DiscussMormonism.com

zeezrom wrote:I spent a week as a guest among the Makah people, vacationing on their land in the northwest corner of the U.S. I visited their museum, studied a little about their heritage, art, and ingenuity. Let me summarize by saying I'm amazed at what they accomplished. While thinking about how these people survived and thrived, I began to consider a series of rhetorical questions about themes found in the Book of Mormon.

One theme in the Book of Mormon is centered on how racial and socio-economic aspects of a population are intrinsically connected to religious beliefs and relative moral views of said population. We find definitions in the following chapters:

Skin color (or symbolic socio-economic level)
1 Nephi 12
Alma 3
Mormon 5

Naked and loin cloths:
Enos 1:20
Mosiah 10:8
Alma 43:20

Level of technology:
Helaman 3:5-16

Level of civility:
Helaman 3:16

I have offered a few references but there are many more. It is quite obvious that the author(s) of this book held severe prejudices against the Native people of the American continent. I'm very sorry to admit that I at one time empathized with the themes of this book because I believed it. What a relief to learn about the fathers of this nation without the fog of Mormon belief to obscure my view.

Here are my rhetorical questions. These are intended to be criticisms of a book that many claim to contain unique and inspiring words. My criticism is that the unique contributions of the Book of Mormon are damaging in general, narrow minded, and naïve. In other words, a person might be better off avoiding the book than not.

Questions:
1. Did the dark skin of the Makah come from the poor religious choices made by Laman and Lemuel and sons?
2. Why do the Makah people resemble those of Asian descent?
3. In the 19th century, many Makah were wiped out by desease introduced by white settlers. These settlers were Christian, not pagan, were expert in commerce and farming. Was God involved in the suffering inflicted by these modern Christians?
4. The Makah people were experts in their art, craft, and hunting skills. Given their resources, do we presume they were cursed because they were not introduced to modern technology early on?
5. Can we ask these questions about all the other Native populations in north and south America?

Skin color (or symbolic socio-economic level)
1 Nephi 12
Alma 3
Mormon 5

Naked and loin cloths:
Enos 1:20
Mosiah 10:8
Alma 43:20

Level of technology:
Helaman 3:5-16

Level of civility:
Helaman 3:16

Here are my rhetorical questions. These are intended to be criticisms of a book that many claim to contain unique and inspiring words. My criticism is that the unique contributions of the Book of Mormon are damaging in general, narrow minded, and naïve. In other words, a person might be better off avoiding the book than not.

Questions:
1. Did the dark skin of the Makah come from the poor religious choices made by Laman and Lemuel and sons?
2. Why do the Makah people resemble those of Asian descent?
3. In the 19th century, many Makah were wiped out by desease introduced by white settlers. These settlers were Christian, not pagan, were expert in commerce and farming. Was God involved in the suffering inflicted by these modern Christians?
4. The Makah people were experts in their art, craft, and hunting skills. Given their resources, do we presume they were cursed because they were not introduced to modern technology early on?
5. Can we ask these questions about all the other Native populations in north and south America?

The Makah ( /məˈkɑː/, from the Klallam name for the tribe, màq̓áʔa)[1] are a Native American people from the northwestern corner of the continental United States in Washington. The Makah tribe lives in and around the town of Neah Bay, Washington, a small fishing village along the Strait of Juan de Fuca where it meets the Pacific Ocean. Their reservation on the northwest tip of the Olympic Peninsula includes Tatoosh Island. The Makah people refer to themselves as "Kwih-dich-chuh-ahtx" (Qʷidiččaʔa•t) which translates as "the people who live by the rocks and seagulls".[1][2] Linguistically and ethnographically, they are closely related to the Nuu-chah-nulth and Ditidaht peoples of the West Coast of Vancouver Island across the Strait of Juan de Fuca in British Columbia.

