to do 'right' or 'wrong'. Nothing is sacred. Atheists do not hold human life in such high regard compared to religion. In nature the lives of many animals end within an instance. To Atheists life is amazing, but not special, just a orchestra of chemical reactions working in unison.

Personally I have seen horrific images of people dying, in ways even less dignified than what occurs in nature. Unjust suffering exists in this world. So to an Atheist, if the person is completely self-aware, than it deserves human rights.

In regards to myself,

I do not feel sorry for the dead, they do not pity themselves so why should I? I do however feel sorry for his friends and family, who are suffering emotional anguish due to his or her death.

Is an unborn baby as human as you or I? I do not feel sorry for aborted children for the same reason I do not feel sorry for the dead. Unborn babies where never even aware they existed.

Now, I follow no belief blindly which includes Darwinian Evolution. Darwin formulated the building block of the modern theory of evolution, yet much of what he said was incorrect or not fully explained.

The theory has been updated hundreds of times since it's initial hypothesis was released. Just be aware that if someone is not religious, doesn't make them a 'Darwinian'.



As an ultimate response to your original post, Atheists who blindly follow their own faith in there not being a god, are just as bad as Muslim extremists or those who practice human sacrifice or even extremist Christians who murder gays and abortionists. In my eyes, humanity would endure less suffering without these people.

[Gman]

Racism is a sign of Stupidity. The inability to think rationally.

I will not follow stupid people, sorry mormons.

I would have to disagree here. Are you saying that there are no intelligent racists? I would say racism is a sign of man being sinful. Do you really think that all Mormons are racist? That would be like saying since Islam teaches terrorism, all Muslims are terrorists.

All muslims are terrorists balah-akbad!

no just kidding, I just do not see why an intelligent person would deny black people souls? They only differ slightly in gene.

I'm not assuming that all mormons are racists, yet some mormon spiritual leaders tolerate it, if not encourage it. I don't agree with this.

I wouldn't say that if you are a mormon you are a racist or if you are a muslim you are a terrorist, however, I would say that their doctrine is corrupt..

But if we believe in atheism, technically no one has a soul or spirit. It's just all chemical reactions..

[Kurieuo]

Personally I have seen horrific images of people dying, in ways even less dignified than what occurs in nature. Unjust suffering exists in this world. So to an Atheist, if the person is completely self-aware, than it deserves human rights.

I'm not sure I ever want to fall asleep around an Atheist.

[RickD]

Racism is a sign of Stupidity. The inability to think rationally.

I will not follow stupid people, sorry mormons.

I would have to disagree here. Are you saying that there are no intelligent racists? I would say racism is a sign of man being sinful. Do you really think that all Mormons are racist? That would be like saying since Islam teaches terrorism, all Muslims are terrorists.

All muslims are terrorists balah-akbad!

no just kidding, I just do not see why an intelligent person would deny black people souls? They only differ slightly in gene.

I'm not assuming that all mormons are racists, yet some mormon spiritual leaders tolerate it, if not encourage it. I don't agree with this.

I wouldn't say that if you are a mormon you are a racist or if you are a muslim you are a terrorist, however, I would say that their doctrine is corrupt..

But if we believe in atheism, technically no one has a soul or spirit. It's just all chemical reactions..

Gman, one could also make the argument that the muslim or mormon doctrines aren't only corrupt, but evil.

[RickD]

I'm guessing that it's the same reason that intelligent people believe that Jews, or unborn babies are less than human. Imo, a philosophical belief in Darwinian evolution may be one reason why some humans are not fully human in someone's eyes.

It's a known fact that Atheists have no personal god. They do not believe in any spiritual beings. In this way they believe that morality is simply a human emotion and only exists within our minds.

They understand suffering, and joy. Yet there is no obligation to do 'right' or 'wrong'. Nothing is sacred. Atheists do not hold human life in such high regard compared to religion. In nature the lives of many animals end within an instance. To Atheists life is amazing, but not special, just a orchestra of chemical reactions working in unison.

Personally I have seen horrific images of people dying, in ways even less dignified than what occurs in nature. Unjust suffering exists in this world. So to an Atheist, if the person is completely self-aware, than it deserves human rights.

