Talk:Black people and early Mormonism

message: I for one would like to see a stamp put on this article.  I find its current contents notably biased and past renditions to likewise have problems.  Obviously this is a politically charged issue that causes many to take sides instead of reporting facts.  There is a desire by one group to protect practices despite obvious questions that should be raised and another group attempting to report practices and opinions as official positions and doctrine.  Adjoining to either of these extremes and producing wikiarticles/edits along those lines is misleading.  This is not a neutral article and there is too much conjecture. -- 206.196.172.2 12:16, 17 May 2006
::I agree with User:206.196.172.2, and I would like to make the following recommendations:
::The Wikipedia style guide states: "If possible, terms used to describe people should be given in such a way that they qualify other nouns. Thus, black people, not blacks; gay people, not gays; and so forth."  Therefore, I take issue with the title of this article. I understand that it used be titled "Blacks and the priesthood (LDS),"  but that is equally problematic.  I recommend something like: Racial policies of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
::The following statement violates the neutral point of view NPOV) : "Some leaders of the LDS Church have disavowed certain past explanations as to why the priesthood ban was instituted by God, but the Church has never disavowed the teaching that the ban was, in fact, instituted by God. According to official statements and declarations of the LDS Church, God was the source of the priesthood ban for blacks."  While this may be true, by placing this stement in the introcution, the author betrays his bias.  An encyclepedic article should attempt to present the facts nuetrally without passing judgement.  Recommend that the issue of diavowal be treated in a seperate section of the article rather than the lead section.
::I would further recommend that the section headings follow a more chronological layout.  By focusing on the history of the policy, it may be easier for authors and present the facts more nuetrally.  
::For example: 
::*Section 1: Racial policies of Jospeh Smith (1830-1844)  This section might include Joseph's statements for abolishion and the example of Elijah Abel.  
::*Section 2: Racial policies of Brigham Youn (1847-1877).  This section should include the discussion of the curse of Cain.  Someone might also contribute his views on Native Americans.  
::*Section 3: Justifications of Jospeh F. Smith (1901-1918).  This section would include the discussion of the curse of Ham.
::*Section 4: The Way to Perfection by Joseph Filding Smith (1970).  This section would discuss the theory that people of Afican descent were somehow less valient than others in the pre-mortal life.  This theory had roots farther back in history, but it achieved a quasi-offcial status upon the publication of The Way to Perfection which was often quoted by other leaders of the church.
::*Section 5: Policy modifications by David O. McKay (1951-1970).  A white man of Africn descent received the priesthood, and in an official statement, President McKay admitted that the reasons for the ban were not fully known.
::*Section 6: Official Declaration 2 (1979). 
::This layout would also make it easier for other contributers to insert sections referring to the athletic boycotts at BYU in the 1960s, and the disavowal non-news item of the 1990s.
::ErinHowarth 18:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem of course is that this article is not about all racial policies. It is about a single racial policy. Or rather it isn't about policies for more than one race (or ethnicity). I think this issue is significant enough that it should not be grouped with other racial policies/issues. I should also mention that much of the POV 206.196.172.2 may have been referring to was taken out when I removed the copyright material last week. --Kmsiever 22:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The title of the article is still in violation of the Wikipedia style guide: "If possible, terms used to describe people should be given in such a way that they qualify other nouns. Thus, black people, not blacks; gay people, not gays; and so forth."  'Blacks and Mormonism is not acceptable.  I wrote a paper in college titled African American Mormons and the Evolution of Church Policy.  Maybe Policies and doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regarding persons of African descent.   That's pretty long.  How about: Policies of the LDS Church regarding Africans.  ErinHowarth 06:06, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, the policies were not directed specifically at Africans; they were also directed at Jamaicans, Americans, Brazilians, English, Canadians, Australians. Anyone who was Black. I am not arguing in favour of the current title, only that I cannot think of another that works as well. In other words, I am not sure it is possible (to quote the style guide). --Kmsiever 07:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable Neutrality 

message: When there is a need for separating a block of text
The blockquote command will indent both margins when needed instead of the left margin only as the colon does.  
 
