Green Oasis

He who will not reason is a bigot; he who cannot is a fool; and he who dares not is a slave.—Sir William Drummond

In 1964, Elder Delbert Stapley of the Quorum of the Twelve wrote a letter to Governor George Romney, father of Mitt Romney, to express concerns about the Governor’s position on the Civil Rights movement of that era. I just read the letter written on official Council of the Twelve letterhead and… Wow!

Just wow!

Elder Stapley felt Governor Romney was too “liberal” on the issue of civil rights for black Americans and not in harmony with the teachings of Joseph Smith. His letter contains brazen threats of divine retribution:

When I reflect upon the Prophet’s statements and remember what happened to three of our nation’s presidents who were very active in the Negro cause, I am sobered by their demise. They went contrary to the teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith—unwittingly, no doubt, but nevertheless, the prophecy of Joseph Smith, “… those who are determined to pursue a course, which shows opposition, and a feverish restlessness against the decrees of the Lord, will learn, when perhaps it is too late for their own good, that God can do His own work, without the aid of those who are not dictated by His counsel,” has and will continue to be fulfilled.

In this respect, let me give you a personal experience. A friend of mine in Arizona—not a Church member—a great champion of the colored race—came to me after my call into the Twelve, and acknowledged President McKay to be a Prophet of God. He wanted me to ask President McKay to inquire of the Lord to see if the Lord would not lift the curse from the colored race and give them the privileges of the Priesthood; therefore, it was the Lord’s responsibility—not man’s—to change His decision. This friend of mine met a very tragic end by drowning. He was a most enthusiastic advocate of the colored cause and went about promoting for them all the privileges, social opportunities, and participation enjoyed by the Whites.

He then tells Governor Romney that the “Negro” must be kept in their place:

It is not right to force any class or race of people upon those of a different social order or race classification. People are happier when placed in the environment and association of like interests, racial instincts, habits, and natural groupings.…

I fully agree the Negro is entitled to considerations, also stated above, but not full social benefits nor inter-marriage privileges with the Whites, nor should the Whites be forced to accept them into restricted White areas.

The following statement needs no further comment:

Now, don’t think I am against the Negro people, because I have several in my employ.

All of this would be less disturbing—and less damning for Mormonism—if Elder Stapley was just one religious bigot, one bad apple in a barrel, except he wasn’t alone. Elder Stapley was well justified by statements of the LDS church and Joseph Smith. He referenced the following passage drawing special attention to the last sentence:

Elder Hyde inquired the situation of the negro. I replied, they came into the world slaves, mentally and physically. Change their situation with the whites, and they would be like them. They have souls, and are subjects of salvation. Go into Cincinnati or any city, and find an educated negro, who rides in his carriage, and you will see a man who has risen by the powers of his own mind to his exalted state of respectability. The slaves in Washington are more refined than many in high places, and the black boys will take the shine off many of those they brush and wait on.

Elder Hyde remarked, “Put them on the level, and they will rise above me.” I replied, if I raised you to be my equal, and then attempted to oppress you, would you not be indignant and try to rise above me, as did Oliver Cowdery, Peter Whitmer, and many others, who said I was a fallen Prophet, and they were capable of leading the people, although I never attempted to oppress them, but had always been lifting them up? Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species, and put them on a national equalization. (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, “Status of the Negro”, pp. 269–70, emphasis added)

He also notes Joseph Smith’s views on slavery (worth reading in full) with emphasis on this paragraph:

Trace the history of the world from this notable event down to this day, and you will find the fulfillment of this singular prophecy. What could have been the design of the Almighty in this singular occurrence is not for me to say; but I can say, the curse is not yet taken off from the sons of Canaan, neither will be until it is affected by as great a power as caused it to come; and the people who interfere the least with the purposes of God in this matter, will come under the least condemnation before Him; and those who are determined to pursue a course, which shows an opposition, and a feverish restlessness against the decrees of the Lord, will learn, when perhaps it is too late for their own good, that God can do His own work, without the aid of those who are not dictated by His counsel. (History of the Church, Volume II, “The Prophet’s Views on Abolition”)

I hadn’t taken the time to look up some of Joseph Smith’s views on the subject until today. I have lost some respect for him. I thought Brigham Young was the true racist culprit, but God’s alleged first prophet of the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times was just as blind to his own racism as was the second prophet.

Elder Stapley encloses a copy of Mormonism and the Negro which says:

Briefly, the LDS policy on Negroes is this: Negroes and others with Negroid blood can become members of the Church, and through righteous works receive patriarchal blessings, enter the temple to perform baptisms for the dead, become heirs to the Celestial kingdom and otherwise partake of many blessings afforded worthy members of the Church, but they cannot be ordained to the Priesthood, nor are they eligible for marriage in an LDS temple; Negroes and Non-Negroes should not intermarry.

Thankfully I can say that I don’t recognize this racist church. This isn’t the Mormon church that I grew up in. It was quite rare when I was a child to meet a black Mormon (and continues to be, Gladys Knight notwithstanding), but I never heard anything so blatantly bigoted in church. I’m happy that the Mormon people have changed their stripes. They deserve kudos for that.

There is just one thing that still bothers me: there has never been an official repudiation and condemnation of the bigoted doctrines of the past. The LDS church, in effect, proclaims that those bigoted teachings regarding people of African descent were according to God’s will. They may protest that they don’t understand, but the doctrines were taught by God’s Prophet and are therefore beyond mortal reproach. They are forced to conclude that these teachings came from a God of love and justice.

Until there is an official condemnation of its racist past, bigotry will taint the heart of Mormonism.

(via Trapped by the Mormons)

I just watched The People vs. Larry Flynt. I don’t have a lengthy review. I just wanted to express my happiness that I can watch and enjoy a film like this.

