From: bunner@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Dana A. Bunner)
Subject: LDS Freedom of Thought
Organization:  University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center
Date: 15 OCT 92 22:07:47    

In article <1992Oct15.180513.4744@linus.mitre.org>, zobell@lute.mitre.org (Steve Zobell) writes...

>I am indeed very surprised.  What you are saying is that the J. Smith,
>and the majority of Mormon presidents, have falsely promoted their racial
>hatred of blacks as inspired church doctrine?  

Well I didn't exactly say THAT!  I do not believe that any Mormon presidents
possessed a hatred of blacks.  And the practice of denying the priesthood
to blacks was never based on a canonized revelation.  There are a few
personal journal entries which suggest the originator of the practice was
Joseph Smith but there is little hard evidence.  I believe this was a 
product of the times and people.  Eventually it became a tradition.  
However there are ample statements which support that Mormon leaders were
quite concerned with and loved Blacks.  There were also leaders who 
disagreed with the practice well before it was formally abandoned.  I 
personally believe JS probably leaned against it, based on personal 
statements attributed to him during the last year or so of his life, and
may well have renounced it if he had been placed into a more tolerant
social climate than Missouri and Southern Illinois of the 1830s & 40s.

>I've never heard such a
>thing from a Mormon.  Have you told your Bishop that you've made a
>public statement about this?  He may want to excommunicate you! 

I can only presume you believe this due to having a limited knowledge of
how business is conducted within the LDS church.  For not only can I 
possess this belief and escape excommunication, but I can also still
obtain approval for a temple recommend.  Mormonism does not demand that
I agree 100% with every doctrine, teaching, or practice ever advocated
by Church leaders.  Joseph Smith, when a man was brought before him
on the grounds of teaching false doctrine, once stated:

 "I did not like the old man being called up for erring in doctrine.  
  It looks too much like the Methodist, and not like the Latter-day
  Saints.  Methodist have creeds that a man must believe or he asked
  out of their church.  I want the liberty of thinking and believing
  as I please.  It feels so good not to be trammelled.  It does not
  prove that a man is not a good man because he errs in doctrine."

I can think of very few times in my tenure as a member of the LDS
church of being asked if I believed in a specific doctrine.  And if I
am asked if I fully support and sustain the current practice of granting
the priesthood to Blacks, I will most assuredly answer yes.

>How can we now judge any doctrine of the church?

I'm afraid I'm going to have to leave this one up to you.  I study
them, read relevant scripture and other material, ponder them, and
try to sense the direction of the Spirit.  Others simply accept and 
believe.  I have no surefire answer.

>It's apparent to anyone who critically
>examines the facts that Joe Smith created a religion so he could have
>money (10% tithing)

Now that's an interesting conclusion to reach after some critical study.
The widescale practice of actively encouraging payment of tithing did
not occur until about 10 years after the death of JS.  In fact during the
majority of his 14 years at the head of the LDS church he lived in
small, very modest accomodations such as in other member's homes, above
stores, and in small pioneer homes & log cabins.

>power (ability to speak for God and have unquestioning followers)

They weren't all unquestioning.  As to the power issue, let's just say
the study of Nauvoo local politics is a fascinating aspect of Americana.

>Don't tell me that none better than Smith was available, because he
>could not begin to compare to a man like Gandhi, who sacrificed
>worldly pleasures for his cause and was admired by many of his
>enemies.

Well you might do better by choosing one of Smith's contemporaries for
comparison, but I will not argue the point with you.  For this you will
need an "orthodox" Mormon.

>OK, what else needs to be fixed in the Mormon church?

Most of what needs "fixing" is not doctrinal/institutional but in the
attitudes of the members.  I would like to see less emphasis placed on
materialism by the membership. And I would enjoy more theological
discussion and challenging debate on doctrinal & social issues.  The
early Church was better on both counts ... perhaps we just need some
serious persecution.  Things are too fat and happy in Zion.  Also more
compassion.  On the other hand there are many positive aspects to 
Mormon life, such as emphasis on families, strong sense of community,
a lay ministry, active participation in church leadership roles by
nearly all active members, and programs for youth.  

As to institutional changes, I would like to see broader participation
in leadership councils ... most of which could be accomplished with no
doctrinal changes.

>Religious people often cannot face the uncovered lies in their beliefs
>and will rationalize to recover the lies and protect their precious
>view of existence.  Here Dana has taken the most important step of
>recognizing the lie, but refuses to see that the lie leads to more lies
>and unravels the whole deception.

What an interesting analysis of my inner beliefs.  Can you always do 
this from reading just one short message?  Oh well, I did say I 
was interested in seeing what the reaction would be.

>If you have the time to read the books by Mormon authors in Dana's
>list, as well as like number of books by non-Mormon authors, by all
>means do so (I suggest you start with some non-Mormon authors since
>you've already been exposed to the other viewpoint!).  I don't have
>that much time to devote to every religion on earth!

Actually I posted one book by a non-Mormon and the publication I referenced
, "Dialogue", carries articles by non-Mormons.  Also I do take a little 
issue with your statement that whomever has "already been exposed to the
other [Mormon] viewpoint."  I would estimate the total number of lines
posted here in t.r.m. over the past few weeks would greatly favor the
non-Mormons.  They may need to read a few days worth of
pro-LDS material to even the score.  However since the person in question
may have been in previous contact with LDS missionaries then it may be
closer ... although I suspect they couldn't have covered nearly as much
material as has been posted here.  (assuming anyone is really reading all
of those 300+ line, largely non-original thought, quotation posts.)

Dana
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc