1852 and The Beginnings of the Priesthood-Temple Ban in the Church 

Yeah, personally I don't believe history unless I live it myself because since the beginning history has changed after it happened

And if it (hateful policy passed off as doctrine)happened then, who's to say or not say that it has happened AGAIN? (Insert women or LGBT in place of 'black')

Dont listen to him! He is full if crap and doesnt know crap!!?

That's exact same situation as today. If the church stood against LBGTQ plus rights and stood a strong ground, people would cry and complain. If Brigham Young would have kept the priesthood in the church with the blacks at that time, people would have cried and complain. The church needs to do what God's will is and not what the cultural will is... People can choose whether the church is doing right or wrong at the time. It's a personal preference.

God doesn't need to tell us how to behave in every aspect of life. He intervenes when He desires, sometimes because we are not capable of working things out the way we should. We need to accept facts and work to not repeat the mistakes of the past.

I do not think the direction the church went was a fumble pre Civil War. The fumble was church members eventually believing the false doctrine Brigham used to justify his idea of no black leadership in Utah, and his servitude policy. Utah was a slave territory because of Brigham’s 1852 speech, many statements made thereafter, and considering the plight of stolen and misplaced naive Americans. There were dangers to the children of the Mexcan slve trade as natives sold or killed rivaling tribal children south, and servitude in Utah was a morally better policy than what existed before the saints arrived in the valley. Read “The Other Slavery” Working on homesteads with families of saints was better than the stolen children working to death in Mexican mines. The brutality required in the southern states to enforce slavery and segregation was completely legal and if Latter-Day Saints in Utah would have declared themselves a free territory and all rights given to former slaves, Latter-Day Saints would have been in danger all over the southern states. We had congregations there and Brigham needed to protect the saints from the general population of the USA. Also, do not forget that the Saints were evicted from the USA with shells and mortars. In 1850 Utah became a territory with no representation in the senate. Choosing to be a slave territory may have made Utah more likely to gain statehood considering the imbalance created in the senate of slave states vs free states when California became a free state and skipped being a territory. Also, consider that the southern states did not declare war on Utah( a slave territory) during the Civil War. Did being a slave territory help with not getting Utah sucked in to the Union army lines? Most likely. The church needed a policy or position that kept its members safest in multiple ways in multiple states, and multiple situations while it was legal to lynch dark and light people who intermarried. The LDS ban was the correct policy until the federal government was willing to put troops on the ground to enforce true freedom of all people and that did not happen until Eisenhower, JFK, and Johnson invoked the insurrection act in 1957, 1962, 1963, and 1968. There was really no recourse for those who breached the equality issue nationally until then since freedom was not really protected. We are one church. Not really able to have different policies crossing 50 state’s cultural lines spouting equality for all before it was protected by troops. The soonest the policy could have safely changed was possibly when the civil rights act was passed.

I do not think the direction the church went was a fumble pre Civil War. The fumble was church members eventually believing the false doctrine Brigham used to justify his idea of no black leadership in Utah, and his servitude policy. Utah was a slave territory because of Brigham’s 1852 speech, many statements made thereafter, and considering the plight of stolen and misplaced naive Americans. There were dangers to the children of the Mexcan slve trade as natives sold or killed rivaling tribal children south, and servitude in Utah was a morally better policy than what existed before the saints arrived in the valley. Read “The Other Slavery” Working on homesteads with families of saints was better than the stolen children working to death in Mexican mines. The brutality required in the southern states to enforce slavery and segregation was completely legal and if Latter-Day Saints in Utah would have declared themselves a free territory and all rights given to former slaves, Latter-Day Saints would have been in danger all over the southern states. We had congregations there and Brigham needed to protect the saints from the general population of the USA. Also, do not forget that the Saints were evicted from the USA with shells and mortars. In 1850 Utah became a territory with no representation in the senate. Choosing to be a slave territory may have made Utah more likely to gain statehood considering the imbalance created in the senate of slave states vs free states when California became a free state and skipped being a territory. Also, consider that the southern states did not declare war on Utah( a slave territory) during the Civil War. Did being a slave territory help with not getting Utah sucked in to the Union army lines? Most likely. The church needed a policy or position that kept its members safest in multiple ways in multiple states, and multiple situations while it was legal to lynch dark and light people who intermarried. The LDS ban was the correct policy until the federal government was willing to put troops on the ground to enforce true freedom of all people and that did not happen until Eisenhower, JFK, and Johnson invoked the insurrection act in 1957, 1962, 1963, and 1968. There was really no recourse for those who breached the equality issue nationally until then since freedom was not really protected. We are one church. Not really able to have different policies crossing 50 state’s cultural lines spouting equality for all before it was protected by troops. The soonest the policy could have safely changed was possibly when the civil rights act was passed.

Why is my following comment getting deleted?

God gave us prophets for a reason

Not the "book of Mormon " Joseph Smith was really creepy, dabbled in the occult!!! Throw out your book of Mormon, it's a path that leads you the wrong way!!!

Read my comment! Read the first chapter of Abraham!!! He is full of crap!!!

Don't be stupid!!! He is a lying apostate! READ the first chapter of Abraham!!!

Because it doesn't matter what policy the imperfect leaders enact; nothing trumps the Divinity of the Book of Mormon, the Plan of Salvation, or the true gospel of Jesus Christ.

@@jacobbuzan374 So true.

It’s important to keep in mind, in that era all the leaders of the church were recent converts as well. While the restrictions on black priesthood holders clearly did not come from the Lord. I would not equate that issue with polygamy. While Polygamy would have been very difficult for many of us to live. It’s important to point out that it was commanded by the Lord for his restored church to grow and very possibly for it to survive. How many members and leaders of the church today can trace their roots back to righteous polygamous marriages. A lot.

Jesus would say, Why did you not believe those scriptures from the books of Abraham and Moses that Joseph Smith translated? Why did you not believe the words that he spoke about it? Why did you not believe what so many prophets and apostles taught about it, even though some of their statements were incorrect. Did you not read in the scriptures where my mission only was to the Jews? Was I a racist for that, or was in Gods will? You should not have listened to those puffed up in pride in their own wisdom and learning! Why were you not afraid to speak that way about my servants?!? See Numbers 12!

@@joechristiansen6016 I don't believe that. I believe polygamy was something in all ages that was brought forth from Satan. That Brigham thought this was something to be restored because he (and many) thought this was something God instituted as shown by people living it in the Old Testament. If you read through the OT carefully keeping in mind the covenants made and when they are made, Abraham became the Father of the Covenant because he repentanted of that abomination (although it was Sarah who finally gave in to the culture and doubt that she would not be blessed with a child). When, the covenant was made they became a righteous branch. Same with Jacob, following a culture gave into another wife and concubines until he realizes after given Rachel and is given name of Israel as a sign of his covenant. Brigham brought on blood atonement /murder, he took away the relief society, he took away blacks holding the priesthood (although I don't think we even understand the priesthood because between God and a man can make this happen directly as it discusses in the scriptures in the Bible and Book of Mormon). Brigham did not repent but caused many, as compared to King Noah, to sin. The reason why we didn't have Zion is because a secret society was built up, killed Joseph and didn't live in the covenants God had established. We are slowly and individually coming back to God. Some are and some are not, it depends on our relationship with Him and our adherence to hear and hearken.