"Marry in your own race"

[LA Ute]

I'm sorry, what manual tells young men and young women to marry in their own race? Not disputing that but it's not in the manual we use in our ward. I do recall that President Kimball said that (something about marrying in your own race) several decades back. I think his point was that interracial mariages put a strain on the relationship or something along those lines. That may have been true in his day. I don't think it's true today, outside of Utah or certain parts of Texas.

[SteelBlue]

Originally Posted by LA Ute

I'm sorry, what manual tells young men and young women to marry in their own race? Not disputing that but it's not in the manual we use in our ward.

If you're using the manual the church states you should be using this year it is Manual 3, lesson 31:

Compare the results of the vote with the following statement by President Spencer W. Kimball. Have a young man read it.
“We recommend that people marry those who are of the same racial background generally, and of somewhat the same economic and social and educational background (some of those are not an absolute necessity, but preferred), and above all, the same religious background, without question” (“Marriage and Divorce,” in 1976 Devotional Speeches of the Year [Provo: Brigham Young University Press, 1977], p. 144).

[exUte]

Originally Posted by SteelBlue

If you're using the manual the church states you should be using this year it is Manual 3, lesson 31:

generally and preferred? It's still a strain on families and the kids. Not as much but still a strain.

[Indy Coug]

...above all, the same religious background

Let's focus on the REAL point of emphasis here; or are we both progressive and naive enough to think that interfaith marriages are not worthy of warnings and disclaimers?

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Let's focus on the REAL point of emphasis here; or are we both progressive and naive enough to think that interfaith marriages are not worthy of warnings and disclaimers?

Bigot.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Let's focus on the REAL point of emphasis here; or are we both progressive and naive enough to think that interfaith marriages are not worthy of warnings and disclaimers?

translation: let's ignore the racism.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

translation: let's ignore the racism.

So an intellectual acknowledgment that differences in ethnic backgrounds can lead to added difficulties in marriage is racism?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

So an intellectual acknowledgment that differences in ethnic backgrounds can lead to added difficulties in marriage is racism?

It's not even true.

An intellectual acknowledgment that "cultural" difference can lead to difficulties in understanding, but racial or ethnic differences will not. The color of one's skin plays no roll in difficulties in marriage but cultural expectations may play a roll.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

So an intellectual acknowledgment that differences in ethnic backgrounds can lead to added difficulties in marriage is racism?

Why specify ethnic backgrounds? I think differences in general can lead to added difficulties in marriage, but of all the types of differences that may arise, ethnic background is probably the least important. That's the problem with the statement--it elevates racial differences to the level of other differences that actually may matter. It encourages decision-making based partially on the color of one's skin. In today's world, that's ridiculous. I was barely alive when he made the statement so I have no idea how racist or progressive it was at the time; it may, as Mike said, have been a very progressive statement for a man of his background. But today, it should not be in the manual.

Financial differences seem to cause the most problems, IMO.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

Why specify ethnic backgrounds? I think differences in general can lead to added difficulties in marriage, but of all the types of differences that may arise, ethnic background is probably the least important. That's the problem with the statement--it elevates racial differences to the level of other differences that actually may matter. It encourages decision-making based partially on the color of one's skin. In today's world, that's ridiculous. I was barely alive when he made the statement so I have no idea how racist or progressive it was at the time; it may, as Mike said, have been a very progressive statement for a man of his background. But today, it should not be in the manual.

Financial differences seem to cause the most problems, IMO.

Differences can be good. Apparently that is lost on some people.