Talk:Black people and early Mormonism/Archive 3

message: The Mormon extermination order was Missouri's response to the Mormon "Danite" militant activity in the north of the state. Slavery had nothing to do with the issue as the order was not called until three battles were fought between Mormons, excommunicated mormons, and non-Mormon Missourians. These pre-exterminaton order battles included an assassination attempt on the Governor, two Mormon attacks on Missouri cities, and one massacre of Mormons. In none of these exchanges was the issue of Black people raised. The Governor was responding to a militant threat, not a fear of Black "freedom" or the abolition of slavery.
If this Extermination Order is placed within the article again, without evidence to support it, I will remove it. --208.254.174.148 19:21, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We have provided references for this. Please see my additions last week. If you have a problem getting a hold of some of the books, please let me know. Please note that wikipedia is not place to make a point, and continued antagonist activity can result in getting banned. I'm not threatening it, just letting you know that you have continued to revert material that has now been referenced and sourced, with the result beginning to become an edit war. -Visorstuff 17:23, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes there was a lot of activity regarding that. What I recall is that on one side, someone was postulating that the Extermination Order was in response to anti-slavery activities of the Mormons. The response was that although the Mormon memebers were (primarily northerners) anti-Slavery, the Mormon establishment disavowed this position, BEFORE the Missouri Extermination Order was created. In addition, Brigham Young also made it clear that the Mormon church did not at any point or time try to meddle in the affairs of Missouri or in the slavery issue. Also, I remember much being said about the Danite issue, but Visor, you never replied to that. I did read a lot of what you posted, but in the end, it was not linking "Mormon Extermination Order" to "Slavery". What ended up happening was that A Mormon article was written that Missourians had interpreted as an abolition move, the Mormon leadership renounced this position, but OTHER issues (Joseph Smith saying that Mormons were the chosen people, that they would rule the world, the polygamy, the excommunication of Mormons and their oppression by Danite Janjaweed like militants and other issues) had a much more immediate and relevant impact on WHY the Mormon Extermination Order was implemented by the governor. In addition to THAT, on Wikipedia, the Mormon Extermination Order (which by the way, no one has edited that seems to be related to the "antagonistic" elements in this article.--68.60.55.162 04:49, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have read the Mormon Extermination Order, I have reviewed the history of the Mormon War in Missourri and the Danite repression. Since you have not mentioned either, I am starting to wonder if you have actually been reading any books yourself? Throughout of all of the experience from the original settling of Missouri by mormons to the order itself, I have seen one reference to anything positive having to do with Black people, and that is there was an article written in the the Mormon's Star that I have not read that is apparently the "cause?" of the Extermination Order as far as you are concerned? But so you know, i have been rather annoyed with the apparent lack of transparency on this issue with regards to Joseph Smith himself. I understand that the arguements on the Mormon side really focus on how much Smith sided with or against slavery. And I have a habit of watching to see what is NOT mentioned. Please give me your opinion on Joseph Smith Jr's own words in the next section --68.60.55.162 04:49, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mormon Extermination Order in Missouri 