This is useful for (as the name says) inserting blocks of quoted (and cited) text.  
|

<blockquote>
The blockquote command will indent 
both margins when needed instead of the 
left margin only as the colon does.  
</blockquote>
  Wikipedia:How to edit a page  ErinHowarth 05:15, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My mistake, Erin. Someone told me about a year ago not to use the blockqoute tag and I had assumed that wikipedia replaced : with  when it rendered the page. I reverted it. Thanks for the link; I will definitely use it in the future. --Kmsiever 15:29, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Kmsiever.  I'm new here.  I'm trying to read the how to pages before I make changes.  I thought I was starting with something harmless.  I was afraid I had misunderstood.  I appriciate you putting the blockquotes back. ErinHowarth 17:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiki markup 

message: I deleted the following paragraph because it does not seem relevant.
As slaves in the new America began converting to Christianity, their Christian owners adopted interpretations of the Word of God that justified the practices of the time. State legislatures also took action.  North Carolina made it illegal to teach slaves in 1740, Georgia in 1770, Missouri in 1817, Virginia in 1819, Mississippi in 1823, Louisiana in 1830, and Alabama in 1832.  Other laws were enacted in Delaware and Florida to punish slaves for congregating.  At the same time, several states prevented Negroes from working at jobs requiring a "knowledge of letters".  Churches were giving in to the pressures of the law and the wrath of wealthy slave owners by backing away from actively proselytizing Negroes.  Abolitionists and proslavery activists alike focused their respective arguments on the Bible as tensions mounted during the great religious revival in the south between 1829 and 1835. (James O. Buswell III, Slavery, Segregation, and Scripture , 1964, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. pp. 37-45)
I just don't see how giving the years that several states out-lawed the teaching of blacks has any impact on blacks and Mormonism.  If there is a connection that I'm not seeing then the author needs to draw it more clearly.ErinHowarth
::The following has been added to the begining of the article: When Joseph Smith declared Jackson County to be the land of Zion and gathering place for the members the new church, it had been illegal to educate or proselytize blacks in Missouri since 1817 (James O. Buswell III, Slavery, Segregation, and Scripture , 1964, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. pp. 37-45) As it became known that Mormons had begun preaching to the local Native Americans, the suspicions of Missouri citizens were raised that the large numbers of voting Mormons would threaten their policies on people of color.I remain unconvinced that (1) laws prohibiting the education of blacks, (2) the mission to preach to Native Americans, or (3) the Mormons voting power are relevent to this discussion.--ErinHowarth 19:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: State legislatures took action

message: I'm scratching my head over the renaming of this article to Negroes and Mormonism by User:Conrad Devonshire, with the comment that it was a "more apporpriate title". How could that possibly be true? COGDEN 04:47, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Such a major change should have been discussed.  I've renamed it back. Val42 02:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Negroes?? 

message: The article is really too long.  I think one of the least painful things that should be trimmed out is Official Declaration 2.  Of course it is a very important part of this topic, but it is not necessary to quote the entire text in this article, when it is so easy to link to at any one of several sources. -ErinHowarth
Although more painful, I think another possible edit might be to remove the section titled "Revelation or policy."  Certainly, the debate over whether the priesthood ban was a matter of revelation or a matter of policy is an important one, but the title of this article is Blacks and Mormonism, which suggests a social and historical discussion.  The section about the debate between revelation or policy is really a theological discussion.  I suggest this article be divided in two: Blacks and Mormonism will discuss the relationship between those two groups, and another article, perhaps titled: The Priesthood Ban, would discuss the myriad theological issues regarding this policy (or revelation).  Comments -ErinHowarth 06:43, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Too long!

message: I added a tag to the top of the article to draw attention to the use of weasel words.  One example: the references to the disavowal are not clear on who it is calling for the church to disavow previously taught doctrines regarding blacks. --ErinHowarth 23:08, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Weasel Words

message: The entire section entitled Dark skin as a curse is about verses in the Book of Mormon.  I am not aware of anyone using verses from the Book of Mormon to justify the priesthood ban.  Although it is interesting information, in the interest of brevity and clarity, I recommend that the entire section be struck.  Opinions?--ErinHowarth 23:59, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the Book of Mormon cites are relevant, in that the book provides a foundation in Mormon theology for the idea that dark skin is a curse. However, citations to the Book of Mormon should be qualified, to make clear that the book does not reference people of African ancestry. COGDEN 07:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dark skin as a curse 