Haplogroup X is also one of the five haplogroups found in the indigenous peoples of the Americas.[6] Although it occurs only at a frequency of about 3% for the total current indigenous population of the Americas, it is a bigger haplogroup in northern North America, where among the Algonquian peoples it comprises up to 25% of mtDNA types.[7][8] It is also present in lesser percentages to the west and south of this area—among the Sioux (15%), the Nuu-Chah-Nulth (11%–13%), the Navajo (7%), and the Yakama (5%).[9]
Unlike the four main Native American mtDNA haplogroups (A, B, C, D), and the Y-chromosome sub-haplogroup Q1a3a, X is not at all strongly associated with East Asia. The main occurrence of X in Asia discovered so far is in the Altay people in Southwestern Siberia,[10] and detailed examination[4] has shown that the Altaian sequences are all almost identical (haplogroup X2e), suggesting that they arrived in the area probably from the South Caucasus more recently than 5,000 BP.

Most mtDNA studies on Native Americans have concentrated on hypervariable region I (HVI) sequence data. Mitochondrial DNA haplotype data from hypervariable regions I and II (HVI and HVII) have been compiled from Apaches (N=180) and Navajos (N=146). The inclusion of HVII data increases the amount of information that can be obtained from low diversity population groups. Less mtDNA variation was observed in the Apaches and Navajos than in major population groups. The majority of the mtDNA sequences were observed more than once; only 17.8% (32/180) of the Apache sequences and 25.8% of the Navajo sequences were observed once. Most of the haplotypes in Apaches and Navajos fall into the A and B haplogroups. Although a limited number of haplogroups were observed, both sample populations exhibit sufficient variation for forensic mtDNA typing. Genetic diversity was 0.930 in the Apache sample and 0.963 in the Navajo sample. The random match probability was 7.48% in the Apache sample and 4.40% in the Navajo sample. The average number of nucleotide differences between individuals in a database is 9.0 in the Navajo sample and 7.7 in the Apache sample. The data demonstrate that mtDNA sequencing can be informative in forensic cases where Native American population data are used.

Examination of the median joining networks for the canonical mtDNA haplogroups and population trees indicates a history of pervasive genetic exchange across linguistic boundaries. The distribution of mtDNA haplogroups in the Apache and Navajo presents the clearest example. As shown in Fig. 4, the distribution of the canonical Native American mtDNA haplogroups differs markedly between the far North and the Southwest. Notably, mtDNA sequences belonging to haplogroup B are not observed in the northern Na-Dene-attributed populations, and members of haplogroup C occur rarely (Fig. 4). By contrast, mtDNA sequences in Southwestern non-Athabascan speakers are characterized by the predominance of members of haplogroups B and C and the absence of members of haplogroup A. The haplogroup configuration for non-Athabascan speakers in the Southwest is exemplified in the present study by the Pima mtDNA sequences (Fig. 4) and has been established in surveys of haplogroups determined from diagnostic sites in many other Southwestern populations (33, 40). The Navajo and Apache possess many haplogroup A sequences typical of Northwestern populations with languages attributed to the Na Dene language family. However, DNA sequences belonging to haplogroups B and C are also common in the Navajo and Apache, and these are most likely due to immigrants from the local non-Athabascan-speaking populations. The elevated nucleotide diversity in the Navajo and Apache relative to their northern counterparts is the consequence of these haplogroup B and C mtDNA sequences.
Interestingly, the pattern of genetic exchange is not reciprocal. A-group haplotypes would have appeared in the Pima sample if they had absorbed a substantial number of Athabascan-speaking migrants. The pattern of asymmetrical genetic exchanges is all the more interesting given current mate exchange practices. Today, marriage practice in both the Western Apache and Navajo is strongly matrilineal. On this basis, we would not expect to see the inclusion of female lineages introduced from the surrounding non-Athabascan-speaking populations. However, the practice of matrilineality in these populations is likely to have begun after the Navajos and Apaches arrived in the Southwest (31). This practice makes it likely that the haplogroup B and C mtDNA sequences carried in the Navajo and Apache today were introduced early in their experience in the Southwest, and before the current cultural practices were initiated.

