"Marry in your own race"

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

How many manuals do you think the church ships annually? Do you really think the church is so careless as to have what you call an "oversight" when it comes to perceived racism? The manuals are public and are the official curriculum of the church. These views are publicly reiterated every year during lesson 31.

I don't know when the curricula was updated but I am sure that the brethren are very aware of what is being taught to the youth of the church. Yes it does bother me. I don't sit around and dwell on it, but it is indicative of a problem, especially when I doubt the brethren would plead ignorant on the quote and the use of it in the Church's curriculum.

You're attaching too much significant to the word "oversight." I don't think they're ignorant, I simply don't think it's that important. To them, or to me.

But I also know that things I consider molehills, on CG are Himalayan-sized mountains. I've said my peace; feel free to have the last word. Cheers.

[CardiacCoug]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

How many manuals do you think the church ships annually? Do you really think the church is so careless as to have what you call an "oversight" when it comes to perceived racism? The manuals are public and are the official curriculum of the church. These views are publicly reiterated every year during lesson 31.

I don't know when the curricula was updated but I am sure that the brethren are very aware of what is being taught to the youth of the church. Yes it does bother me. I don't sit around and dwell on it, but it is indicative of a problem, especially when I doubt the brethren would plead ignorant on the quote and the use of it in the Church's curriculum.

I agree -- it's not an accident that it's still in there.

My father is pretty progressive in his attitudes for a 60-year old LDS man, but I'm pretty sure he would not disagree with the statement that GENERALLY you should marry within your race. I think the GAs feel similarly.

They obviously need to take the word race completely out of the discussion and change it to similar cultural background and values. I don't think it's ridiculous to say it may be easier to successfully marry someone from a similar cultural background. Although come to think of it my wife's upbringing as a gentile in Connecticut was not very similar to mine and we are extremely compatible.

There is a very strictly orthodox LDS guy in my ward who is married to a woman from the Phillipines. I wonder what he thinks about being told to marry within one's race.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by CardiacCoug

I agree -- it's not an accident that it's still in there.

My father is pretty progressive in his attitudes for a 60-year old LDS man, but I'm pretty sure he would not disagree with the statement that GENERALLY you should marry within your race. I think the GAs feel similarly.

They obviously need to take the word race completely out of the discussion and change it to similar cultural background and values. I don't think it's ridiculous to say it may be easier to successfully marry someone from a similar cultural background. Although come to think of it my wife's upbringing as a gentile in Connecticut was not very similar to mine and we are extremely compatible.

There is a very strictly orthodox LDS guy in my ward who is married to a woman from the Phillipines. I wonder what he thinks about being told to marry within one's race.

just so I can be sure to warn people, which races/cultures are really incompatible, or at least very difficult. Better yet, which races/cultures are incompatible with hispanics. Most of the boys in my ward are of latino derivation.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

just so I can be sure to warn people, which races/cultures are really incompatible, or at least very difficult. Better yet, which races/cultures are incompatible with hispanics. Most of the boys in my ward are of latino derivation.

white trash is incompatible with most races from what I know.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Mike Waters is the Rosa Parks sitting at the front of the short bus.

Are you implying that Rosa Parks is handicapped along with Waters?

Dude, you need to work on your "witty" banter.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

I don't find it all that disturbing for the time.

It's always cool when pointed heads take counsel from 30, 50, or 150 years ago and pretend it was delivered over the General Conference pulpit yesterday.

Is the concept outdated and should the manual be updated? Yes. Quit obsessing about it for heaven's sake.

Isn't that the problem, though? When it is included in the manual, it is included to be taught as doctrine TODAY, and not an outdated teaching from 30, 50 or 150 years ago. If you agree the concept is outdated, then isn't Waters' approach of asking church curriculum for its removal and asking the bishopric to instruct teachers to cease teaching it correct?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Isn't that the problem, though? When it is included in the manual, it is included to be taught as doctrine TODAY, and not an outdated teaching from 30, 50 or 150 years ago. If you agree the concept is outdated, then isn't Waters' approach of asking church curriculum for its removal and asking the bishopric to instruct teachers to cease teaching it correct?

I agree completely with you, it should be deleted, but when I teach or taught, I omitted any parts I disliked or used them as object lessons to find out the feelings or beliefs of members.

So Triplet identified using it as an object lesson, though the better course would be to simply ignore it.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Isn't that the problem, though? When it is included in the manual, it is included to be taught as doctrine TODAY, and not an outdated teaching from 30, 50 or 150 years ago. If you agree the concept is outdated, then isn't Waters' approach of asking church curriculum for its removal and asking the bishopric to instruct teachers to cease teaching it correct?

I didn't say it shouldn't be removed, and if Waters want to write a letter or start a petition, then by all means. The church is notoriously slow at updating its curriculum and of all the nits to pick, this is minor by far.

But there's no complaint about the church too petty for Cougarguard. We can always get pettier.

*Cue the story about the mixed-race couple who was devastated by this quote and left the church hurt and angry, followed by, "It's folks like Tex and his ilk that keep driving good people out of the church."

[Mormon Red Death]

Originally Posted by Tex

I didn't say it shouldn't be removed, and if Waters want to write a letter or start a petition, then by all means. The church is notoriously slow at updating its curriculum and of all the nits to pick, this is minor by far.

But there's no complaint about the church too petty for Cougarguard. We can always get pettier.

*Cue the story about the mixed-race couple who was devastated by this quote and left the church hurt and angry, followed by, "It's folks like Tex and his ilk that keep driving good people out of the church."

I thougth you were done with this topic? Like dog to its vomit

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Mormon Red Death

I thougth you were done with this topic? Like dog to its vomit

Barf!