message: I've attempted a major re-write of the page with three goals
#to place the various elements of the article in chronological order
#to shorten the article by eliminating repeated concepts.  This is probably most notable by the new section titled W.W. Phelps which deals with the curse of Cain and the curse of Ham with links to those main pages and the elimination of the sections devoted specifically to those doctrines.
#bring the introductory paragraphs in line with the new focus of the article since it was split from Blacks and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
There are still lots to do:
#I think we need a quote from Joseph Smith III either on slavery or race.
#citation styles could be cleaned up for consistency.  I recommend we follow the example found in Early life of Joseph Smith, Jr., a featured article.  ErinHowarth 20:37, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good. Keep up the good work. COGDEN 00:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major rewrite 

message: Does anyone know this denominations teaching on the topic?
:No, but see here for an article implying their position. The article is based largely on anyonymous interviews, however, and it doesn't give a citation on this point. You might send an email to the webmaster if you are interested in documentation. COGDEN 22:51, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "In the 1990s members of the AUB discovered within their congregation, a Caucasian-looking man who had African ancestry had been ordained to the priesthood.  A controversy ensued, which resulted in the release of Richard Kunz from his position as a President in the AUB’s Council of Seventy."It's a vague reference, but my guess is that as a fundamentalist group, they uphold Brigham Young's position, and that Richard Kunz is the name of the "Caucasian-looking man who had African ancestry."  I'm sure there is an interesting story there. This article describes a legal battle between his first wife and his plural wives centering on the fact that he did not leave her children his inheritance, but it doesn't mention the issue of race. -ErinHowarth 00:11, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apostolic United Brethren? 

message: From the article: "When the Mormons migrated to Missouri they encountered the pro-slavery sentiments of their neighbors. Initially, Joseph Smith, Jr. supported the laws regarding slaves and slaveholders as a matter of peace and order, but eventually rejected the institution and supported its abolishment."
:I believe Smith ran for US president on a anti-slavery platform. I don't have have a reference, but this may be a good place to look if the statement above is true.--Dbolton 06:20, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WW Phelps wrote an editorial that enoucraged blacks to come to Missouri and convert to mormonism. This was obviously controversial and originally approved by the paper's editor - Joseph Smith. Becuase of public outcry, the first presidency not only recanted and disavowed the editorial, but put in place a policy of not baptizing slaves to keep the peace. It wasn't until the Illinios period that Smith took a completly abolitionist stance - you may want to read this recent blog post which is most enlightening and pretty much a summation of this, but I believe the other blacks and the lds church, or mark of cain or curse of ham, etc articles deal with this issue, but can't recall. History of the Church volume 3's introduction by BH Roberts deals with the slavery and missouri question, and is quite frank on the above. It would provide a decent reference. -Visorstuff 16:10, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-slavery 

message: Origen (circa 185-c. 254): “For the Egyptians are prone to a degenerate life and quickly sink to every slavery of the vices. Look at the origin of the race and you will discover that their father Cham, who had laughed at his father’s nakedness, deserved a judgment of this kind, that his son Chanaan should be a servant to his brothers, in which case the condition of bondage would prove the wickedness of his conduct. Not without merit, therefore, does the discolored posterity imitate the ignobility of the race [Non ergo immerito ignobilitatem decolor posteritas imitatur].” Homilies on Genesis 16.1
“Mar Ephrem the Syrian said: When Noah awoke and was told what Canaan did. . .Noah said, ‘Cursed be Canaan and may God make his face black,’ and immediately the face of Canaan changed; so did of his father Ham, and their white faces became black and dark and their color changed.” Paul de Lagarde, Materialien zur Kritik und Geschichte des Pentateuchs (Leipzig, 1867), part II
St. Jerome: “Chus in Hebrew means Ethiopian, that is, black and dark, one who has a soul as black as his body.” (The Homilies of Saint Jerome, vol. 1, trans. Marie Liguori Ewald, Homily 3, 28).
The Eastern Christian work, the Cave of Treasures (4th century), explicitly connects slavery with dark-skinned people: “When Noah awoke. . .he cursed him and said: ‘Cursed be Ham and may he be slave to his brothers’. . .and he became a slave, he and his lineage, namely the Egyptians, the Abyssinians, and the Indians. Indeed, Ham lost all sense of shame and he became black and was called shameless all the days of his life, forever.” La caverne des trésors: version Géorgienne, ed. Ciala Kourcikidzé, trans. Jean-Pierre Mahé, Corpus scriptorium Christianorum orientalium 526-27, Scriptores Iberici 23-24 (Louvain, 1992-93), ch. 21, 38-39 (translation).
 