message: “DEAR SIR: —This place (Kirtland) having recently been visited by a gentleman who advocated the principles or doctrines of those who are called ABOLITIONISTS, and his presence having created an interest in that subject, if you deem the following reflections of any service, or think they will have a tendency to correct the opinions of the Southern public,...you are at liberty to give them publicity... I FEAR that the sound might go out, that 'an Abolitionist' had held forth several times to this community,...all, except a very few, attended to their own vocations, and left the gentleman to hold forth his own arguments to nearly naked walls. I am aware that many, who PROFESS to preach the Gospel, complain against their brethren of the same faith, who reside in the South, and are ready to withdraw the hand of fellowship, because they will not renounce the principle of slavery, and raise their voice against every thing of the kind. This must be a tender point, and one which should call forth the candid reflections of all men, and more especially before they advance in an opposition calculated to lay waste the fair states of the South, and let loose upon the world a community of people, who might, peradventure, OVERRUN OUR COUNTRY, AND VIOLATE THE MOST SACRED PRINCIPLES OF HUMAN SOCIETY, CHASTITY AND VIRTUE.... I do not believe that the people of the North have any more right to say that the South shall not hold slaves, than the South have to say the North shall. “How any community can ever be excited with the CHATTER of such persons, boys and others, who are too indolent to obtain their living by honest industry, and are incapable of pursuing any occupation of a professional nature, is unaccountable to me; and when I see persons in the free states, signing documents against slavery, it is no less, in my mind, than an army of influence, and a DECLARATION OF HOSTILITIES, against the people of the South. What course can sooner divide our union? “After having expressed myself so freely upon this subject, I do not doubt, but those who have been forward in raising their voices against the South, will cry out against me as being uncharitable, unfeeling, unkind, and wholly unacquainted with the Gospel of Christ....the first mention we have of SLAVERY is found in the Holy Bible,... And so far from that prediction being averse to the mind of God, it remains as a lasting monument of the DECREE OF JEHOVAH, to the shame and confusion of all who HAVE CRIED OUT against the South, in consequence of their holding the sons of Ham in SERVITUDE.... 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, by Joseph Smith, Vol. 2, pages 436-438)--68.60.55.162 04:48, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: And yes, some of this WILL be posted in the article, especially in areas where people try to push the idea off that Smith was anti-slavery.--68.60.55.162 04:48, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Joseph Smith's official views on Slavery - By Joseph Smith himself

message: The Messenger and Advocate was the second periodical of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. It was published at Kirtland, Ohio, from October 1834 until September 1837. Each issue consisted of 16 pages, and it was published once a month.
:“Where can be the common sense of any wishing to see the slaves of the south set at liberty,... Such a thing could not take place without corrupting all civil and wholesome society, of both the north and the south! Let the BLACKS of the south be free, and our community is overrun with paupers, and a reckless mass of human beings, uncultivated, untaught and unaccustomed to provide for themselves the necessaries of life— endangering the chastity of every female who might by chance be found in our streets—our prisons filled with convicts, and the HANG-MAN WEARIED with executing the functions of his office! This must unavoidably be the case, every rational man must admit, who has ever travelled in the slave states, or we must open our houses unfold our arms, and bid these degraded and degrading sons of Canaan, a hearty welcome and a free admittance to all we possess! A society of this nature, to us, is so intolerably degrading, that the bare reflection causes our feelings to recoil, and our hearts to revolt....the project of emancipation is destructive to our government, and the notion of amalgamation is devilish!— And insensible to feeling must be the heart, and low indeed must be the mind, that would consent for a moment, to see his fair daughter, his sister, or perhaps, his bosom companion, in the embrace of a negro!...(Messenger and Advocate, Vol. 2, pp. 299-301)
68.60.55.162 04:58, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to clarify, I believe this passage would have been originally printed sometime around mid 1837, The Mormon Extermination Order happened in 1838. I flatly reject the notion that one to two years after these comments by Smith, Smith was playing abolitionist and that this has anything to do with the Mormon Extermination Order. --68.60.55.162 05:03, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, those in here concerned with Wikipeidia policies and on editing wars should note that those who are most concerned, and who consider themselves to be well educated or acquainted with LDS history have little excuse for NOT presenting this information here. I waited patiently for someone to post it and I am yet again amazed at how it had not happened. This I am posting now, and I await the accusations that this periodical never was published. I also await the possible attempts to deny it's authenticity by pointing to a much later edited and republished version of the same periodical. But I can definitely say, I am very much losing patience with this process. So I am going to suggest that we discuss this matter honestly, and I will give until Friday (before I request formal administrator action be taken) for a SERIOUS objection (maybe you can say that this was a made up article, or maybe it was proven to be a misquote). But do not think that retelling this article in a benign-naive light counts as a SERIOUS objection. He said "sons of Caanan" so we know part of this article is going to the Curse of Ham article. --68.60.55.162 04:58, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  More of Joseph Smith jr's views on Slavery 

