Come on. A lot more people than Adam and SU are in that camp and have been for a long time.

This has been my experience as well as the experience of virtually everyone I've talked to that has gone on a mission to Africa, Europe or parts of the US where there are higher concentrations of African-Americans.

There is a AA member that joined the church a year ago in our branch. He said that the church's stance pre-1978 didn't matter to him during his conversion because

1. He had an undeniable spiritual witness that the church was true
2. It was a thing of the past

Sure, there are plenty of black converts that aren't completely up to speed on this issue, but I don't think this brother's attitude/experience is all that atypical either.

Call it what you want but the fact is that the policy has changed. That is what should matter, in fact can't that be the tacit mea culpa admittance that it was wrong in the first place? ;) I find the calls for "apology" rooted more in the time and effort some have spent researching the topic and self-dubbing themselves "sooooooooooooooo-JERS!" in this war. I feel that perhaps they are motivated by pride and such an apology proves that they were right. In my opinion what is right has already happened.

Much like Chino an apology wouldn't bother me, I just don't think it is relevent when the policy no longer exists and hasn't for 30 years. But it is important to note that the historians have usurped the Prophets on this subject.....those watchmen on the towers need to turn their damn towers in the other direction, damnedit!

Somewhat ironically, a 16 year old Dominican in our branch stopped coming to church because (he claims) he found out about the church and polygamy. For whatever reason, that bothers him more than blacks and the priesthood.

Sorry. As you know, I haven't been around here long and they just seem to be the most vocal about it. I certainly didn't mean Adam and SU as an exhaustive list--I realize there are probably plenty of others who feel this way.

Goat and Chino--this has nothing to do with me being a watchman. Like you, before I heard the interview, I didn't feel too passionately about it. Like you say, it IS in the past, and the policy reversal is sort of a tacit admission of error. However, listening to a black member who really loves the Gospel and the church but feels very strongly about this particular issue, and is in touch with a whole community of members who feel the same way (which I doubt can be said for most of us) changed my mind on this one.

Again, from a practical point of view, there's huge upside with little or no downside.

I think the upside is that it could bring peace to Darron Smith and others who share his passion about this subject. However, I wonder how much of their peace would be the result of being proven "right." The right actions have already occurred in my opinion.

Maybe we should get a list together and they could apologize for everything at once.

Polygamy, withholding the Priesthood, teaching birth control was evil, announcing man would not walk on the moon, having a Prophet who was supportive of the John Birch society.

Maybe they could even apologize in advance for women not having the Priesthood and being against gay marriage.

I am sure you can think of others.

Why isn't a change good enough as an apology.

Most people want an apology as a way to have something to further attack with. An apology would mean nothing to folks like SU and Waters. You honestly think an apology would shut them up on the issue.

Maybe if they apologized the whole house of cards would collapse. That's a good upside, as far as I'm concerned. I bet that's what they're afraid of? Self-immolation.

Self immolation?

That is classic, that you think the LDS church is afraid of self immolation.

What a douche.

LDS Church holds the world's record among religions for lacking the courage of its convictions. It's always running scared, always dissembling. In fact, as we've established here, the LDS Church has no doctrine.