Press release.

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/racial-remarks-in-washington-post-article


What a load of complete crap. That guy is only saying what I have heard said dozens of times by LDS leaders.

Feels like he's being thrown under the bus but in the end they only really say that he doesn't speak for the Church. No where did I see anything condemning what he said only that people are taking it as authoritative.

"The Church’s position is clear—we believe all people are God’s children and are equal in His eyes and in the Church. We do not tolerate racism in any form."

It should add......Unless of course you're talking about racism that we attribute to God. The priesthood ban came from God and not the racism of our 19th century leaders, so we're good....

Does this quote sound like it came from the one true church...or from a bunch of lawyers??

"For a time in the Church there was a restriction on the priesthood for male members of African descent. It is not known precisely why, how, or when this restriction began in the Church but what is clear is that it ended decades ago. Some have attempted to explain the reason for this restriction but these attempts should be viewed as speculation and opinion, not doctrine. The Church is not bound by speculation or opinions given with limited understanding."

They acknowledge it. They don't know why, though they are the ONLY church with a prophet...but they don't came out and say that that early practice was just plain wrong...It's wrong NOW to them but not back then. They don't know why nor do they want to find out..

For a person on the outside with critical thinking skills....that doesn't sound to inspiring to me

"We Mormons for over a century and a half, had no idea why we did what we did. We blame all our disgusting doctrines on God. But we NEVER say any of the racist policies that were supported by so many past prophets were wrong, we instead say that it's in the past--like Mountain Meadows."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/29/2012 09:15PM by baura.

"It is not known precisely why, how, or when this restriction began in the Church but what is clear is that it ended decades ago."

The one true church doesn't know why it does what it does? What kind of leadership is this? We made a decision, don't know why, but we did.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/29/2012 09:23PM by Strykary.

Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 02/29/2012 05:13PM by steve benson.

Exactly, Steve. Brigham Young's statements about mixed race couples needing to be murdered immediately in the name of god are indefensible. The Brigham Young University carries his name and is the most revered prophet in LDS history, second only to Joe the Perv.

Strange that, according to the press release, no one in the church knows why the doctrine change occured ... but we've been taught our whole lives the who, where, when, how, why but suddenly there's a dearth of knowledge.

The NAACP was threatening litigation. The IRS was considering pulling the tax exemption status. The LDS church was FORCED to make the change in 1978 and the old school leaders are still pissed about it.

like:

Jeffrey Nielsen
Kendall Wilcox
Steven Jones
David Knowlton
Cecilia Konchar Farr
Gail Houston
Brian Evanson
Martha Beck

and then the axe will fall.

The article refers to "decades" and they don't know why...Pffffft...let's try as recently as 1979.

The official response is so transparent...
Aaaagh, I want to say to my TBM wife...hey babe are you getting any of this?
I mean, the church really is worse than anti-mormons for discrediting itself.

Right after it says that it tolerated racism for 130 years...it says racism is intolerable!

EVERYONE but themselves can see the "restriction" was bogus all along...but the church says "we don't know why".

You dumbasses, everyone ALREADY knows WHY, because it was bullshit. Only Mormons are forced to look any further for a reason...because YOU DON'T RENOUNCE THE BAN ITSELF...you only renounce the reasons your members make up because you haven't told them it was BULLSHIT!

"For a time in the Church there was a restriction on the priesthood for male members of African descent."

"For a time" is double speak for "For the vast majority of our history"

Randy Bott is nothing more than the fruit of Mormonism. Does the church presume to tell the world that he just pulled these ideas out of his ass? Bott is simply a product of decades of Mormon thinking and doctrine. When you believe in and promote the teachings of a fraudulent criminal, you are abetting said criminal. The church as it stands today is equally guilty of every vile crime and violation of humanity perpetrated by their beloved founder, Joseph Smith. Deny, justify, and backpedal all you want. The fruit will continue to grow --- very sour fruit indeed.

My TBM friends are all posting the Church's official statement. As if that makes decades of overt racism all okie dokie now, and this guy is just some loon.

canadianfriend Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Randy Bott is nothing more than the fruit of
> Mormonism.

Exactly. This is a case of "it's the "Church" and NOT the "people."

Mormonism has a secret "inside" that is suddenly being exposed to public scrutiny. For over a century the Church has put on one face for the public and another for the members. How many Church leaders would want a zone conference videoed and put on Youtube as proselyting effort? How many missionaries have heard the word, "this is not to be shared with your investigators"?

Recently a poster here mentioned that he was the teacher for the EQ and the EQ president told him to be careful what he taught because there would be an investigator present.

Name ONE other major religious denomination that has a major part of it's worship service that can't even be mentioned? The fact that a husband and wife in the privacy of their own home are forbidden from discussing details of the Endowment shows how totally weird Mormonism is.

Brother Botts' problem was that he let the "inside" explanation get out to the "outside." By the way, his explanation is identical to what my brother, an institute director explained to me in an attempt to show that the Church was never "racist."

My brother is a great guy and not any more racist than he NEEDS to be as a faithful Mormon.

It's the Church that's rotten, not the people. Kudos for putting the blame where it squarely belongs.

