Mormons arguing that “Mormon” is as derogatory as the N-word

[Equality]

So when this guy hears them introduce the choir at General Conference he thinks to himself they are saying the equivalent of "N-word Tabernacle Choir"? And what about the "Book of N-word"?

Mormons Oneandonlytrueandlivingchurchofjesuschristians are getting weirder by the minute (Hinckley's protestations to Wallace notwithstanding).

The Church has renamed the choir to "The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square."

Are they also going to rename the other testament of Jesus the Book of M-Word?

[drumdude]

Which of his contemporaries in similar positions of power is he decent in comparison with? How does he stack up against, say, Abraham Lincoln? The stakes were even higher for Lincoln and even though he had to carry that “misfortune” it seems to have illuminated his noble character for the world to see.

LOL!!! I say “relatively decent” and you pull out one of the most universally loved and respected presidents (at least, in modern opinion) of the 19th century for comparison? That’s pretty funny.

My point was the huge burden of leading so many people seems not to have caused Lincoln to order mass murders and marry dozens of women. Lincoln could have easily gone further than merely suspending habeas corpus if he had the inclination.

Perhaps men are tested by their circumstances but not led by them, and Brigham’s character really is to blame.

[Kishkumen]

My point was the huge burden of leading so many people seems not to have caused Lincoln to order mass murders and marry dozens of women. Lincoln could have easily gone further than merely suspending habeas corpus if he had the inclination.

Perhaps men are tested by their circumstances but not led by them, and Brigham’s character really is to blame.

The comparison is stupid. I am not arguing that BY was a better person than Lincoln or close to as good as Lincoln. Lincoln was kept in line by the fact that he was an elected leader in a position that was well defined and limited by the Constitution and the laws. Apples to oranges comparisons like these are silly.

[drumdude]

My point was the huge burden of leading so many people seems not to have caused Lincoln to order mass murders and marry dozens of women. Lincoln could have easily gone further than merely suspending habeas corpus if he had the inclination.

Perhaps men are tested by their circumstances but not led by them, and Brigham’s character really is to blame.

The comparison is stupid. I am not arguing that BY was a better person than Lincoln or close to as good as Lincoln. Lincoln was kept in line by the fact that he was an elected leader in a position that was well defined and limited by the Constitution and the laws. Apples to oranges comparisons like these are silly.

Again not the point I was making, but that’s okay

[Moksha]

The thing about stark moral certainty is that it is so easy to arrive there if you cut out everything that complicates things.

Excellent point. If we were given the same power that Brigham enjoyed, could we guarantee we would not abuse it? Who wouldn't put all the Church's money in our own bank account? If we had our own assassins, would we want them to be continuously idle? If we learned of the castration deeds of bishop Snow of Manti, would we not remark that the Church needed more men like him?

[I Have Questions]

I’m not sure I could sit comfortably with using the words “relatively decent” as part of a description for a man who ordered the mass murder and forced enslavement of native Americans. But that’s just me.

If you put it that way . . . .

The thing about stark moral certainty is that it is so easy to arrive there if you cut out everything that complicates things.

I’m unsure as to your basis for labelling Brigham Young “relatively decent”.

Young supported slavery and its expansion into Utah and led the efforts to legalize and regulate slavery in the 1852 Act in Relation to Service, based on his beliefs on slavery.[94][95] Young said in an 1852 speech, "In as much as we believe in the Bible ... we must believe in slavery. This colored race have been subjected to severe curses ... which they have brought upon themselves."[96] Seven years later in 1859, Young stated in an interview with the New York Tribune that he considered slavery a "divine institution ... not to be abolished".[97]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigham_Young

Was racism and slave ownership “relatively decent” behaviour back in the 1800’s?

I’m genuinely interested in what you would see as not “relatively decent” 1800’s behaviour.

[Kishkumen]

Again not the point I was making, but that’s okay

I addressed the point you were making. Sure, I said other stuff, but the fact that their positions were quite different does make a difference in how we assess each person.

[Kishkumen]

Excellent point. If we were given the same power that Brigham enjoyed, could we guarantee we would not abuse it? Who wouldn't put all the Church's money in our own bank account? If we had our own assassins, would we want them to be continuously idle? If we learned of the castration deeds of bishop Snow of Manti, would we not remark that the Church needed more men like him?

I don’t know, Moksha. I mean, heaven knows what YOU would do. I would never find myself in Young’s position in the first place. Thanks for proving that this would inevitably devolve into yet another recapitulation of Brigham’s bad deeds.

I mean, I am often leading the chorus on that one, but I am glad to see we can’t do anything else. At least we’re consistent. Thank goodness for that.

[Kishkumen]

Young supported slavery and its expansion into Utah and led the efforts to legalize and regulate slavery in the 1852 Act in Relation to Service, based on his beliefs on slavery.[94][95] Young said in an 1852 speech, "In as much as we believe in the Bible ... we must believe in slavery. This colored race have been subjected to severe curses ... which they have brought upon themselves."[96] Seven years later in 1859, Young stated in an interview with the New York Tribune that he considered slavery a "divine institution ... not to be abolished".[97]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigham_Young

Was racism and slave ownership “relatively decent” behaviour back in the 1800’s?

I’m genuinely interested in what you would see as not “relatively decent” 1800’s behaviour.

LOL! Relatively decent depends on the full range of behaviors at the time. For example, do you think a relatively decent person can vote for Trump? You see, I do, even though I think Trump is an awful human being and an enemy of democracy. I could never vote for Trump, but I know some people who are lovely in many ways, better than I in some ways, and yet they are voting for a person I truly abhor.

[I Have Questions]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigham_Young

Was racism and slave ownership “relatively decent” behaviour back in the 1800’s?

I’m genuinely interested in what you would see as not “relatively decent” 1800’s behaviour.

LOL! Relatively decent depends on the full range of behaviors at the time. For example, do you think a relatively decent person can vote for Trump? You see, I do, even though I think Trump is an awful human being and an enemy of democracy. I could never vote for Trump, but I know some people who are lovely in many ways, better than I in some ways, and yet they are voting for a person I truly abhor.

I’ll try repeating my question - what would you see as not “relatively decent” 1800’s behaviour?