In regards to myself,

I do not feel sorry for the dead, they do not pity themselves so why should I? I do however feel sorry for his friends and family, who are suffering emotional anguish due to his or her death.

Is an unborn baby as human as you or I? I do not feel sorry for aborted children for the same reason I do not feel sorry for the dead. Unborn babies where never even aware they existed.

Now, I follow no belief blindly which includes Darwinian Evolution. Darwin formulated the building block of the modern theory of evolution, yet much of what he said was incorrect or not fully explained.

The theory has been updated hundreds of times since it's initial hypothesis was released. Just be aware that if someone is not religious, doesn't make them a 'Darwinian'.



As an ultimate response to your original post, Atheists who blindly follow their own faith in there not being a god, are just as bad as Muslim extremists or those who practice human sacrifice or even extremist Christians who murder gays and abortionists. In my eyes, humanity would endure less suffering without these people.

Enginseer, As a christian, i believe physical death is not the end of existence, but the beginning of eternity. As far as babies who were aborted, I believe they now exist for eternity as well. To say that they never were aware they existed, would mean that they weren't human. If an unborn baby is not human, what is it? Did you know that fetus means little one?

[Gman]

Gman, one could also make the argument that the muslim or mormon doctrines aren't only corrupt, but evil.

I don't think so amigo... I think that they might think that, but a careful examination would repudiate that.

[RickD]

Gman, one could also make the argument that the muslim or mormon doctrines aren't only corrupt, but evil.

I don't think so amigo... I think that they might think that, but a careful examination would repudiate that.

What do you mean?Who might think that? If the muslim or mormon doctrines don't reconcile with the bible, they are either man-made doctrines or doctrines of demons. If they are in fact doctrines of demons, wouldn't that make them evil?

[Gman]

What do you mean?Who might think that? If the muslim or mormon doctrines don't reconcile with the bible, they are either man-made doctrines or doctrines of demons. If they are in fact doctrines of demons, wouldn't that make them evil?

Oh sorry.. They don't reconcile with the Bible, so they are man made, or evil. Correct. I thought you were claiming something else..

My bad.

[openminded]

I skim daily over MRM's blog, and one of the posters pulls references out like some sort of human Google. Ha.

Anyways, this is relevant to the actual thread

It's a statement by the First Presidency:

August 17, 1949

The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration OF A POLICY but of DIRECT COMMANDMENT from the Lord, on which is founded THE DOCTRINE of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said: “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.”

President Wilford Woodruff made the following statement: “The day will come when all that race will be redeemed and possess all the blessings which we now have.”

The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the Church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintain their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes.

The First Presidency

From the poster who presented this:
"Notice here the First Presidency uses not one scriptural reference in the above Statement, they only quote Brigham Young and Wilford Woodruff. Here are some salient points they make:
1. The Priesthood ban was given by REVELATION, but it is not in the standard works
2. The Priesthood ban is DOCTRINE
3. The Priesthood ban is derived from another DOCTRINE (the war in heaven)
4. The Priesthood ban would stay in effect until 'all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood'
5. The day would come when 'all that race will be redeemed & possess the blessings' all others have."


Furthermore, the poster (grindael) mentions Mr. Mauss:
A Mormon Scholar named Armand L. Mauss wrote an article called: 'The Fading of the Pharaohs' Curse: The Decline and Fall of the Priesthood Ban Against Blacks in the Mormon Church.' Who is Armand L. Mauss? According to Wiki:

“Armand Lind Mauss (born June 5, 1928) is an American sociologist specializing in the sociology of religion. He is professor emeritus of Sociology and Religious Studies at Washington State University, is the most often published sociologist in the twentieth century of works on the Mormons, and is broadly recognized as one of the leading Mormon intellectuals of his generation.”

This guy wrote this in a book on the ban on black priesthood holders:

“There is no known record of any revelation in this dispensation that either denies the priesthood to blacks or ties them to the lineage of the pharaohs. Nor is there any record that the Church had a policy of priesthood denial in the lifetime of Joseph Smith. There is much evidence that the policy developed after Brigham Young took charge of the church. Was that policy established by revelation? We may never know, but it is not necessary to believe so.”

