Black and Mormon - Page 10 - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

creekster · 01-31-2008, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

How is God imposing "racial restrictions" not racist? I'm not trying to play semantic games here. When you discriminate using race, whether you are David Duke or Elohim, it is racism.

DOn't do it. DOn't start this again. Step away from the edge.

pelagius · 01-31-2008, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

How is God imposing "racial restrictions" not racist? I'm not trying to play semantic games here. When you discriminate using race, whether you are David Duke or Elohim, it is racism.

Okay, well just say that in the first place. To you any answer besides, it was caused by man, is racist because you are uncomfortable with its implications for the character of God. I can respect that position. I think it goes too far, but I respect it.

Jeff Lebowski · 01-31-2008, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pelagius

Second, I don't think it is necessarily racist to use the Gentile example (it depends). Surely, you can think of a way in which that example is used that reveals no racism. I don't think you do any good for your case when you paint with such and indicting and sweeping brush.

Here is the bottom line for me: If you throw out the "descendants of Cain" folklore as the reason behind the ban, there is nothing left to support it. The ban was clearly started by BY and BY specifically and repeatedly used this justification. If this is gone, there is nothing left and any type of explanation regarding the Levites, etc. is defending the indefensible.

pelagius · 01-31-2008, 09:43 PM

MW, I think I just wasted an entire afternoon arguing with you. But it was fun. I think it is the first time I have had a prolonged argument with you and I must say I enjoyed it immensely.

Tex · 01-31-2008, 09:44 PM

Just by way of illustration, the diversity of opinion and disagreement in this thread is evidence for why attracting further attention to the subject via public pronouncement is a bad idea.

IMHO.

K-dog · 01-31-2008, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by creekster

DOn't do it. DOn't start this again. Step away from the edge.

He's right, the only question is whether racism is wrong. If God is racist, is it wrong?

pelagius · 01-31-2008, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Here is the bottom line for me: If you throw out the "descendants of Cain" folklore as the reason behind the ban, there is nothing left to support it. The ban was clearly started by BY and BY specifically and repeatedly used this justification. If this is gone, there is nothing left and any type of explanation regarding the Levites, etc. is defending the indefensible.

Once again. I agree with you Jeff in terms of the cause of the ban. I also agree that the gentile restriction or the levite restriction aren't good counter examples. I just don't think they are necessarily racist. Are they bad explanations, yes. Racist, I am not so sure (other than they are used to explain a racial based division). They are bad because of the reason you outline.

MikeWaters · 01-31-2008, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pelagius

MW, I think I just wasted an entire afternoon arguing with you. But it was fun. I think it is the first time I have had a prolonged argument with you and I must say I enjoyed it immensely.

The rest of you dimwits and pansies take note.

creekster · 01-31-2008, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K-dog

He's right, the only question is whether racism is wrong. If God is racist, is it wrong?

I just meant that we have had this argument many times and it frequently involves a largely pointless debate between people who have in their head that racism includes a component of improper or wrongful intent and other people that think racism is any differentiation based on race (or more narrowly skin color). This debate then tends to go round and round with no one really moving forward because they are talking about different things.

Here, Pelagius deftly seized on this point (and would we expect anything less, Chicago Ph.D and all) and avoided such a mess, but I was afraid that it was about to happen again.

Never mind, back to work for me.

creekster · 01-31-2008, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woot

This isn't a troll, so I apologize if it's comes off poorly.

I know that many of you guys accept science and whatnot, so I'm wondering what the interpretation of Moses 7:22 is in light of our knowledge that humans started with black skin and that we white folk showed up quite a bit later, and only as we migrated out of Africa over the last 50-100,000 years.

If I were to take a stab at it, I suppose that since all of Moses would need to be a metaphor in order to jive with reality that there wouldn't be any particular difficulty with this verse, since it is only a product of the racial views of its time. Is that about right or is there an explanation that would allow it to be viewed as the perfect word of God and not a product of outdated racial prejudices?

My wife's family has several black sheep. None of them are either sheep or black, of course.

01-31-2008, 09:44 PM	#95
Tex Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,596	Just by way of illustration, the diversity of opinion and disagreement in this thread is evidence for why attracting further attention to the subject via public pronouncement is a bad idea. IMHO. __________________ "Have we been commanded not to call a prophet an insular racist? Link?" "And yes, [2010] is a very good year to be a Democrat. Perhaps the best year in decades ..." - Cali Coug "Oh dear, granny, what a long tail our puss has got." - Brigham Young

01-31-2008, 09:43 PM	#94
pelagius Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,431	MW, I think I just wasted an entire afternoon arguing with you. But it was fun. I think it is the first time I have had a prolonged argument with you and I must say I enjoyed it immensely.