NOM

Well good for the Church for speaking out about Charlottesville: http://kutv.com/news/local/lds-church-i ... ottesville

I really do applaud the Church's statement. But I have to point out the statement condemns Brigham Young as "not a true disciple of Christ":

The statement, from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, often called the Mormon church, criticized people who use racism in speech, taking a quote from one of the church's former, late leaders, President Gordon B. Hinckley:
…No man who makes disparaging remarks concerning those of another race can consider himself a true disciple of Christ.

What, you mean "disparaging remarks" like this gem from Brother Brigham?

"You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind....Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin."
Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, 1863, p. 290.

Which side would Brother Brigham have been on in Charlottesville?

I thought the same thing.

This is unfair to Brigham. He was just a product of his time and couldn't be expected to have an enlightened mind, even though he was a prophet of God.....

It's really a poor comparison. The supremacists in Charlottesville have an additional 180+or- years of cultural evolution over what Brigham had....so they should know better.

So you see, Brigham was definitely not a man ahead of his time. He was just as dark minded and blindly bigoted as any other backwater hay seed of his milieu.

So you can't condemn him for something that wasn't his fault. Therefore he was still a prophet of God and the church is still true.

I feel better now having explained that to all of you.....

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2017 10:00 pmBut I have to point out the statement condemns Brigham Young as "not a true disciple of Christ".

It would include more than just Brigham Young. When I pressed upon that exact point years ago, the apologists pointed out that any such statements were not meant to be applied retroactively. That way they can have the true disciple cake and the majority of past Church leaders too.

Now imagine 3-4 decades from now, some NOMs are having this same discussion about their corporate leaders condemning past ones for crappy policies like this:

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2017 10:00 pm - Modified by me:

What, you mean "disparaging remarks" like this gem from Brother: Fill in your favorite COB Bigot Here?

"You see some classes of the human family that are gay, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind...they cannot participate in the blessings of salvation that this corporation has to offer."

Thoughtful wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2017 10:12 pm I thought the same thing.

Me too. Should we start a campaign to remove his statue from downtown? By the way, is it just me or is Brother Brigham posed with his butt to the temple and his hand out to the bank?

Someone should manufacture an infographic with the new release juxtapositioned with All the prophets up to Kimball and what they had to say...

The truth is that I salute the Church when it steps up and condemns racism. That is at least one prejudice down.