message: Intro to this section is in need of some citation for legitimacy.  For example, the assertion that Joseph Smith invited some early black members to receive the priesthood is questionable at best, and needs documentation. --24.163.193.13
:It's far from just questionable. See Newel G. Bringhurst's "The 'Missouri Thesis' Revisited" in Black and Mormon, University of Illinois, 2004. At least one instance of Joseph Smith approving blacks being ordained to the priesthood. Elijah Abel was his name. --Kmsiever 04:46, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And by my last count, I've found about two dozen black men ordained to the priesthood during the administration of Smith. It was the norm for the small amounts of blacks who joined. This even though the church was officially prohibited from proselytizing to them because of the results of banishment and leaders being forced to sign documents stating such in Missouri. -Visorstuff 14:22, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

text: The page scope was expanded since that was originally written. It is now about Mormonism as opposed to the LDS church - big difference. I think we've already broken out Curse of Ham and Curse and mark of Cain. I'm not sure this topic deserves more breaking up, IMO. Anyone else have thoughts? -Visorstuff 21:38, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What about the era from the founding of the church until Joseph's death, and afterwards. Val42 04:51, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Scope and advice

message: Joseph Smith, and many Mormons today will say that Smith got his ideas on Blacks, their skin color, and the passages in their scriptures from God, but they actually got them from Josiah Priest, who studied the pre-Adamic theory which was being popularized at the time of Smith's revelations. Since I came into these Mormon-Black articles, I have been fighting against the pro-Mormon side, which has used rhetoric to side step the fact: Black skin does not come from a mark on Cain. The idea that it did, does not come from a revelation from God to Smith in 1830, but in a racist-assumption from man-to-man-to-man-to-Smith from the late 14th century to his time. And THAT should be a big reason that people should see Mormonism for what it is a false grafting attempt by a con-man onto Christianity. - Zaph. http://www.christianodyssey.com/bible/africans.html
:Sorry, I am going to sidestep your point for just one minute, to ask one question: Why do you feel like you need to fight Mormons? we welcome all people. I'd be willing to bet that if you belong to a protestant denomination that it too has a history of discrimination and uncouth practices. Heck, we may as well try to tear down the United States because of slavery. Yes, slavery and discrimination are both wrong, but why fight something in the past that people are trying to put behind them. The idea of not forgiving is not a Christian, Muslim or Jewish ideal. The church has changed, why others have to be the judge of the Mormon Church. This seems very anti-Christian to me. But maybe I'm missing something. 
:we don't deny it was taught, what more do you want us to admit? Any why does it matter so much to you? 
:For just as long as the policy on the priesthood was in effect (actually longer), it was legal to kill, rape and take property from Mormons in Missouri. I had two great-great grandfathers, (and one of their eight-year old sons) who were killed for being Mormon (the eight year old so he wouldn't grow up to be a Mormon). I've been held at gunpoint on one occasion and beat and left to die for being Mormon by a gang on another. I could name numerous other examples of discrimination from rock throwing, to death threats I've had for being Mormon - but yet I have no hard feelings toward Missouri (this law has since been repealed and the latest "legal" killing was in the 1940s), toward the gang or anyone else. I consider it ignorance on their part, but do not fight Missouri because of this law or that they once did it. I've let it go, chalked it up to ignorance, and forgiven. That's what Christ would have me do. In the same vein, why fight against Mormonism because they once taught something? Times have changed, they've moved on, and the higher road is awareness and forgiveness. I hope someday you find the peace that forgiveness brings. 
:What evidence is there that Smith got his views from Priest? Why couldn't he have got it from other sects? Why couldn't he have gotten it from God? What is the proof of this? Supposition does not work in a historical setting. Evidence does. Interesting that your "christianoddyssey" doesn't mention other sects who held similar views. Having studied Mormon history in depth, I'm unaware that Smith read or mentioned this author. No doubt he got it somewhere or it wouldn't have been taught, but there is no evidence as to exactly where, and speculation to the contrary is futile. Trust me, I've been there. The simple fact is that he taught it as policy, and that the policy was repealed in 1978. -Visorstuff 14:06, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the Mormon views on blacks and the priesthoods that were widely held during the late 18th and early 19th centuries did not begin with Joseph Smith. In fact, Joseph Smith ordained several blacks to the priesthood. You may want to consider a broader research base in the future. A good start would be a collection of essays called Black and Mormon. Intriguing read. -- Kmsiever 16:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Josiah Priest