Video: Romney tears up
posted at 3:43 pm on December 16, 2007 by Michelle
Share on Facebook | regular view
Here’s the vid of Gov. Mitt Romney getting misty-eyed on MTP this morning:
Background here.
A few other reasons to reach for the Kleenex here.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Entelechy,
I really don’t care about Huckabee. I don’t think he will make it to the general. Romney has the money and organization to be in the campaign a long time.
bnelson44 on December 16, 2007 at 7:30 PM
It won’t be funny in Sept if Hillary’s camp hits Romney with racism charges and the GOP has nothing to fall back on but what Romney said today.
bnelson44 on December 16, 2007 at 7:31 PM
I happen to have seen that as it was not on cable TV, which I will never get as it cost more per month than it is worth for the whole year (just thought I would throw that in while I was at it), and he seemed sincere to me.
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 7:32 PM
None of your quoted exclamatory statements can be found anywhere in this thread.
Does misqouting your detractors make you a liar or merely swine, like the rest of us?
The Race Card on December 16, 2007 at 7:34 PM
Non sequitur.
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 7:35 PM
I guess we will leave it at that. We will see what happens if and when Mitt gets nominated whatever the Dems decide to lob at him.
bnelson44 on December 16, 2007 at 7:37 PM
*mere
Mere modifies the noun swine, not a verb. Pardon my error.
The Race Card on December 16, 2007 at 7:37 PM
If the HildaBeast does not get the dim nom, no Republican has much of a chance in Nov 2008 anyway.
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 7:39 PM
Robert Byrd is fully atoned, as far as the media, his actions afterward, etc. are concerned. The left gives all of their transgressions a pass. Therefore, I want them to apply the same standard to the right.
Nothing in Mr. Romney’s actions or words denotes that he is a racist.
To your analogy, I was born long after WWII into a German family in Romania. The ignorant called us kids Nazis sometimes. Do you think that I am a Nazi? Do you think that, if I should run for office, that I should have to distance myself from all which they did/stood for? (they were monsters whom I despise, btw, but my question is related to your analogy).
I’ll have to believe you.
Entelechy on December 16, 2007 at 7:42 PM
Don’t feel completely like the Lone Rangerette.
I recall my mom saying that, during the forties I guess, maybe even latter, her mom told her and her siblings that if anyone asked, they should say that they were of Norwegian descent rather than of German descent (they were both, but more German).
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 7:52 PM
Just reviewed the vid 3 times and saw a few extra blinks and a hard swallow. Certainly no waterworks.
I just watched a man — who has never had a racist bone in his body — recall the pride and relief he felt when an organization he belonged to, vindicated his own principles.
Yet this is the catalyst for a savaging at HA, MM, and FR.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 8:05 PM
Nobody think’s you’re a Nazi. I realize many people have caught the victim vapors and actually wish to be part of a marginalized group. Maybe you wish you were a Nazi, so your analogy would make sense. (If you find such a statement outrageous, maybe you should stop trying to mar yourself with Nazi stink just to make a tired point.)
Racial and ethnic heritage and lineage is ascribed to each of us involuntarily. One is born into such categories. Religion is different; typcally, it is a choice.
One has the right and responsibility to understand and acknowledge the public positions of organizations which they have joined. This includes religious groups.
We often require people to denounce their memberships or at least the actions of offensive groups to which they have belonged—CAIR, LA RAZA, MALDEF, KKK, etc.
The Race Card on December 16, 2007 at 8:08 PM
Vile attempt to threadjack.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 8:12 PM
Entelechy was born and raised in a country that felt the effects of WWII far longer than did the USA (try 40+ years longer). Don’t deny her experience just because you are unfamiliar with it.
baldilocks on December 16, 2007 at 8:14 PM
Maybe you wish that you were a Dingbat, but then … ……. …
So now Mormons are like the KKK?
If I were a Mormon I think that I would be seriously thinking about leaving the Republican party about now.
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 8:17 PM
Not really. The Catholic Church’s own study of the scandal (covered 1950 to 2004) revealed that 80% of the victims were male. I walked away from the Catholic Church because of that scandal and I was very pleased and relieved to hear Pope Benedict state that homosexuals were no longer welcome to join the priesthood. It appears that this pope is attempting to return the church to Scripture.
Something may have hit a cord for Romney, in the same way.
sinsing on December 16, 2007 at 8:23 PM
If I were a Mormon I think that I would be seriously thinking about leaving the Republican party about now.
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 8:17 PM
Of course I’d be thinking the same thing if I were a Cuban… considering the policies towards Castro of most of the frontrunners
blackrepublican on December 16, 2007 at 8:24 PM
But then again no one cares if Cuban-Americans leave the Republican party because Florida is unimportant to the electoral vote and if they live in Miami, they’re 3rd world anyways. /sarc
blackrepublican on December 16, 2007 at 8:26 PM
Most Cubans in America don’t have much use for Castro and the Republican party is much closer to that view than is the democrat party.