The changing definitions surrounding the black man in Mormon history raise the question, as few other issues have, of just what is authentic doctrine in the Church? That we had an official policy or practice of withholding the priesthood from blacks cannot be denied. The doctrinal rationale supporting that policy, however, is quite a separate matter. Note, in this connection, that the revelation of June 1978 actually changed only the policy and did not address any doctrine at all, except indirectly by overturning a common belief that priesthood for the blacks could come only in the next life. It is against this background that Presidents McKay and Brown and like-minded colleagues seem to have been correct all along (though perhaps beside the point) in considering the priesthood ban a policy and not a doctrine.”

Interesting stuff.

[Gman]

That is interesting openminded.. It seems that whenever they try to put a band-aid on it, it just get's worse.. Like a chameleon changing colors.

I've been reading this topic from the Mormon curtain that really sheds some light on racism in the Mormon church.. You just can't deny it..

Source: http://www.mormoncurtain.com/topic_raci ... b_-2851309

Joseph Smith first president, prophet, and founder of the Mormon Church:

Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species, and put them on a national equalization" (Joseph Fielding Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 270; History of the Church, 5: 218; emphasis added).

"Thursday, 8--Held Mayor's court and tried two negroes for attempting to marry two white women: fined one $25, and the other $5" (ibid., 6: 210).

and the rebellious niggers in the slave states. . . " (Millennial Star, 22:602; emphasis added).

"The deeply-embedded, canonized, scripturally-recorded, presently-accepted and on-the-books roots of Mormon race hate are well known and readily accessible for review. For examples of this skin-based prejudice, as laid out in LDS unholy writ, see:

http://www.truthandgrace.com/Racism.html

http://www.exmormon.org/blacks1.htm

http://www.truthandgrace.com/Racism.html

The basic point to be made here is that abhorrent racist views that linger in so-called "modern" society are no different, either in substance or tone, from the blatant bigotry expressed by Mormon Church leaders toward people of African lineage. When today's Mormons defend the heritage of their Church's leadership as supposedly being comprised of "prophets, seers and revelators" led by God in passing righteous judgment on humankind, they would do well to realize that what they are really rallying behind are the rantings of blatant White separatists, racists and bigots who have sought to give their hateful opinions the white and delightsome sheen of credibility by wrapping them in the cloak of "holy" scripture.

Below are but a few examples of racist ideology that has sounded from the highest pulpits of Mormon Church leadership.

**Mormon Doctrine: Ignorant, Uneducated, Uncultivated, Degraded, Jealous, Angry, Unchaste, Unvirtuous, Criminal, Freed Black Slaves Pose a Mortal Threat to Civilized White Society and, Thus, Must Remain in Divinely-Decreed Slavery--or Be Hung**

--Joseph Smith spewed:

”Dear Sir--[Kirtland] having recently been visited by a gentleman who advocated the principles or doctrines of those who are called abolitionists and his presence having created an interest in that subject, if you deem the following reflections of any service, or think they will have a tendency to correct the opinions of the Southern public . . . you are at liberty to give them publicity . . .

“I fear that the sound might go out, that 'an Abolitionist' had held forth several times to this community . . . all, except a very few, attended to their own vocations, and left the gentleman to hold forth his own arguments to nearly naked walls.

“I am aware that many, who profess to preach the Gospel, complain against their brethren of the same faith who reside in the South and are ready to withdraw the hand of fellowship because they will not renounce the principle of slavery and raise their voice against every thing of the kind. This must be a tender point, and one which should call forth the candid reflections of all men, and more especially before they advance in an opposition calculated to lay waste the fair states of the South and let loose upon the world a community of people who might, peradventure, overrun our country and violate the most sacred principles of human society, chastity and virtue. . . .

“I do not believe that the people of the North have any more right to say that the South shall not hold slaves, than the South have to say the North shall. How any community can ever be excited with the chatter of such persons, boys and others, who are too indolent to obtain their living by honest industry and are incapable of pursuing any occupation of a professional nature, is unaccountable to me; and when I see persons in the free states, signing documents against slavery, it is no less, in my mind, than an army of influence, and a declaration of hostilities against the people of the South.