A couple years ago I would never have watched this movie, at least not while anyone was looking. If I had watched it, I would have been fixated on its sexual content and felt overcome with guilt for having given in to my carnal appetites. I would have agreed that Larry Flynt worked for Satan to entrap the souls of mankind. Now, I can watch it and find goodness in the life of Larry Flynt. I have removed the barriers between me and the beauty inside other people. Ironically, I’m a better follower of Jesus now that I don’t believe in him. I’m willing to lovingly embrace those who are judged the sinners of society. For that, I am grateful.

I’m sorry mom. I went and did what I thought good people were supposed to do, and that meant you were not able to go to see me sealed to my wife. Even today when I hold no faith in the temple ceremonies, I feel sealed to my wife. If God is truly compassionate, then he would not separate people who love each other. If he would, then to hell with him. You missed out on the marriage of your first son, and I wish I could make that decision again. You were there when my dad was less then a good person, and then died. You had to show strength that has always impressed me. You were there when the world seemed rough to me, and I left you out of that important day. I’m sorry. (Gunner)

It hurts to hear these stories of ritual violence which I was deaf to back when I was married. To all those excluded by my decision to marry in an LDS temple, I am sorry. It seemed so simple to me then that I was oblivious to how unjust my hurtful actions were. The irony that I may also face this exclusion by those I love most dearly doesn’t escape me.

I’m starting to like Iran. Not because it’s a great place to live. Not because I like how the government runs things over there. Because they and their president are like a mirror that shows the United States its own hypocrisy. George W. Bush and Ahmadinejad are like two peas in a pod. The only substantive differences? Ahmadinejad is a Muslim fundamentalist and doesn’t have global power on the same scale as Bush.

We think we’re the bastion of freedom and truth. To some extent that’s true, but we’ve gone a long way down the road to tyranny and imperialism. If we don’t think we have been just as guilty of atrocity and injustice as the Iranians, then we’re blind.

In response to Bolliger’s inhospitable introduction of Ahmadinejad after inviting him to speak at his university, seven Iranian chancellors and presidents responded with this open letter. I wish someone in the Bush administration would respond.

Mr. Lee Bollinger
Columbia University President

We, the professors and heads of universities and research institutions in Tehran, hereby announce our displeasure and protest at your impolite remarks prior to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s recent speech at Columbia University.

We would like to inform you that President Ahmadinejad was elected directly by the Iranian people through an enthusiastic two-round poll in which almost all of the country’s political parties and groups participated. To assess the quality and nature of these elections you may refer to US news reports on the poll dated June 2005.

Your insult, in a scholarly atmosphere, to the president of a country with a population of 72 million and a recorded history of 7,000 years of civilization and culture is deeply shameful.

Your comments, filled with hate and disgust, may well have been influenced by extreme pressure from the media, but it is regrettable that media policy-makers can determine the stance a university president adopts in his speech.

Your remarks about our country included unsubstantiated accusations that were the product of guesswork as well as media propaganda. Some of your claims result from misunderstandings that can be clarified through dialogue and further research.

During his speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad answered a number of your questions and those of students. We are prepared to answer any remaining questions in a scientific, open and direct debate.

You asked the president approximately ten questions. Allow us to ask you ten of our own questions in the hope that your response will help clear the atmosphere of misunderstanding and distrust between our two countries and reveal the truth.

1- Why did the US media put you under so much pressure to prevent Mr. Ahmadinejad from delivering his speech at Columbia University? And why have American TV networks been broadcasting hours of news reports insulting our president while refusing to allow him the opportunity to respond? Is this not against the principle of freedom of speech?

2- Why, in 1953, did the US administration overthrow Iran’s national government under Dr Mohammad Mosaddegh and go on to support the Shah’s dictatorship?

3- Why did the US support the blood-thirsty dictator Saddam Hussein during the 1980-88 Iraqi-imposed war on Iran, considering his reckless use of chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers defending their land and even against his own people?

4- Why is the US putting pressure on the government elected by the majority of Palestinians in Gaza instead of officially recognizing it? And why does it oppose Iran’s proposal to resolve the 60-year-old Palestinian issue through a general referendum?

5- Why has the US military failed to find Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden even with all its advanced equipment? How do you justify the old friendship between the Bush and Bin Laden families and their cooperation on oil deals? How can you justify the Bush administration’s efforts to disrupt investigations concerning the September 11 attacks?

6- Why does the US administration support the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) despite the fact that the group has officially and openly accepted the responsibility for numerous deadly bombings and massacres in Iran and Iraq? Why does the US refuse to allow Iran’s current government to act against the MKO’s main base in Iraq?

7- Was the US invasion of Iraq based on international consensus and did international institutions support it? What was the real purpose behind the invasion which has claimed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives? Where are the weapons of mass destruction that the US claimed were being stockpiled in Iraq?

8- Why do America’s closest allies in the Middle East come from extremely undemocratic governments with absolutist monarchical regimes?

9- Why did the US oppose the plan for a Middle East free of unconventional weapons in the recent session of the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors despite the fact the move won the support of all members other than Israel?

10- Why is the US displeased with Iran’s agreement with the IAEA and why does it openly oppose any progress in talks between Iran and the agency to resolve the nuclear issue under international law?

Finally, we would like to express our readiness to invite you and other scientific delegations to our country. A trip to Iran would allow you and your colleagues to speak directly with Iranians from all walks of life including intellectuals and university scholars. You could then assess the realities of Iranian society without media censorship before making judgments about the Iranian nation and government.

You can be assured that Iranians are very polite and hospitable toward their guests.

(Global Research)

Where did America lose its way?