Leaderboard

Chapters 3, 4, 5: Historical settings that illustrate some of the dynamics of the 1830s and 40s. Chapter 3 goes briefly through the Missouri era. He focuses quite a bit on W. W. Phelps publication of an article in his paper that local Missourians (remember that Missouri was a pro-slave state) felt was too racially inclusive -- an event that Reeves highlights as "the beginning of the Saints expulsion from Jackson County" and, eventually, the state of Missouri. Chapter 4 is a very quick synopsis of the same racial attitudes he describes in much more detail in Religion of a Different Color. Chapter 5 focuses on the specific issue of slavery, noting amongst other things how the issue of slavery split other Christian denominations along north/south lines (like the Baptists), but somehow the Latter-day Saints managed to stay together as a group. Reeves says at the end of chapter 5: It can seem that, though the issues have changed, the church is still trying to figure out how to create a unified church while welcoming people of competing and conflicting and contradictory ideologies.

Chapters 1 and 2: Basically documenting a few examples (including well known examples like Elijah Able) of early black converts. Chapter 1 covers free black converts from the northern US, and chapter 2 covers enslaved black converts (with passing mention of enslavers) from the southern US. The basic idea behind these first chapters is to show that,

Wearing the Temple Garment The temple garment is a reminder of covenants made in the temple and, when worn properly throughout life, will serve as a protection against temptation and evil. The garment should be worn beneath the outer clothing. It should not be removed for activities that can reasonably be done while wearing the garment, and it should not be modified to accommodate different styles of clothing. Endowed members should seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit to answer personal questions about wearing the garment. It is a sacred privilege to wear the garment and doing so is an outward expression of an inner commitment to follow the Savior Jesus Christ.

Reagan won the Cold War without firing a single shot. The man deserves a Nobel Prize but will never get one. He’s also one of the main reasons why I’m a republican. I could go on.

There is a history concerning the sacred temple garments. In my youth it seemed all my family (including aunts and uncles) were Church members married in the temple. I recall my grandmother talking about wearing the sacred garment. Her generation strongly believed in the protection of the sacred garment. My grandmother told me that she never completely took off her garment – for anything. When she bathed, she always kept at least one arm or leg in the garment. When changing the process was similar, an arm or leg was left in the old garment until another arm or leg was in the new garment. During her generation the garment was one piece. The arms covered down to the wrists and the legs were covered to the ancles. When I received my garments, things had changed but the garment was still a single piece. However, there was a special garment required at the temple that was the old style that my grandparents used. There were problems in the military with the garments because it was not government issue uniform. While I was in the army the church came out with a military garment that was not white but the same color as the government issued military undergarment. And it was in two pieces, so it did not stand out as something different. Generally, it was not acceptable in the church to wear the military garment with civilian clothing but many former military did. Within a few years the Church came out with a two-piece garment and eventually the old style required at the temple garment was dropped. Many older members still preferred my grandparent’s style and refused to wear the more modern styles. Some older members though those that wore the newer styles were less righteous. This was an interesting era in the Church. The style of clothing was changing, and ladies liked to wear shorter dresses that did not cover the knees. The garment was intended to extend over the knee, but many ladies found ways to wear the shorter dresses regardless. A serious problem arose in the Church as ladies sat on the stand at church with the shorter dresses. When I returned from my mission and having spent time in the army – I was personally disgusted, especially with the young ladies at BYU and their short dresses. During that era the young ladies usually were not endowed until they married. I had great difficulty accepting what I thought was immodesty among the young sisters. The problem was so bad with the ladies and their short dresses that the Church built half walls for the chapel stand in the churches to compensate. This is now standard and required. Later, after I married, I began to compete in cycling. I found it difficult to compete while wearing the garment because the garment was not designed for rigorous cycling and I would overheat – especially in summer heat. I wrote a detailed letter to the first presidency with a design for a garment for sports that would allow the body to breath and not overheat. I also suggested that my cycling jersey could be modified (similar to what was done for the military). I received a response from the first presidency that a special sport garment was unacceptable because the brethren were concerned it would be worn when not participating in sports. It was suggested that while participating in sports that I not wear the sacred garment. I was quite troubled with this and fasted and prayed much concerning this suggestion. It was hard to adjust but I was able to compete at a much higher level. I am still bothered that something special is not done for sports, but I understand why this blessing is not offered – because it would be abused. If I were to say any thing about the garment – I would say that it is perhaps the most sacred physical part of my covenant with G-d. It has been a great protection for me – even when I am participating in sports. The protection has been both physical and spiritual. I have come to understand that the garment is not the covenant but the symbol of the covenant. If I were to make any suggestion – it would be to find a way to maintain your covenants with G-d. This recommendation is regardless of religion but for LDS I believe covenants are especially important. If someone is LDS and has not received a manifestation of the spirit concerning the sacred and holy garment – I suggest that you consider becoming more serious concerning your covenants. To paraphrase what Isaiah said to king Ahaz – you cannot believe in holy and sacred things because you are not loyal to your covenants. The Traveler

