Announcement

Collapse

LDS - Mormonism Guidelines

Theists only.

Look! It's a bird, no it's a plane, no it's a bicycle built for two!

This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to the LDS - Mormons. This forum is generally for theists only, and is generaly not the area for debate between atheists and theists. Non-theists may not post here without first obtaining permission from the moderator of this forum. Granting of such permission is subject to Moderator discretion - and may be revoked if the Moderator feels that the poster is not keeping with the spirit of the World Religions Department.

Due to the sensitive nature of the LDS Temple Ceremonies to our LDS posters, we do not allow posting exact text of the temple rituals, articles describing older versions of the ceremony, or links that provide the same information. However discussion of generalities of the ceremony are not off limits. If in doubt, PM the area mod or an Admin


Non-theists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

The LDS Church and Interracial Marriage.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
    Source: http://www.mormonstudies.net/html/kimball/ir_marriage.html



    President Spencer W. Kimball's Counsel on Interracial Marriage

    Cultural differences pose dangers for marriage. When I said you must teach your people to overcome their prejudices and accept the Indians, I did not mean that you would encourage intermarriage. I mean that they should be brothers, to worship together and to work together and to play together; but we must discourage intermarriage, not because it is sin. I would like to make this very emphatic. A couple has not committed sin if an Indian boy and a white girl are married, or vice versa. It isnít a transgression like the transgressions of which many are guilty. But it is not expedient. Marriage statistics and our general experience convince us that marriage is not easy. It is difficult when all factors are favorable. The divorces increase constantly, even where the spouses have the same general background of race, religion, finances, education, and otherwise.
    The interrace marriage problem is not one of inferiority or superiority. It may be that your son is better educated and may be superior in his culture, and yet it may be on the other hand that she is superior to him. It is a matter of backgrounds. The difficulties and hazards of marriage are greatly increased where backgrounds are different. For a wealthy person to marry a pauper promises difficulties. For an ignoramus to marry one with a doctorís degree promises difficulties, heartaches, misunderstandings, and broken marriages.
    When one considers marriage, it should be an unselfish thing, but there is not much selflessness when two people of different races plan marriage. They must be thinking selfishly of themselves. They certainly are not considering the problems that will beset each other and that will beset their children.
    If your son thinks he loves this girl, he would not want to inflict upon her loneliness and unhappiness; and if he thinks that his affection for her will solve all her problems, he should do some more mature thinking.
    We are unanimous, all of the Brethren, in feeling and recommending that Indians marry Indians, and Mexicans marry Mexicans; the Chinese marry Chinese and the Japanese marry Japanese; that the Caucasians marry the Caucasians, and the Arabs marry Arabs.

    (Spencer W. Kimball, The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, edited by Edward L. Kimball [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1982], 303.)

    © Copyright Original Source



    http://www.mormonstudies.net/html/ki..._marriage.html
    The new Mormon face is to appease the general public. They would like to forget their arch-racist past. Forget that the Book of Mormon still teaches that dark skin is the result of sin (which it does). Now that they are moving into Africa, in their quest to gain more numbers for their membership stats, they have to put on another face - that of tolerance, love for blacks and others with darker skins, etc. It's all really a performance. In our area the hispanics never cease complaining about the discrimination they suffer at the hands of Mormons.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post


      Smith actually seemed open to relationships with blacks, ordaining a few of them to the "priesthood". One of them was Elijah Abel, who also participated in temple ceremonies in Kirtland, Ohio. As the Mormons attempt to deal with their racist past, the official Mormon website claims there was no "church wide policy of segregation".

      The "defense" of their racism is that the Mormon Church was started at a time when racism was quite prevalent - kind of an "everybody's doing it" argument. The problem with that is that the Mormon Church was SUPPOSEDLY restored by God directly through Joseph Smith by the angel Moroni, yet the Mormon Church was no better than, and arguably worse than, other Churches at the time with regards to racism.
      However, Mormon scriptures still proclaim dark skin as a curse.

      (Sorry, Doctrine Matters, I hadn't read your post.)

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
        Source: http://www.mormonstudies.net/html/kimball/ir_marriage.html



        President Spencer W. Kimball's Counsel on Interracial Marriage

        Cultural differences pose dangers for marriage. When I said you must teach your people to overcome their prejudices and accept the Indians, I did not mean that you would encourage intermarriage. I mean that they should be brothers, to worship together and to work together and to play together; but we must discourage intermarriage, not because it is sin. I would like to make this very emphatic. A couple has not committed sin if an Indian boy and a white girl are married, or vice versa. It isnít a transgression like the transgressions of which many are guilty. But it is not expedient. Marriage statistics and our general experience convince us that marriage is not easy. It is difficult when all factors are favorable. The divorces increase constantly, even where the spouses have the same general background of race, religion, finances, education, and otherwise.
        The interrace marriage problem is not one of inferiority or superiority. It may be that your son is better educated and may be superior in his culture, and yet it may be on the other hand that she is superior to him. It is a matter of backgrounds. The difficulties and hazards of marriage are greatly increased where backgrounds are different. For a wealthy person to marry a pauper promises difficulties. For an ignoramus to marry one with a doctorís degree promises difficulties, heartaches, misunderstandings, and broken marriages.
        When one considers marriage, it should be an unselfish thing, but there is not much selflessness when two people of different races plan marriage. They must be thinking selfishly of themselves. They certainly are not considering the problems that will beset each other and that will beset their children.
        If your son thinks he loves this girl, he would not want to inflict upon her loneliness and unhappiness; and if he thinks that his affection for her will solve all her problems, he should do some more mature thinking.
        We are unanimous, all of the Brethren, in feeling and recommending that Indians marry Indians, and Mexicans marry Mexicans; the Chinese marry Chinese and the Japanese marry Japanese; that the Caucasians marry the Caucasians, and the Arabs marry Arabs.

