liz3564 wrote:If I had a quarter for every time Yahoo Bot used the word, anonymous, in a post, I would be richer than the last lottery winner.
If I had a penny for every time anonymous mods on this board slammed a TBM, either with a personal insult or an insult to his or her religion, I'd have enough to run my own board with a substantial profit.
Did I slam you? It was a joke, silly.
Wow, for someone who gets testy when I don't accept your brand of humor, you are a little over-sensitive.
Consider the following events that directly proceeded the 1978 revelation:
Under President Jimmy Carter, Brigham Young University and possibly the LDS Church itself was in danger of losing their tax exempt status if they continued to discriminate against blacks. Colleges were boycotting athletic games against BYU. Stanford and San Jose State University both refused to play BYU in any sport because of what they called racism at BYU. The mood in the country at the time was decidedly against the Mormons. newspaper article The Boy Scouts of America was putting a lot of pressure on the Church since only priesthood holders could be boy scout troop leaders in LDS scout troops this was denying black scouts the same opportunities that white scouts had. “A 12-year-old boy scout has been denied a senior patrol leadership in his troop because he is black, Don L. Cope, black ombudsman for the state, said Wednesday.... The ombudsman said Mormon ‘troop policy is that in order to become a patrol leader, he must be a deacon’s quorum president in the LDS church. Since the boy cannot hold the priesthood, he cannot become a patrol leader.” Salt Lake Tribune, July 18, 1974
All circumstantial, right Yahoo Bot?
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
Drifting wrote:All circumstantial, right Yahoo Bot?
Like I say, rejoice in the advancement of God's kingdom to all races, rather than slamming it for making a necessary change.
When Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, it would have been appropriate to slam him for not freeing the blacks in the north at the same time, but it would have been totally bogus to slam him for freeing the blacks in the south. Your trivial arguments -- and you are in good company -- basically slam and mock somebody for righting a wrong. What's wrong with you?
liz3564 wrote: Wow, for someone who gets testy when I don't accept your brand of humor, you are a little over-sensitive.
This thread isn't about me. If you want to have a thread about me, then start one (as you have done, oh so many times in the past, before and after you suspended me for doing nothing more than typing in red font.)
Drifting wrote:All circumstantial, right Yahoo Bot?
Like I say, rejoice in the advancement of God's kingdom to all races, rather than slamming it for making a necessary change.
I do, but I am a bit cross that, because of my association with the Church, I have to accept that I was complicit in racism. That embarrasses me.
However, you are right to point out that the Church has changed and no longer discriminates against anyone because of their race (except within the lesson 'Choosing an Eternal Companion' but that's a different thread).
It only discriminates based on sex and sexuality now...
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
Drifting wrote: I do, but I am a bit cross that, because of my association with the Church, I have to accept that I was complicit in racism. That embarrasses me.
However, you are right to point out that the Church has changed and no longer discriminates against anyone because of their race (except within the lesson 'Choosing an Eternal Companion' but that's a different thread).
It only discriminates based on sex and sexuality now...
I wouldn't affiliate in any respect with a religion that embarrasses me. But, then again, I live in a state where nobody gives a hoot whether or not you go to church, much less the Mormon church.
But, then again a second time, I accept the argument that people are weak, unwilling to take a stand for one's principles, just so that people won't talk about them. Imagine that, being afraid to leave an embarrassing religion over fear that somebody will criticize you for doing so. I wonder if people who leave the Ku Klux Klan over embarrassment with its policies are fearful that people will condemn them for doing so. All sorts of people have spines like jelly, I suppose.
Yahoo Bot wrote:When Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, it would have been appropriate to slam him for not freeing the blacks in the north at the same time, but it would have been totally bogus to slam him for freeing the blacks in the south. Your trivial arguments -- and you are in good company -- basically slam and mock somebody for righting a wrong. What's wrong with you?
You'll of course remember how after Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, successive presidential administrations would issue anonymous press releases declaring that they didn't know why the United States practiced slavery and claiming that none of the Founding Fathers practiced it, and that the United States has never been racist, and that Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the Constitution was never law, while apologists for our country argued that the enslavement of black Africans was not racist.
Darth J wrote:You'll of course remember how after Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, successive presidential administrations would issue anonymous press releases declaring that they didn't know why the United States practiced slavery and claiming that none of the Founding Fathers practiced it, and that the United States has never been racist, and that Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the Constitution was never law, while apologists for our country argued that the enslavement of black Africans was not racist.
No I am not familiar with any of what appears to be bull shite on your part. But you know so little of the meaning of an anonymous statement. A press release issued by an institution is not anonymous.
Yahoo Bot wrote: If I had a penny for every time anonymous mods on this board slammed a TBM, either with a personal insult or an insult to his or her religion, I'd have enough to run my own board with a substantial profit.
Yep, you are right about this. Bias is all over the mods faces, even though their faces are anonymous.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
