https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900083797/guest-opinion-our-moral-conscience-must-repudiate-white-supremacy.html?fbclid=IwAR0z1fDSdYR4zU9hj2HrXb_OO7MB0rVKrnFrM6VEozxHD9x-GyMZgQCx4nw

"Silence from good people allows racist rhetoric and hatred to fester. Inaction from those with influence does, too. Religious people must bring our moral convictions to bear on these matters, and we must do so in public. To be effective in this struggle, believers schooled in Christ’s teachings must reach beyond denominational, cultural and ethnic boundaries. The costs of ambivalence or apathy or distraction are far too high. God’s own vivid, righteous anger at the shedding of innocent blood should urge us on. Who is my neighbor? Who is my enemy? Our voices must speak peace, justice and reconciliation in the midst of this unambiguous national crisis." J. Spencer Fluhman, executive director of the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship at Brigham Young University.

He directs Religious Scholarship at a "University" named after one of the most racist humans who has ever lived and expects anybody to take him seriously when he says "Silence from good people allows racist rhetoric and hatred to fester."

What about the racist rhetoric still cannonized as the word of God in Mormon scriptures that has a racist God cursing white people, over and over again, with black skin when they commit the sin of having been born African or American Indian? And then rewarding people with dark skin by turning their skin white and delightsome, once they repent. That's White Supremacist AF.
In fact, try and name another religion with scriptures more racist than Mormons. Is it any wonder MORmONs voted for a blatant racist more than any other demographic, besides white born again/evangelicals?

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/how-the-faithful-voted-a-preliminary-2016-analysis/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/12/2019 03:44PM by schrodingerscat.

All of the white supremicists I have seen present a good case for bleaching the gene pool.

Your baby is a racist.
https://time.com/67092/baby-racists-survival-strategy/

anybody Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/10
> /new-evidence-that-racism-isnt-natural/263785/

I guess the authors of those two studies ought to get together and reconcile their different conclusions. But concluding, "race is a social construct" is kind of like concluding "continents are a social construct" since they are all connected beneath the oceans.

The author of the study underlying your Time article, Jessica Somerville, disagrees with your conclusion. Thus

'Are babies really racist? No, not really. “Racism connotes hostility,” Sommerville said, “and that’s not what we studied.” “What the study does show is that babies use basic distinctions, including race, to start to “cleave the world apart by groups of what they are and aren’t a part of,” Sommerville said."

So no, the study does not say "Your baby is a racist."



https://www.theblot.com/study-finds-babies-racist-assholes-/

Even though the headline of the article you referenced is: Study Finds: Babies Are Racist Assholes

So editors just make up inflammatory headlines that contradict the conclusions of the studies as click bait? Huh, who knew?

Exactly!

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Exactly!
Huh, alot like asshole strangers on the internet making up inflammatory topic titles that contradict the entire point of the articles they link to? haha,
I love irony.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The author of the study underlying your Time
> article, Jessica Somerville, disagrees with your
> conclusion. Thus
>
> 'Are babies really racist? No, not really.
> “Racism connotes hostility,” Sommerville said,
> “and that’s not what we studied.” “What
> the study does show is that babies use basic
> distinctions, including race, to start to
> “cleave the world apart by groups of what they
> are and aren’t a part of,” Sommerville said."
>
> So no, the study does not say "Your baby is a
> racist."
>
>
>
> https://www.theblot.com/study-finds-babies-racist-
> assholes-/
I took the time to read all three articles and I think I see what they have in common. I think they're all talking about tribalism and the psychology of making others out of them versus us.
We are all naturally afraid of strangers and prefer our own clan to "others".
We are taught to fear strangers and pitty others, who are not in our clan.
No moreso than in Mormonism, where we were all so indoctrinated to pitty "others" we felt a need to go convert them to our ideology that made us "a peculiar people" with "unique" doctrines, that demonize dark skin and glorifies whiteness.
Joseph's Myth is based upon the glorification of Patriarchal, authoritarian white nationalism and belief in a racist God who went around placing curses on people for the sins of their Fathers, contrary to their Articles of Faith and Christ's main commandment to love our fellow men as ourselves.
Uniting a tribe by making "others" out of our fellow men is the exact opposite of Christ's entire message.
Also it seems like both authors make the same false dichotomy, that race is either an ugly, horrible thing or it is completely meaningless.
I don't think it is either.
And they both draw the same faulty conclusion, that we all started out as one race and dispersed out of Africa.
It is only recently that we have been the only sub species of Humans on the Earth. We coexisted with 13 other sub species of humans in Africa and interbred with many of them in Africa, Europe and Asia. That's meaningful, scientifically.
It means we are all hybrids and share more in common with Chimps and Bonobos than they have in common with other apes.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/14/2019 09:23PM by schrodingerscat.

Yes.

The articles indicate that babies prefer people who resemble their parents, which makes almost as much sense as preferring a human adult to a wolf. Clearly there is an evolutionary advantage to identifying the "us" who will care for "me" and avoiding the "them" who have much less interest in helping "me." But that is not the same thing as racism, which doesn't really emerge until the pre-teen and teen years. So babies are not racist.

I agree with what you do here: shifting from race to the us/them dichotomy. That is a more fundamental moral question for humans in general.

Wait, so you’re saying black-white interracial couples and their children should NOT be put to death?

babyloncansuckit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wait, so you’re saying black-white interracial
> couples and their children should NOT be put to
> death?

So that means the executive director of the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship at Brigham Young University is either,

A. going to quit being silent and repudiate Mormonism's racist rhetoric and hatred, which is still canonized as revelation from God

or

B. Concede that is he not a "good person" since he is going to allow the racist rhetoric and hatred to fester in silence.

Comments are suspended for the article at Deseret News. Oh well, I guess I'll just post it here.

The article says "a key to modern racism and white supremacy is the stereotyping and scapegoating of entire groups as enemies to be removed or opposed."

Let me see, God's wrath on an entire group and his spirit with the whites, aiding them in their removal of that enemy group.

1 Nephi 13:14 And it came to pass that I beheld many multitudes of the Gentiles upon the land of promise; and I beheld the wrath of God, that it was upon the seed of my brethren; and they were scattered before the Gentiles and were smitten.

15 And I beheld the Spirit of the Lord, that it was upon the Gentiles, and they did prosper and obtain the land for their inheritance; and I beheld that they were white, and exceedingly fair and beautiful, like unto my people before they were slain.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' moral conscience must repudiate the Book of Mormon. :)

What about all those Cadillacs all those "negroes" were supposed to get ?

So . . . Is the article simply a gigantic very public virtue signal composed so the author might feel cleansed and all goodie-goodie two-shoes about himself?