St. Ennodius (474-521): “Keep your chastity constant. Don’t let the body of a black girl soil yours, nor lie with her for her Hell-black face.” Epistulae 7.21
John Philoponus, Greek Christian philosopher (6th century): “The Scythians and Ethiopians are distinguished from each other by black and white color, or by long and snubbed nose, or by slave and master, by ruler and ruled,” and again, “The Ethiopian and Scythian. . .one is black, the other white; similarly slave and master.” A. Sanda, Oposcula Monophysitica Johannes Philoponi (Beirut, 1930), pp. 66,96 (Sanda’s Latin translation).
Ishodad of Merv (Syrian Christian bishop of Hedhatha, 9th century): When Noah cursed Canaan, “instantly, by the force of the curse. . .his face and entire body became black [ukmotha]. This is the black color which has persisted in his descendents.” C. Van Den Eynde, Corpus scriptorium Christianorum orientalium 156, Scriptores Syri 75 (Louvain, 1955), p. 139.
Eutychius, Alexandrian Melkite patriarch (d. 940): “Cursed be Ham and may he be a servant to his brothers… He himself and his descendants, who are the Egyptians, the Negroes, the Ethiopians and (it is said) the Barbari.” Patrologiae cursus completes…series Graeca, ed. J.P. Migne (Paris, 1857-66), Pococke’s (1658-59) translation of the Annales, 111.917B (sec. 41-43)
Ibn al-Tayyib (Arabic Christian scholar, Baghdad, d. 1043): “The curse of Noah affected the posterity of Canaan who were killed by Joshua son of Nun. At the moment of the curse, Canaan’s body became black and the blackness spread out among them.” Joannes C.J. Sanders, Commentaire sur la Genèse, Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 274-275, Scriptores Arabici 24-25 (Louvain, 1967), 1:56 (text), 2:52-55 (translation).
Bar Hebraeus (Syrian Christian scholar, 1226-86): “‘And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father and showed [it] to his two brothers.’ That is…that Canaan was cursed and not Ham, and with the very curse he became black and the blackness was transmitted to his descendents…. And he said, ‘Cursed be Canaan! A servant of servants shall he be to his brothers.’” Sprengling and Graham, Barhebraeus’ Scholia on the Old Testament, pp. 40-41, to Gen 9:22.
Gomes Eannes de Zurara (official royal chronicler of Portugal, 1453): “These blacks were Moors like the others, though their slaves, in accordance with ancient custom, which I believe to have been because of the curse which, after the Deluge, Noah laid upon his son Cain [read: Cham], cursing him in this way: that his race should be subject to all the other races of the world.” C.R. Beazley and E. Prestage, The Chronicle of the Discovery and Conquest of Guinea in the Hakluyt 1st series, no. 95 (London, 1896), 1:54.
Francisco de la Cruz (Dominican, 1575): “The blacks are justly captives by just sentence of God for the sins of their fathers, and that in sign thereof God gave them that color.” Bartolomé de Las Casas in History (DeKalb, Ill., 1971), p. 417.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.10.2 (talk) 18:11, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ancient Christian Church Fathers were 'White Supremacists'

