Seriously? Dark skin was a metaphor?

[_Kishkumen]

Yeah, especially with all the reading of morally repugnant fools like Hegal, Foucault, Bartes, Sarte, and the cultural Marxists etc. I do.

I'm doomed.

Nice job at misspelling.

[_Droopy]

Yeah, especially with all the reading of morally repugnant fools like Hegal, Foucault, Bartes, Sarte, and the cultural Marxists etc. I do.

I'm doomed.

Nice job at misspelling.

It certainly was, as I was rushing to the call of a couple of important people needing my attention (wife and grand daughter).

Hegel, Foucault, Barthes, Sartre.

There. Now you can get back to watching Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS between postings.

[_Darth J]

Now you can get back to watching Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS between postings.

You have curiously specific knowledge about these kinds of things.

[_Droopy]

Now you can get back to watching Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS between postings.

You have curiously specific knowledge about these kinds of things.

You can't be a boomer...

[_bcspace]

Racism is not always about theoretical inferiority.

Jews are a lineage. Not a race. Antisemitism is still a form of racism.

Incorrect. Lineage transcends race. Take the Jews in your example. You can trace their lineage to Abraham, but were there any Jews before Abraham (or Jacob if you prefer)? Of course not. Yet we see from LDS doctrine that the ban was from the time of Adam. Therefore, the ban cannot possibly be racist.

[_Morley]

Racism is not always about theoretical inferiority.

Jews are a lineage. Not a race. Antisemitism is still a form of racism.

Incorrect. Lineage transcends race. Take the Jews in your example. You can trace their lineage to Abraham, but were there any Jews before Abraham (or Jacob if you prefer)? Of course not. Yet we see from LDS doctrine that the ban was from the time of Adam. Therefore, the ban cannot possibly be racist.

You are saying the priesthood ban is based on lineage, so it isn't racist. But banning Jews from hotels (based on Hebraic lineage) was racism. Banning based on lineage is racism.

[_Darth J]

Racism is not always about theoretical inferiority.

Jews are a lineage. Not a race. Antisemitism is still a form of racism.

Incorrect. Lineage transcends race. Take the Jews in your example. You can trace their lineage to Abraham, but were there any Jews before Abraham (or Jacob if you prefer)? Of course not. Yet we see from LDS doctrine that the ban was from the time of Adam. Therefore, the ban cannot possibly be racist.

And we see from objective reality that the LDS narrative about Adam and Eve is a hopelessly infantile myth. That being the case, your and Droopy's ongoing claims that discrimination based on race is not racism is a particularly curious example of rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

[_moksha]

What determines lineage apart from genetic inheritance?

The Church used to use racial purity as the deciding factor. If you had "one drop of Negro blood" it would disqualify you from the Priesthood. Even Alabama and Mississippi stopped its discrimination with fractions less than 1/32.

Or could lineage be some artificial factor apart from genetics, like so a person might claiming they had exclusive rights to be priest or ruler and pass that down to their successors?

[_bcspace]

The Church used to use racial purity as the deciding factor. If you had "one drop of Negro blood" it would disqualify you from the Priesthood.

That is correct. But never has "blood" been the reason or cause for the ban.

[_Darth J]

The Church used to use racial purity as the deciding factor. If you had "one drop of Negro blood" it would disqualify you from the Priesthood.

That is correct. But never has "blood" been the reason or cause for the ban.

Right. Just spiritual shortcomings that, coincidentally, were found exclusively in Negroes or people with Negro ancestors.