Thank you RandFan. That is really dynamite stuff.
I don't see how anyone can read this, and not question the churches teachings, and the church as a whole?
Even the prophet seems to want to keep his blinders, firmly in place.
I would be curious to get cat's take on "milk before meat".
While I was still a believer two of my chief complaints were suppression of dissent (freedom of conscience means little if you cannot voice your opinion) and lack of informed consent. The policy of "milk before meat" is, IMO, a violation of trust. Forgive me cat for the comparison but that is what con men do. It's also what Scientology and cults do. A lack of transparency is usually a bad sign.
It's also in contradiction to the concept in Judeo-Christian theology of "
winnowing" or "sifting the wheat to separate the chaff". If a person's faith is strong enough to be baptized why is it not strong enough to reveal all?
Many religious sects allow freedom of conscience (open and public criticism) and informed consent. I think that is a good thing. Obviously not everything the prophet says is correct (see Brigham Young). In his book, The Case for Democracy, the former Soviet dissident Natan Sharansky makes the case that freedom of conscience is absolutely crucial to avoid oppression and subjugation. I would argue that Sharansky was right on the mark when it came to racism and segregation in the Mormon Church.
Elder MARK E. PETERSON said:
I think I have read enough to give you an idea of what the Negro is after. He is not just seeking the opportunity of sitting down in a cafe where white people eat. He isn't just trying to ride on the same streetcar or the same Pullman car with white people. It isn't that he just desires to go to the same theater as the white people. From this, and other interviews I have read, it appears that the Negro seeks absorption with the white race. He will not be satisfied until he achieves it by intermarriage. That is his objective and we must face it. We must not allow our feelings to carry us away, nor must we feel so sorry for Negroes that we will open our arms and embrace them with everything we have. Remember the little statement that we used to say about sin, "First we pity, then endure, then embrace"....
Now let's talk about segregation again for a few moments. Was segregation a wrong principle? When the Lord chose the nations to which the spirits were to come, determining that some would be Japanese and some would be Chinese and some Negroes and some Americans, He engaged in an act of segregation....
Now we are generous with the Negro. We are willing that the Negro have the highest education. I would be willing to let every Negro drive a Cadillac if they could afford it.
Was he not merciful preaching from his ivory tower? (that was 1954 BTW)
When I was a believer I often heard such sentiments and I founnd them as odious, presumptuous and condescending to say the least, as I do now. I don't think Peterson meant to be vulgar or obscene but IT IS vulgar and obscene. Certainly far worse than shouting the "F" word in a Mormon temple.
There were many Mormons like me who were against this kind of racism, Mitt Romney's dad for one. But most of us had to be careful not to directly criticize leaders. You could humbly and respectfully disagree but to come out publicly and denounce such words as racist and evil could get you excommunicated.
That bothered me. A lot. If I could overcome every other objection I had against the Church, and that would be a considerable undertaking, I could not affirm my faith in it for those two reasons.
I believe that freedom of conscience is a fundamental human right and that freedom of conscience means little to nothing without freedom of expression. I could understand excommunication for libel or slander but proscriptions for speaking out against hateful and harmful rhetoric I find untenable.