I have offered a few references but there are many more. It is quite obvious that the author(s) of this book held severe prejudices against the Native people of the American continent.

bcspace wrote:

I have offered a few references but there are many more. It is quite obvious that the author(s) of this book held severe prejudices against the Native people of the American continent.

Ah the noble savage argument. Were they really that noble? I think not.

Ah the noble savage argument. Were they really that noble? I think not.

Is there an argument?
I don't see anyone posting examples from the Book of Mormon that suggest it's authors were not prejudiced.

bcspace wrote:
I don't see any examples of prejudice so it must be noble savage.

Native American populations show a unique pattern of genetic diversity as a result of different demographic processes—population bottlenecks, founder effects, genetic drift—involved in the colonization of the New World and the posterior European contact and African slave trade (Mulligan et al. 2004; Salas et al. 2004). Presently Mexico is mainly inhabited by two distinct population groups: (1) the so-called ‘Mestizos’, a term used in the country and widely accepted by Mexicans to designate individuals of recent admixed ancestry (although the term is meaningless from a genetic point of view; see comments in Salas et al. (2004)), and (2) the native indigenous Mexican groups defined by their language, cultural traits, ethnicity, oral history and customs as part of their cultural complexity. Despite ‘Mestizos’ representing nearly 95% of the Mexican population (INEGI 2007), the Native American component is highly prevalent in their gene pool. Thus, for instance, the study by Cerda-Flores et al. (2002a) based on short tandem repeats showed the admixed percentage contribution of ‘Mestizo’ Mexicans from northeastern locations as deriving from Spanish (54.99 ± 3.44), Amerindian (39.99 ± 2.57) and African (5.02 ± 2.82). The analysis of the mtDNA in ‘Mestizos’ has shown that their maternal component is an admixture of Native American (89.1%), European (5.4%), and African (4.5%) lineages (Green et al. 2000).
Besides the intrinsic interest of exploring the variability of Native American groups, their analysis is also pivotal to understand the genetic composition of admixed populations in the Americas. Our results show that the majority of the mtDNAs of autochthonous Mexican individuals can be allocated to one of the four most common Native American haplogroups (A2, B2, C1, D1) (Achilli et al. 2008). We did not observe the mtDNA contribution of African and European ancestry, with the exception of one Pima individual who presented a Eurasian lineage that could be attributed to recent gene flow. The haplogroup distribution observed is similar to that found in an ancient Maya population in which haplogroup A2 accounted for most of the samples (84%) followed by C1 (8%) and B2 (4%), although haplogroup D1 was not found (González-Oliver et al. 2001).
It is noteworthy that no traces of haplogroup X2a were observed in our native Mexican populations. In contrast with haplogroups A2 to D1, which have an East Asian origin (Torroni et al. 1993b), haplogroup X has its origins in West Eurasia, and its entrance into the Americas is more controversial. Haplogroup X2a is not present in Central and South Native American populations (Perego et al. 2009) and represents a clade that lacks close relatives in the Old Word, including Siberia (Reidla et al. 2003). Our results point to a geographical limit in Mesoamerica beyond which haplogroup X2a is not found. Fagundes et al. (2008) suggested that this haplogroup was part of the gene pool of a single Native American founding population and its low frequency is probably due to a failed expansion as a result of its geographic location in the expansion wave and/or its low initial frequency. The most recent study of Perego et al. (2009) suggested however that X2a could have moved from Beringia directly into the North American regions located East of the Rocky Mountains; the X2a expansion could have occurred in the Great Plains region, where the terminal part of the glacial corridor ended, and is in complete agreement with both the extent of diversity and distribution of X2a observed in modern Native American populations. The absence of X2a in our samples supports the idea that Mesoamerica played an important role during the colonization of the continent, restricting this haplogroup to the northernmost lands and shaping the diversity of the other founder haplogroups on their way down to Central and South America.