        (Spencer W. Kimball, The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, edited by Edward L. Kimball [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1982], 303.)

        © Copyright Original Source



        http://www.mormonstudies.net/html/ki..._marriage.html
        God made white people white, and black people black. He did not create us differently so that we could intermingle and destroy his divine plan for races. Its no different from a man with a woman. A man is supposed to be with a woman and not with another man. We can not change whether that is right or wrong by attempting to change the ethics behind it.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Apocalypticsights View Post
          God made white people white, and black people black. He did not create us differently so that we could intermingle and destroy his divine plan for races. Its no different from a man with a woman. A man is supposed to be with a woman and not with another man. We can not change whether that is right or wrong by attempting to change the ethics behind it.
          Okay, so you're a racist, an adulterer, and you think you have a "good idea" of when the end times will be? That's quite the combination.

          How can you possibly see a man being with a man, or a woman being with a woman as on par with a white man being with a black woman, or vice versa? These things are not connected in any real logical way. Those of different races are all human, and when a man and woman come together are able to produce offspring unless there is a physical defect. This is not true of homosexual relationships, and without some not yet invented medical technique is impossible. It might not be even possible to do so even with major scientific advances. Besides, the "races" are really arbitrary distinctions based on outward appearance.

          Acts 17:26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands.

          Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile*, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

          *This would have encompassed all "races" that people speak about today. Said distinction is meaningless now because of the work of Christ.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
            Okay, so you're a racist, an adulterer, and you think you have a "good idea" of when the end times will be? That's quite the combination.

            How can you possibly see a man being with a man, or a woman being with a woman as on par with a white man being with a black woman, or vice versa? These things are not connected in any real logical way. Those of different races are all human, and when a man and woman come together are able to produce offspring unless there is a physical defect. This is not true of homosexual relationships, and without some not yet invented medical technique is impossible. It might not be even possible to do so even with major scientific advances. Besides, the "races" are really arbitrary distinctions based on outward appearance.

            Acts 17:26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands.

            Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile*, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

            *This would have encompassed all "races" that people speak about today. Said distinction is meaningless now because of the work of Christ.
            By your logic, wouldn't the term "man" and "woman" be arbitrary distinctions? After all, it says "there is neither male and female". Do we take that literally? What about the man and the woman who can not have children due to genetic defect? Are they homosexual and is this a sin in the eyes of the Lord? Is it all about reproducing?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Doctrine Matters View Post
              The new Mormon face is to appease the general public. They would like to forget their arch-racist past. Forget that the Book of Mormon still teaches that dark skin is the result of sin (which it does)
              for now....

              Now that they are moving into Africa, in their quest to gain more numbers for their membership stats, they have to put on another face - that of tolerance, love for blacks and others with darker skins, etc. It's all really a performance. In our area the hispanics never cease complaining about the discrimination they suffer at the hands of Mormons.
              Brigham Young, the supposed prophet, never imagined the Mormons would need the people he so badly disparaged.
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Apocalypticsights View Post
                God made white people white, and black people black. He did not create us differently so that we could intermingle and destroy his divine plan for races. Its no different from a man with a woman. A man is supposed to be with a woman and not with another man. We can not change whether that is right or wrong by attempting to change the ethics behind it.
                SO why did Moses marry a woman from Ethiopia?
                That's what
                - She

                Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                Stephen R. Donaldson

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                  SO why did Moses marry a woman from Ethiopia?
                  What color was Moses and what color was the woman from Ethiopia? Did this have to do with slavery or not?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Apocalypticsights View Post
                    What color was Moses
                    Well, Moses was able to be claimed as an Egyptian, so he would have had olive colored skin. Like this girl:

                    2af4bd043a34eb985e30c20822aab441.jpg

                    While archaeology shows that people from Cush looked like this:





                    Did this have to do with slavery or not?
                    No. Zippora was not a slave.
                    That's what
                    - She

                    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                    - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                    Stephen R. Donaldson

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Apocalypticsights View Post
                      By your logic, wouldn't the term "man" and "woman" be arbitrary distinctions? After all, it says "there is neither male and female". Do we take that literally? What about the man and the woman who can not have children due to genetic defect? Are they homosexual and is this a sin in the eyes of the Lord? Is it all about reproducing?

                      Seriously? These are your questions? The verses in question are about spiritual equality in Christ. The Bible also teaches that all of mankind ultimately comes from Adam, so there is only one real race to begin with, the human race. Jews and Gentiles were mainly separated by religion. Anyone who wanted to could come and be a part of God's covenant. Ruth comes to mind.

                      Procreation is one of the primary purposes of marriage, and what the sex act is designed for. People who have a physical or genetic defect would be different than those who are actually homosexual. Anyone with half a brain can see that.
                      What it's about is God's created order, and since God made all nations from one man, all people on the planet are equally human. God did make man and woman to be physically different, and so that their bodies work together towards the purpose of reproduction. This works regardless of "race", but does not with regards to same sex activities. A genetic defect is different from having the wrong "equipment" entirely. Besides, you can have a genetic defect, and never find out about it(in fact, all of us have some mutations). Only recently is it even possible to find out. It's not something you can just look at the person and see. That's not true in around 99% cases with regards to what sex a person is.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Does that guy think that the different "races" are different species??? How can there be "interracial" children if the "races" are not one species?
                        If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

                        Comment

                        widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                        Working...
                        X