That is true. It's unwarranted speculation, poor research, and contrary to official LDS doctrine to think of it as a change in countenance, attitude, or a "tattoo" (as I've seen speculated at FAIR and their new site mormonvoices.org). And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them. Moses 7:22 He has heard our prayers, and by revelation has confirmed that the long-promised day has come when every faithful, worthy man in the Church may receive the holy priesthood, with power to exercise its divine authority, and enjoy with his loved ones every blessing that flows therefrom, including the blessings of the temple. OD 2 I really don't see any change from prior to 1978 and I don't see any indication of racism in the doctrine, past or present, as the curse was not applied based on some inherited phenotype such as skin color. It is also certain that the doctrine remains that the ban was insituted by God ("long promised day", "from the dispensation of Adam etc.). There need not be any apologies or sugar-coating.