"From the days of the Prophet Joseph Smith even until now, it has been the doctrine of the Church, never questioned by Church leaders, that the Negroes are not entitled to the full blessings of the Gospel." (Statement of The First Presidency on the Negro Question, July 17 1947, quoted in Mormonism and the Negro, pp.46-7)

"The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time." (The First Presidency on the Negro Question, August 17, 1949)

"The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the pre-mortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality,
and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the principle itself indicates that the coming to this earth and taking on mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintained their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes.....” (Official Statement of First Presidency, August 17, 1951)

Nice work, oddcouplet. Succinct and accurate.

That aside it pretty much says it all. The First Presidency knew exactly why the ban was in place before 78. Now it's only merely speculation.

Apparently the BYU students are very upset with Bott's comments and may be planning a protest. The only meaningful way to protest this is to resign from the church en masse. Write up your letters, hand them in, and be free. What? They're not that upset? Oh...I see.

I sincerely hope we can get Bro. Bott to speak on the subject of Joseph Smith and polygamy. In the meantime, I will go pop some popcorn . . . .

Agreed.

Other topics for Brother Bott to address:

Subservience of women
Sin of homosexuality
Necessity of polygamy
Abomination of all other religions


Keep that popcorn coming.

They do not tolerate racism except the racism taught in the book of mormon.

you cook popcorn, I smell Trouble.

Seems the argument that blacks are from the the seed of cain doesn't hold up - neither were Egyptians black nor were cananites.
http://www.wheatandtares.org/2011/06/06/using-scriptures-to-debunk-the-priesthood-ban/
Seems the black/cananite/egyption theory doesn't hold up.

The reason they can argue this is because Joseph Smith was sloppy making up the book of Abraham. They strain over his slips and see meaning in tea leaves. The whole thing is myth created by an ancient people justifying why they are in the right to slaughter other cultures.

Mormons will project whatever they need to on their scriptures to justify what they are currently doing. Brig did it because he was a racist. The latest trend is to reverse him because they don't want to be labeled racist. However, as long as mormons keep ”chosen people” in their vernacular and segregate people by patriarchal blessings into tribes, they are racist.

drilldoc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Seems the argument that blacks are from the the
> seed of cain doesn't hold up - neither were
> Egyptians black nor were cananites.
> http://www.wheatandtares.org/2011/06/06/using-scri
> ptures-to-debunk-the-priesthood-ban/
> Seems the black/cananite/egyption theory doesn't
> hold up.

I agree; the Book of Abraham was nonsense, and had holes through it from the start. Allred has exposed fatal contradictions and revealed the fraud, not clarified the scriptures, but he has yet to see that.

Really intelligent people are really good at rationalising crazy beliefs. Smart people spot the contradictions, but are very good at coming up with 'patches' or alternate explanations. Allred has given us a classic example.

He has retro-projected Mormon theology onto the OT Jews, and completely ignored the concept of the Levitical Priesthood and cherry-picked what he needed to support his position. His explanation also calls for complete denial of divine inspiration for Joseph Smith or any prophet (surely a fatal contradiction for the validity of the church as a whole).

This just shows that the Book of Abraham is not scripture, and none of the prophets have been divinely inspired.

Alma Allred, we look forward to seeing you on the board in the future!

So they're throwing Bott under the bus. Maybe this will be the beginning of his disillusionment and he'll join the ranks of prominent mormons speaking out about doctrinal cover-ups. One can only hope.

Bott is so highly ranked among BYU students because he is very good at answering the questions that church leadership won't clearly answer (I was in his mission prep class in 2001).
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705269644/BYU-professor-sits-atop-national-rankings.html
He charismatically provides feel good answers to questioning (and possibly doubting) young minds. He resolves that unsettled worry in the students' guts about church history, and things that just "don't seem right" about the church, so they can sleep well at night knowing they really ARE devoting their lives to Gods true church and not some great fraud. I have high hopes that the critical thinkers of the bunch will see through it.

"Lying for the Lord"

The Mormon Church doesn't know precisely why, how or when this restriction began in the Church . . .?? Wow, that's gotta be one of the best B.S. statements I've ever read! I'm sure they dug deep into their hearts on writing and re-writing that one.

The Mormon Church doesn't know precisely why, how or when this restriction began in the Church....
How offensive must this be to blacks that were denied the PH - the church admits we've had this stance and we don't even know when it started and why. You couldn't make it up.

"The Church’s position is clear—we believe all people are God’s children and are equal in His eyes and in the Church."*

*Only applies to white, straight men.

Don't overlook women who couldn't go thru the Temple prior to 1978...

la la la la la... I can't hear you....

Wait What? Please explain!

I'm sure this will increase the large flow of Black people lining up to join "The Only True Church"!! Deception, deception, deception. You can run but you can't hide. You drilled it all into our heads all those years and think we will forget?

You'll see something similar to this issued by the church PR dept in about 30 years from now:

"The positions attributed to BYU professor Billy Bob in a recent Washington Post article absolutely do not represent the teachings and doctrines of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. BYU faculty members do not speak for the Church. It is unfortunate that the Church was not given a chance to respond to what others said.

The Church’s position is clear—we believe all people are God’s children and are equal in His eyes and in the Church. We do not tolerate homophobia in any form.

For a time in the Church there was a restriction on marriage between same-sex individuals. It is not known precisely why, how, or when this restriction began in the Church but what is clear is that it ended decades ago. Some have attempted to explain the reason for this restriction but these attempts should be viewed as speculation and opinion, not doctrine. The Church is not bound by speculation or opinions given with limited understanding.

We condemn homophobia, including any and all past homophobia by individuals both inside and outside the Church.".