message: Ephrem the Syrian (306-378): “Abel was bright as the light, / but the murderer (Cain) was dark as the darkness.” Tryggve Kronholm, Motifs from Genesis 1-11, pp. 135-42.
Ambrose: “The meaning of Ethiopia in Latin is ‘lowly and vile (abiecta et vilis).’ What is more lowly, what is more like Ethiopia, than our bodies, blackened, too, by the darkness of sin?” De Paradiso, 3.16
Augustine: “A gouty doctor of [Carthage], when he had given in his name for baptism, and had been prohibited the day before his baptism from being baptized that year, by black woolly-haired boys who appeared to him in his dreams, and whom he understood to be devils, and when, though they trod on his feet, and inflicted the acutest pain he had ever yet experienced, he refused to obey them, but overcame them, and would not defer being washed in the laver of regeneration, was relieved in the very act of baptism, not only of the extraordinary pain he was tortured with, but also of the disease itself, so that, though he lived a long time afterwards, he never suffered from gout.” The City of God, 22.8
Didymus the Blind (313-398): The Devil is black “because he fell from the splendor, virtue, and spiritual whiteness which only those who have been whitened by God can possess.” “Those who fall beneath the stroke of God’s sword are the Ethiopians, because they all share in the malice and sin of the Devil, from whose blackness they take their name.” Sur Zacharie 4.312
In an Eastern Christian (Armenian) Adam-book (5th or 6th century) it is written: “And the Lord was wroth with Cain. . . He beat Cain’s face with hail, which blackened like coal, and thus he remained with a black face.” The History of Abel and Cain, 10, in Lipscomb, The Armenian Apocryphal Adam Literature, pp. 145, 250 (text) and 160, 271 (translation).
The Kebra Nagast (6-7th century), the Christian Ethiopian national epic, has the queen of Ethiopia speak to King Solomon concerning their son: “Thy son whom thou hast begotten, who springeth from an alien people into which God hath not commanded you to marry, that is to say, from an Ethiopian woman, who is not of thy color, and is not akin to thy country, and who is, moreover, black.” E.A.W. Budge, The Queen of Sheba and Her Only Son Menyelek, p.102.
The Vienna Genesis (11-12th century) shows black skin as the externalized sign of internal sin: some of Adam’s offspring “completely lost their beautiful coloring; they became black and disgusting, and unlike any people. . . [They] displayed on their bodies what the forebears had earned by their misdeeds. As the fathers had been inwardly, so the children were outwardly.” John B. Friedman, The Monstrous Races in Medieval Art and Thought (Cambridge, 1981), p. 93.
The Irish Saltair na Rann (The Versified Psalter, AD 988), records Gabriel announcing to Adam: “Dark rough senseless Cain is going to kill Abel.” D. Greene and F. Kelly, The Irish Adam and Eve Story from Saltair Na Rann (Dublin, 1976), 1:91, lines 1959-1960.
A medieval Armenian apocryphal work, The History of the Creation and Transgression of Adam 27 says of Eve: “Even though she had been stripped of the heavenly light, she was nonetheless beautiful, for her flesh was dazzling white like a pearl because she was newly created.” William Lipscomb, The Armenian Apocryphal Adam Literature, pp. 112 and 122.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.129.100.43 (talk) 17:16, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Curse of Cain material

message: In the interests of improving Wikipedia, and especially this article, Im adding a POV tag to help stimulate some improvement to this article.  The criteria that we need to meet to make this article neutral are:
* Need a named subsection addressing the lengthy "non priesthood" LDS period 1860(?) - 1978  
* Need a named subsection about LDS role when Utah legalized slavery (e.g. were church members leaders of the territory?)
* 1978 Revelation: some information about expansion in Brazil and the new temple there
* Some opinions/thoughts/quotes of black church members 1860 to 1978, positive and negative
* Picture: the single picture of a black, with a pronounced caption "was a priest and held several positions" is highly POV and has a "token negro" feel to it.  The picture must be removed, or balanced with a picture of a black church member that was not satisified with church policies.
* Priesthood discussion:  omits key fact that virtually all white male members of the church are/were priests.
* Some discussion of LDS views on miscegnation, esp after 1978. 
* Need some rough statistics of black church membership, especially in USA
* Need statistics on current black participation in top levels of current LDS church hierarchy (e.g. "2 of 12 are black")
* Some mention of current attitudes of black members of LDS church, positive and negative  
Noleander (talk) 14:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since there are no comments on these suggested changes, I'll start making headway on some of them.  Others I'll need help with, but I can at least do some of the simpler ones. Noleander (talk) 14:44, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ive removed the POV tag, since all the issues are now covered (and most resolved) in the Blacks and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints article. Noleander (talk) 06:54, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Tag Added 

message: It is my understanding that the whole (or most of) controversy with Blacks and the priesthood began with Brigham Young being infuriated with the interracial marriage of Walker Lewis's son.  Shouldn't that get a mention in here somewhere?  If it wasn't for that event,   IMHO, this entire issue would not really exist, not even for the other Latter Day Saint movement denominations.  Please correct my understanding of the history if I am incorrect.  If not, perhaps a "Walker Lewis" section?--Descartes1979 (talk) 20:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a Walker Lewis section on the Blacks and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints page.  How it affects other denominations is unclear.  I wouldn't put it on unless you can find sources to show it did affect other denominations.Joshuajohanson (talk) 23:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Walker Lewis and Brigham Young 

