A formal apology...

[_Fence Sitter]

Is this a joke? So, years and years later someone needs to give a public apology? Maybe the British need to offer a public apology for subjugating the world and putting millions of people under their yoke, including the Irish peoples. Really, Mary, I am surprised at you. Everybody wants to be a victim these days and the former Mormons are no exception to the rule.

Because obviously Christ's one true church on the earth, that he guides directly through a living prophet, should be held to the same standards as the British government.

[_Chap]

Is this a joke? So, years and years later someone needs to give a public apology? Maybe the British need to offer a public apology for subjugating the world and putting millions of people under their yoke, including the Irish peoples. Really, Mary, I am surprised at you. Everybody wants to be a victim these days and the former Mormons are no exception to the rule.

Because obviously Christ's one true church on the earth, that he guides directly through a living prophet, should be held to the same standards as the British government.

That unsourced quote had to be from whyme.

It has the authentic combination of silliness and an almost desperate willingness to find something, anything, to say on the side of the CoJCoLDS on any topic whatsoever.

Off-topic, but there is a rather good British response I once heard to US based gibes about their imperial past:

"At least when we had finished with our Indians there were more of them that when we started."

[_Mary]

Is this a joke? So, years and years later someone needs to give a public apology? Maybe the British need to offer a public apology for subjugating the world and putting millions of people under their yoke, including the Irish peoples. Really, Mary, I am surprised at you. Everybody wants to be a victim these days and the former Mormons are no exception to the rule.

Why me, I am going to respond to you because we have been friends over the years. This has absolutely nothing to do with being a victim, and I have no idea how you get that from anything I have said as regards Chris's Public Apology.

The trouble is Why me, for better or worse, the church taught me for 20 years plus to be honest in all my dealings with my fellow men and women. How on earth can you expect your people to be honest when the leadership, or whoever issued the public apology cannot be honest with themselves?

Are you saying that reasons for the ban were not taught as doctrine and that people of all races were always welcomed? I know that not to be true. I'm happy to put my name to the amended apology. You are not. That's okay. We don't have to agree.

I never liked the ban, I never thought it was from God. I never understood it, and I am ashamed of that part of church doctrine which so greatly flies in the face of all the knowledge we have on the development of race in general. There were no white people to begin with. We evolved in warm climates with the skin needed to survive in warm/hot weather. We as a race left the warm climates and gradually adapted to the climates that we were able to survive in. That led to the many adaptions we see today in terms of skin colouring, eye colour, eye shape, hair colour and other subtle differences that I am not particularly qualified to speak on, since it isn't my area of speciality or interest.

Over and above that. Hope all is well with you.

[_Mary]

Please could anyone who is willing to sign their name to the amended document send a message to Chris at

rdennisnomenace@aol.com


This is an email set up specifically for this. Chris is happy for the debate over the statement and thinks it is a good thing.. Hopefully, he will register on here today...

Thanks all, both for and against.

Mary

Your friend may like to consider a more up to date (and free) way of gathering signatures for a petition:

Look at this link:

http://www.petitionbuzz.com/

I suspect that by using that he will get a LOT more signatures more quickly than by waiting for people to email him.

Chap, thankyou.. Am passing it on now.

[_SteelHead]

Can you please define who is a black person? It is my understanding that 'black' brazilians had no problems in getting the priesthood.

Your understanding is wrong. In Brazil the missionaries were taught to look for racial characteristics and not teach those of black ancestry. In some cases men who were ordained to the priesthood had that ordination revoked when their black lineage was discovered. As 80% of Brazil is of mixed ancestry it was becoming impossible to find enough local leadership to support the growth of the church.

[_LDSToronto]

Chap, the person who wrote this is from the UK. We still use that term over here as normal.... A cultural difference I think..... have passed the message on....

Then don't use African American but simply Black.

And don't quote the Declaration of Independence.

H.

[_why me]

Because obviously Christ's one true church on the earth, that he guides directly through a living prophet, should be held to the same standards as the British government.

Is this the same god that declared the jews the chosen people at the expense of all others? I think that you will find a god to be pretty racist in the old testament and in the new testament since His son only visited a select group of people to the exclusion of all others.

[_why me]

And don't quote the Declaration of Independence.

H.

The letter was obviously written by someone who just has a vendetta against the LDS church. His letter was obviously flawed.

[_Buffalo]

Because obviously Christ's one true church on the earth, that he guides directly through a living prophet, should be held to the same standards as the British government.

Is this the same god that declared the jews the chosen people at the expense of all others? I think that you will find a god to be pretty racist in the old testament and in the new testament since His son only visited a select group of people to the exclusion of all others.

Non-Jews could convert and become part of the "chosen people."

[_why me]

Your understanding is wrong. In Brazil the missionaries were taught to look for racial characteristics and not teach those of black ancestry. In some cases men who were ordained to the priesthood had that ordination revoked when their black lineage was discovered. As 80% of Brazil is of mixed ancestry it was becoming impossible to find enough local leadership to support the growth of the church.

As I stated it was not a color thing. So which black people should the church apologize to?