“What course can sooner divide our Union? After having expressed myself so freely upon this subject, I do not doubt, but those who have been forward in raising their voices against the South will cry out against me as being uncharitable, unfeeling, unkind and wholly unacquainted with the Gospel of Christ. . . . the first mention we have of slavery is found in the Holy Bible . . . And so far from that prediction being averse to the mind of God, it remains as a lasting monument of the decree of Jehovah, to the shame and confusion of all who have cried out against the South, in consequence of their holding the sons of Ham in servitude . . .

“I can say, the curse is not yet taken off from the sons of Canaan, neither will be until it is affected by as great a power as caused it to come; and the people who interfere the least with the purposes of God in this matter, will come under the least condemnation before Him; and 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.”

(Joseph Smith, "History of the Church," vol. 2, pp. 436-438)

--Oliver Cowdery spewed:

”All who are acquainted with the situation of slave States know that the life of every White is in constant danger and to insinuate anything which could possibly be interpreted by a slave--that it was not just to hold human beings in bondage--would be jeopardizing the life of every White inhabitant in the country. For the moment an insurrection should break out, no respect would be paid to age, sex or religion by an enraged, jealous and ignorant Black banditti.

"And the individual who would not immediately report anyone who might be found influencing the minds of slaves with evil would be beneath the slave himself and unworthy the privilege of a free government.”

(Oliver Cowdery, "Outrage in Jackson County," in "Evening and Morning Star," 2, January 1834, p. 122)

--John Taylor spewed:

” . . . I would not talk to him [abolitionist Horace Greeley]; I felt myself superior to such a mean, contemptible cur. I knew he was not after truth, but falsehood. This Greeley is one of their popular characters in the East, and one that supports the stealing of [N-word] and the Underground Railroad . . . [H] e is one of the prominent newspaper editors in the Eastern country and he is a poor, miserable curse.”

(John Taylor, "Journal of Discourses," vol. 5, p. 119)

--Official Mormon publications spewed:

“Where can be the common sense of any wishing to see the slaves of the south set at liberty . . . Such a thing could not take place without corrupting all civil and wholesome society, of both the north and the south! Let the Blacks of the South be free and our community is overrun with paupers and a reckless mass of human beings, uncultivated, untaught and unaccustomed to provide for themselves the necessaries of life— endangering the chastity of every female who might by chance be found in our streets—our prisons filled with convicts, and the hang-man wearied with executing the functions of his office!

“This must unavoidably be the case, every rational man must admit, who has ever traveled in the slave states, or we must open our houses unfold our arms, and bid these degraded and degrading sons of Canaan, a hear[t]y welcome and a free admittance to all we possess! A society of this nature, to us, is so intolerably degrading, that the bare reflection causes our feelings to recoil, and our hearts to revolt. . . . [T]he project of emancipation is destructive to our government and the notion of amalgamation is devilish! — And insensible to feeling must be the heart, and low indeed must be the mind, that would consent for a moment, to see his fair daughter, his sister, or perhaps, his bosom companion, in the embrace of a Negro! . . .”

("Messenger and Advocate," vol. 2, pp. 299-301)

**Mormon Doctrine: Blacks Are a Second-Class Race, Undeserving of Equal Treatment**

Joseph Fielding Smith spewed:

"Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race. . . . Millions of souls have come into this world cursed with a black skin . . . These are the descendants of Cain. Moreover, they have been made to feel their inferiority and have been separated from the rest of mankind from the beginning. Enoch saw the people of Canaan, descendants of Cain, and he says, 'and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people.'"

“There is a reason why one man is born black and with other disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantages. The reason is that we once had an estate before we came here, and were obedient; more or less, to the laws that were given us there.”

(Joseph Fielding Smith, "The Way to Perfection," 1931, pp. 101-102; and Smith, "Doctrines of Salvation," vol. 1, p. 61)

Bruce R. McConkie spewed:

”The Negroes are not equal with other races . . .

“Negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned . . . “

(Bruce R. McConkie, "Mormon Doctrine," 1966 ed., pp. 527-28; and ibid., 1958 ed., p. 477))

**Mormon Doctrine: Blacks Are Animalistic, Sub-Intelligent, Vile, Cursed with Physical Ugliness, Possessing Dishonorable Bodies, Associates of Satan and Rulers Over Satan**

--Brigham Young spewed:

“You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind. The first man that committed the odious crime of killing of one his brethren [Cain] will be cursed the longest of any children of Adam. . . [T]he Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and the black skin.”

(Brigham Young, "Journal of Discourses," vol. 7, 1859 p. 290)

--Orson Hyde spewed:

“At the time the devil was cast out of heaven, there were some spirits that did not know who had authority, whether God or the Devil. They consequently did not take a very active part on either side but, rather, thought the Devil had been abused and considered he had, rather, the best claim to the government.

“These spirits were not considered bad enough to be cast down to hell, and never have bodies; neither were they considered worthy of an honorable body on this earth but it came to pass that Ham, the son of Noah, saw the nakedness of his father while he lay drunk in his tent and he with 'wicked joy,' ran like Rigdon and made the wonderful disclosure to his brethren; while Shem and Japheth took a garment, with pity and compassion, laid it upon their shoulders—went backwards and covered their father . . . “The conduct of the former brought the curse of slavery upon him, while that of the latter secured blessings, jurisdiction, power and dominion . . . Canaan, the son of Ham, received the curse; for Noah wished to place the curse as remote from himself as possible.

“He therefore placed it upon his grandson instead of his son. Now, it would seem cruel to force pure celestial spirits into the world through the lineage of Canaan that had been cursed. This would be ill appropriate, putting the precious and vile together. But those spirits in heaven that rather lent an influence to the Devil, thinking he had a little the best right to govern, but did not take a very active part any way were required to come into the world and take bodies information concerning the doctrine of pre-existence.”

(Orson Hyde, “Is There Reason Then Why the Type of Birth We Receive in This Life Is Not in the Accursed Lineage of Canaan; and Hence the Negro or African Race?” speech delivered before the High Priests' Quorum, Nauvoo, Illinois, 27 April 1845, published in Liverpool, England, p. 30)

--Bruce R. McConkie spewed:

“Though he was a rebel and an associate of Lucifer in the pre-existence and though he was a liar from the beginning whose name was Perdition, Cain managed to attain the privilege of mortal birth. Under Adam's tutelage, he began in this life to serve God. . . . [H]e came out in open rebellion, fought God, worshiped Lucifer and slew Abel. . . .

“As a result of his rebellion, Cain was cursed with a dark skin; he became the father of the Negroes, and those spirits who are not worthy to receive the priesthood are born through his lineage. He became the first mortal to be cursed as a son of perdition. As a result of his mortal birth he is assured of a tangible body of flesh and bones in eternity, a fact which will enable him to rule over Satan.”

(Bruce R. McConkie, "Mormon Doctrine," p. 102)

--Official Mormon Church publications spewed:

“. . . [T]he descendants of Cain cannot cast off their skin of blackness, at once, and immediately, although every soul of them should repent, . . . Cain and his posterity must wear the mark which God put upon them; and his white friends may wash the race of Cain with fuller's soap every day, they cannot wash way God's mark . . . "

("Millennial Star," vol. 14, p. 418)

**Mormon Doctrine: Blacks Are Social Pariahs Who Must Be Kept Separate from White Society in Order to Preserve the Purity of the White Race**

--B.H. Roberts (with a little help from a like-minded White supremacist/separatist) spewed:

”If we sit with Negroes at our tables, if we entertain them as our guests and social equals, if we disregard the color line in all other relations, is it possible to maintain it fixedly in the sexual relation, in the marriage of our sons and daughters, in the propagation of our species? Unquestionably, No! . . . [O]nce the middle wall of social partition [is] broken down, the mingling of tides of life would begin instantly and proceed steadily. . . . As a race, the Southern Caucasian would be irreversibly doomed. For no possible check could be given to this process once established. . . . The moment the bar of absolute separation is thrown down in the south, that moment the bloom of her spirit is blighted forever, the promise of her destiny is annulled, the proud fabric of her future slips into dust and ashes. No other conceivable disaster that might befall the south could, for an instant, compare with such miscegenation within her borders. Flood and fire, fever and famine and the sword-- even ignorance, indolence, and carpet-baggery--she may endure and conquer while her blood remains pure; but once taint the well-spring of her life, and all is lost—even honor itself.”

