Obiwan wrote:Most Mormons don't like Obama because his ideology and actions are anathema to the Gospel of Christ. Because yes, he IS a socialist/communist/facsist, etc.
Wow, a communist AND a fascist. A rare animal! :D
I wish he really WERE a socialist. Unfortunately, he's just another capitalist stooge.
What you need to realize is that it's on purpose.... The radicals of the 60's which are now running the country learned that if they want to change this country, they couldn't do it by violence nor being on the fringe. They realized that THEY need to take over the institutions in order to effect their "change", that they have to do it "little by little". They realized they can't directly show who they are too much, otherwise most people would be turned off and they would never be able to destroy this country, and make it low like Cuba or otherwise.
So, you need not fear that they are "capitalist stooges", they are just lying to us and using us for their own immoral and wicked means, using and taking over the institutions for their own purposes, just like Hitler did, Chavez did, and every other dictator. All dictators/liberals know that you can't gain power unless you take over the institutions of power and use their for your own means.
It's sad you follow this stuff.... or just don't really know and understand what you are following.
Obiwan wrote: What you need to realize is that it's on purpose.... The radicals of the 60's which are now running the country learned that if they want to change this country, they couldn't do it by violence nor being on the fringe. They realized that THEY need to take over the institutions in order to effect their "change", that they have to do it "little by little". They realized they can't directly show who they are too much, otherwise most people would be turned off and they would never be able to destroy this country, and make it low like Cuba or otherwise.
So, you need not fear that they are "capitalist stooges", they are just lying to us and using us for their own immoral and wicked means, using and taking over the institutions for their own purposes, just like Hitler did, Chavez did, and every other dictator. All dictators/liberals know that you can't gain power unless you take over the institutions of power and use their for your own means.
It's sad you follow this stuff.... or just don't really know and understand what you are following.
Don't worry, if you wear three layers of tin foil on your head, the double-secret communist infiltrators won't be able to read your thoughts.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
moksha wrote:Okay, the first one is hard so I will give it to you: Wearing a hat indoors.
Can you spot the other two?
Well, prior to 1978, Obama had been less valiant in the pre-existence.
Actually, the teaching was that everyone's place on earth is such for a "reason" per the pre-existence. That teaching is still doctrine. The fact that is was used also for a possible reason for why African Blacks weren't given the priesthood, doesn't mean anything.
Obiwan wrote:Actually, the teaching was that everyone's place on earth is such for a "reason" per the pre-existence. That teaching is still doctrine. The fact that is was used also for a possible reason for why African Blacks weren't given the priesthood, doesn't mean anything.
It does if you're Black.
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.
"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
Obiwan wrote:Actually, the teaching was that everyone's place on earth is such for a "reason" per the pre-existence. That teaching is still doctrine. The fact that is was used also for a possible reason for why African Blacks weren't given the priesthood, doesn't mean anything.
It does if you're Black.
You should be "accurate".... You mean "African lineage".
"Black" never was a disqualifyer to the Priesthood. It was those of African lineage that was banned, not blacks. Plenty blacks of Central/South America, the Islands who were just as black as African blacks and all other colors inbetween WERE given the Priesthood. Even some "whites" were not given the Priesthood or had it taken away per their African lineage.
This idea it was "blacks" the ban applied to is simply another anti-mormon misrepresentative race-bait.
Obiwan wrote:Actually, the teaching was that everyone's place on earth is such for a "reason" per the pre-existence. That teaching is still doctrine. The fact that is was used also for a possible reason for why African Blacks weren't given the priesthood, doesn't mean anything.
It doesn't mean anything that the vast majority of general authorities of the LDS church taught that blacks were less valiant?
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Obiwan wrote: You should be "accurate".... You mean "African lineage".
"Black" never was a disqualifyer to the Priesthood. It was those of African lineage that was banned, not blacks. Plenty blacks of Central/South America, the Islands who were just as black as African blacks and all other colors inbetween WERE given the Priesthood. Even some "whites" were not given the Priesthood or had it taken away per their African lineage.
This idea it was "blacks" the ban applied to is simply another anti-mormon misrepresentative race-bait.
In American English, "blacks" is referring to people of African descent.
It takes balls to accuse other people of race-baiting when you're defending a church that treated an entire ethnicity as second class citizens for most of its history.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Obiwan wrote: You should be "accurate".... You mean "African lineage".
"Black" never was a disqualifyer to the Priesthood. It was those of African lineage that was banned, not blacks. Plenty blacks of Central/South America, the Islands who were just as black as African blacks and all other colors inbetween WERE given the Priesthood. Even some "whites" were not given the Priesthood or had it taken away per their African lineage.
This idea it was "blacks" the ban applied to is simply another anti-mormon misrepresentative race-bait.
The "Blacks" of the West Indies and South America are not of African descent? I hadn't heard that. Where did they come from? They're certainly not Lamanites.
Did the LDS church think Black South Americans were not of African descent despite the use and cultivation of African slaves in the Caribbean and South America since the 1600's? How odd!
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.
"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
Obiwan wrote:Actually, the teaching was that everyone's place on earth is such for a "reason" per the pre-existence. That teaching is still doctrine. The fact that is was used also for a possible reason for why African Blacks weren't given the priesthood, doesn't mean anything.
It doesn't mean anything that the vast majority of general authorities of the LDS church taught that blacks were less valiant?
Teaching that there is a reason why people are where they are including those who are banned from the Priesthood per things in the Pre-mortal life, is not the same as teaching that blacks were less valiant.
Most taught the first, and only some taught the later. The first is true doctrine, the last is false assumption. Thus, it's not accurate to say the "vast majority" taught the later. That's simply not true. As someone who left the Church primarily for this issue, I know what I'm talking about. I've studied the history thoroughly. Your "vast majority" is imaginary in your own mind from over-focusing on PART of history, the most negative part. It is not based on true history which includes ALL views and comments on the issue.