message: I removed the words "/and or seemingly racist". We're talking about if they made racist statements. Wikipedia acknowledged that. Someone attempt to soften that was inappropriate bias.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.228.240.57 (talk) 14:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The words "race" and "racist" are defined and re-defined endlessly to suit the agenda of the speaker (and even undefined). Facts are communicated better if neither is used, at all. Likewise, the use of the word "African" in this context is typically an attempt to soften bias. To communicate clearly, use the unmistakable term, damn the outrage. Even "black" (or "Black") is not truly definitive of persons of negroid descent, as there are some negroids with lighter skin color than some caucasians. Anyone's personal offense is irrelevant to communicating facts. Find an appropriate exact synonym if you like, but clearly and concisely assert facts, please. If you're confused, then yes, I am requesting that all appearances of the words "black", "African", and most especially "African-American" that reference ethnic decent or appearance be replaced with "negro", "Negro", "negroid", or "Negroid". 96.226.204.58 (talk) 17:03, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed bias in race statement 

message: I want all racists out of wikipedia
:The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the move request was: Rename as suggested -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:46, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  racist 

message: I noticed some editors recently made some good-faith edits to add material into the article.  Please note that the article is organized by chronological period (and, toward the bottom, by branch of Mormonism).  So, if the new content is organized by religious text, that has to be fit into the chronological sections in a sensible way (by date of publication?);  or perhaps create an entirely new group of sections at the bottom of the article: one section per text (but before doing that, make sure that the new content does not fit sensibly into one of the chronological sections... for instance, the "New York" section contains a discussion of the Book of Mormon).  --Noleander (talk) 13:33, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outline is chronological, not topical 

message: There are a couple of problems with the Fundamentalist section: (1) it is not written in encyclopedic prose (instead is just just some quotes); (2) the quotes are not well-sourced.  The source for the quotes is  but it is just a web page (not a book, or academic source) and the web page is missing some key information: when did Jeffs say this?  Who recorded it?  What was the context of the speech?  WP material needs better sources.  If these bigoted viewpoints are so central to the Fundmntl  church, there should be other, more reliable sources that convey the same information.  --Noleander (talk) 23:05, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better source for Fund. quotes? 

message: Please see the discussion here about reogranizing the existing articles about Black people and Mormonism, including this article. COGDEN 23:59, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorganizing Black people/Mormonism articles 

message: :The following comment was added as a new section to the article by User:Guy Noir Private Eye. I reverted and placed it here. ~Adjwilley (talk) 16:47, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be worthwhile for you to go back and read the way a slave could exist in Utah.  Working off of memory:  a slave had to agree to be a slave to remain a slave; if they did not agree they were declared free.  A slave owner had to properly care for their slaves i.e. pay them, educate them, clothe them, and treat their children in the same manner. In essence, a slave could only exist IF they chose to be one. Not really slavery at all. --StormRider 11:20, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reality Check

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Black people and early Mormonism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140604030004/http://christopherrandallnicholson.webs.com/lds-racial-history to http://christopherrandallnicholson.webs.com/lds-racial-history
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:22, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The verse D&C 101:79 was put in this article to imply that the early Church was against slavery.  It reads: "Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another."  This is in reference to economic bondage, not chattel slavery. (see "The Mormon Church and Blacks" A Documentary History" e-book location 457 of 6260, Lester E. Bush Jr., "Mormonism's Negro Doctrine," 56; Lester E. Bush Jr., "A Commentary on Stephen G. Taggart's Mormonism's Negro Policy: Social and Historical Origins," in Bush and Mauss, "Neither White nor Black," 34)  The subject of section 101 and further sections make clear that this is the case, and how it was understood by early Saints. See also D&C 104:83-84 which makes clear that this is the case. See also D&C 134:12 Epachamo (talk) 15:47, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This page has a lot of those kinds of problems (using scriptures as sources). Do you think it should be merged with Black people and Mormonism? Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 15:13, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it should be merged, although Black people and Mormonism has many of the same problems.--Jburlinson (talk) 12:13, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  After I make the proposed merger of the 1978 Revelation into Black People and Priesthood, would it be OK if I pursued this merger?  The timeline would be to propose a merger later this month. --Jburlinson (talk) 06:42, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  go for it! would you be merging it into Black People and Priesthood? Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 16:17, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: D&C 101:79