“But some may deny that the mongrelization of the southern people would . . . corrupt or degrade the southern stock of humanity. If so, then such a one has yet to learn the largest-writ (sic) lessons of history and the most impressive doctrines of biological science. That the Negro is markedly inferior to the Caucasian is proved both craniologically and by six thousand years of planet-wide experimentation."

"Here, then, is laid bare the nerve of the whole matter: Is the South [the southern U.S.] justified in this absolute denial of social equality to the Negro, no matter what his virtues or abilities or accomplishments? We affirm, then, that the South is entirely right in thus keeping open at all times, at all hazards, and at all sacrifices an impassible social chasm between Black and White. This she must do in behalf of her blood, her essence, of the stock of her Caucasian Race.”

(William Benjamin Smith, "The Color Line," as quoted approvingly by B.H. Roberts in his manual, "First Year Book in the Seventy's Course in Theology," 1931, pp. 231-33)

--Mark E. Petersen spewed:

“The discussion on civil rights . . . has drawn some very sharp lines. It has blinded the thinking of some of our own people, I believe. They have allowed their political affiliations to color their thinking to some extent, and then, of course, they have been persuaded by some of the arguments that have been put forth . . .

“We who teach in the Church certainly must have our feet on the ground and not be led astray by the philosophies of men on this subject . . .

“I think I have read enough to give you an idea of what the Negro is after. He is not just seeking the opportunity of sitting down in a cafe where white people eat. He isn't just trying to ride on the same streetcar or the same Pullman car with white people. It isn't that he just desires to go to the same theater as the white people. From this, and other interviews I have read, it appears that the Negro seeks absorption with the White race. He will not be satisfied until he achieves it by intermarriage. That is his objective and we must face it. We must not allow our feeling to carry us away, nor must we feel so sorry for Negroes that we will open our arms and embrace them with everything we have. Remember the little statement that we used to say about sin, 'First we pity, then endure then embrace.' . . .

“Now let's talk segregation . . . for a few moments. Was segregation a wrong principle? When the Lord chose the nations to which the spirits were to come, determining that some would be Japanese and some would be Chinese and some Negroes and some Americans, He engaged in an act of segregation. . . .

“When he told Enoch not to preach the gospel to the descendants of Cain who were black, the Lord engaged in segregation. When He cursed the descendants of Cain as to the Priesthood, He engaged in segregation . . . Who placed the Negroes originally in darkest Africa? Was it some man, or was it God? And when He placed them there, He segregated them . . . The Lord segregated the people both as to blood and place of residence. At least in the cases of the Lamanites and the Negroes we have the definite word of the Lord Himself that He placed a dark skin upon them as a curse—as a punishment and as a sign to all others. He forbade intermarriage with them under threat of extension of the curse. (2 Nephi 5:21) And He certainly segregated the descendants of Cain when He cursed the Negro as to the Priesthood, and drew an absolute line. You may even say He dropped an Iron curtain there. . . .

“Now we are generous with the Negro. We are willing that the Negro have the highest kind of education. I would be willing to let every Negro drive a Cadillac if they could afford it. I would be willing that they have all the advantages they can get out of life in the world but let him enjoy these things among themselves. I think the Lord segregated the Negro and who is man to change that segregation? It reminds me of the scripture on marriage, 'What God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.' Only here we have the reverse of the thing— What God hath separated, let no man bring together again.”

(Mark E. Peterson, “Race Problems as They Affect the Church,” address delivered at the Convention of Teachers of Religion on the College Level, Brigham Young University, 27 August 1954)

Society's Historical Language of Bigotry is Mormonism's Historical Bigoted Theology

It bears keeping in mind that racist venom still unfortunately heard in backwater corners of today's society is merely an echo of the White supremacist mindset of Mormonism's own prophets of prejudice.

Contrary to what LDS Church president Hinckley claimed, long-sanctioned and piously-promoted official Mormon racism is not a "little fleck of history."

It is a firmly-rooted fact. "