Do you feel like the church "duped" you regarding history?

[MikeWaters]

One of the complaints of the aggrieved, or the non-inoculated, is that they were duped by not having every known of the more controversial aspects of Mormon history.

Whatever that may be. Joseph Smith's polygamy, polyandry, destruction of the printing press, Pearl of Great Price papyrus, etc.

I think we can all agree that no one was taught in primary that Joseph Smith looked into a hat with a seer stone....

My question is this however: what is the church's responsibility in this? How should it change, if at all?

Should there be some kind of change to the basic church curricula. Like primary lessons, Sunday school lessons, priesthood lessons.

What should change in seminary and institute?

Or is the current path the right thing? I think we are experiencing a thaw towards historians. The Joseph Smith Papers project. The recent essay on blacks and the priesthood.

What does an LDS church that has "fully matured" on this issue look like?

I get the impression that some apostates feel like if they could *just* get the message out about controversial things, that many thousands would soon exit the church, and the "house of cards" could come tumbling down.

I think that this is a gross misreading of the church and its members.

With the blacks and priesthood essay, there have been some of us that are mystified by the consternation that many dyed-in-the-wool Mormon conservatives have experienced. Is this the demographic that is most at "risk"?

On the other hand, didn't ute4ever or someone else say that a majority of the members of CUF had apostatized? They're probably on the more liberal side of things.