Every Friday, I spend an hour with my workplace's Diversity Allies group. I'm the only conservative there. Guess what we talk about more weeks than not? I agree with you @Godless, that the gender issue is being pushed hard by the right, to willing audiences. It'll motivate folks on the right who might not otherwise vote, to get outraged enough to vote. But if you're trying to claim the left isn't doing exactly the same thing, for exactly the same reaons, well, please let me know if that's what you're doing, and I'll quickly come up with five major recent news stories on gender issues from five major left wing sources. By the way, this is what I mean by the "exact same thing": Right: "The radical left isn't content with redefining woman to let hairy dudes molest women in locker rooms and win gold medals in women's sports. They also want to groom your children by sticking sexually explicit children's books in every school, and teaching 10 year old boys how to twerk in drag shows!" Left: "The evil right is trying to commit genocide on an entire class of people by making it illegal for our most vulnerable children to get medical care!"

Acts 20:7-9

I'm not sure of the exact provenance of the account (I've tracked it back to an early Mormon Stories episode 271-274 while it was still nuanced rather than just anti) of Dr. Dan Petersen who served on the curriculum committee for a while. As a joke, he suggested this passage with discussion questions like, "Have you ever killed anyone with a Sacrament meeting speech? What could you do better in the future to avoid this?" The story goes that it made it past correlation and into the final proof gallies. When Dr. Petersen saw the galley proofs, he called someone up and suggested that part be taken out.

For those who shut off the video prematurely, this is not just a rehash of the same video that was posted before. At the 1:04 mark, it focuses in on the individual who were part of the "gay men's chorus" and shows many are registered pedophiles.

What did you expect? AHorseWithNoName?

You really shouldn't be eating out-laws, regardless what crime they've committed. And I can't imagine why you would even consider eating your in-laws. You must have a very different relationship with them than I had with mine.

I don't want to offend but this is one of my favorite moments in a Reagan speech.

Operative word there, "was". When I moved here 20 years ago, we were a good purple, sometimes leaning red, sometimes leaning blue. Every year since, we've turned bluer. Red folk are leaving for Arizona and Texas and Florida (Half a dozen from my stake and friend groups.) As California empties out, they're coming to Colorado (I know personally at least two dozen recent Cali transplants, with more arriving weekly. I am the FotF CS crowd - that's El Paso county, the last populous red county in the State. Lauren Bobert makes national news, but her 3rd congressional District covers half the state but only has ~12% of the population. Our front range corridor from ColSpgs through Fort Collins is growing at something like 5-8% yearly, and they're all blue refugees from failing liberal places. Denver is like the whiny little brother to Seattle and Portland. Those two get their safe injection sites and zero cash bond programs going, and Denver is running after them wailing "wait up guys I wanna come too".