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 8:30 PM
you have just provoked me into responding to another attempted threadjack, so congratulations, br. You are talking to one vocal Cubaphile, and at least one other avowed Cubaphile on this very thread. I suggest that you lurk and learn before blurting your bitterness here at HA.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 8:33 PM
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 8:30 PM
That’s my whole point. If memory serves me right, most of the frontrunners have been squishy at one point or another on engagement with Castro.
blackrepublican on December 16, 2007 at 8:33 PM
There you go again, retreating into theology instead of sticking with politics, history, current events.
Why does the SBC get a pass anyway? God is not running for President, men are. Because the entire foundation of the SBC was made by men and not arrived at through revelation, Huckabee and others get a free pass in your estimation? Dittoes for Obama and his black separatist church?
I don’t think Huckabee does need to apologize for these things (anymore that any of us need to apologize for slavery) but then again I’m not insisting that Mitt apologize for things that he was not responsible for.
Well said.
Ha Ha! I think it went over bnelson44’s head though.
I think that your cynicism is a very unfair. Earlier you used a German/Nazi analogy. Hypothetically, if your parents were Nazis at one point but later renounced the Nazis, if you reacted emotionally, would it be fair to call your response “melodramatic”?
Bingo. As a conservative and a Christian, it’s really quite disheartening.
That is one of the most idiotic and ignorant statements I have ever heard. Why do you think they risk their lives to get here? So they can help the Socialists in the Democrat Party propagandize for Castro? Or could it be because they can’t bear to live under Castro’s tyranny?
Buy Danish on December 16, 2007 at 8:35 PM
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 8:33 PM
It’s not a threadjack. It’s about identity/affinity politics. I’m intrigued by the concern over a religious group leaving verus an ethnic group leaving the party. To me, it’s identity politics through and through. It’s just recognized as such in one context and not another.
blackrepublican on December 16, 2007 at 8:35 PM
The Race Card on December 16, 2007 at 8:08 PM
I thought so much higher of you, The Race Card, until this comment.
Ignorance is not bliss. Perception is also not reality. Reality is reality. Now, check it out, before you burn yourself this badly again.
Thank you all who know better.
Entelechy on December 16, 2007 at 8:36 PM
Buy Danish, my parents were never Nazis. Please don’t insinuate otherwise.
Entelechy on December 16, 2007 at 8:38 PM
That is one of the most idiotic and ignorant statements I have ever heard. Why do you think they risk their lives to get here? So they can help the Socialists in the Democrat Party propagandize for Castro? Or could it be because they can’t bear to live under Castro’s tyranny?
Buy Danish on December 16, 2007 at 8:35 PM
I was referring to Huckabee’s past support for lifting the Cuban embargo and Romney’s flubs during his first introduction to Cuban Republicans. I think you assume I’m arguing that Cubans would leave the Republican party over wanting to see the embargo lifted. Whereas I’m arguing the opposite — that the squishiness of the frontrunners (Thompson and Giuliani excluded) could prompt them to look elsewhere – especially combined with idiotic attacks on Miami by other presidential hopefuls.
blackrepublican on December 16, 2007 at 8:47 PM
Brother, you crossed the line when you suggested that Entelechy might wish to be a nazi, and that nazi stink is somehow a “tired point”.
Apologize to her at once, then let’s unpack your point about identity politics.
I’m facing you here, ready to shake hands and talk. But you really. really. need to apologize.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 8:49 PM
I think you’re confusing me with “The Race Card”, my friend. I’ve never mentioned “Nazi” in any of my posts nor will I.
blackrepublican on December 16, 2007 at 8:52 PM
RushBaby, you confuse the blackrepublican with The Race Card, who actually said that.
Entelechy on December 16, 2007 at 8:54 PM
*reads thread, backs away slowly*
Bad Candy on December 16, 2007 at 8:54 PM
Bad Candy, I thought you had a stronger constitution than that :)
Entelechy on December 16, 2007 at 8:56 PM
I stand corrected and apologize. Unforgivable mixup.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 8:57 PM
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 8:57 PM
Apology accepted. No worries.
blackrepublican on December 16, 2007 at 8:58 PM
I’m your huckleberry. What’s confusing? If you go through the entire thread, you should have all of the information you need. If not,
The Race Card on December 16, 2007 at 9:00 PM
Chica,
The analogy fell flat due to a lack of knowledge of history of the old Warsaw Pact countries. The only reason I know about it is because I had to (as you know). Your short overview of the bigotry in Romania against ethnic Germans–whether Nazi or not (and most weren’t)–makes sense considering the havoc that the Germans wrecked during WWII. Human nature and all that.
Also I think too many people are taking everything a little too personally. Cheers. Don’t spill it on yhour keyboard.
Wrong person.
baldilocks on December 16, 2007 at 9:00 PM
RB, I see you got it straight.
baldilocks on December 16, 2007 at 9:01 PM
I do, I thought I’d try and add a little humor, plus this threads a bit of an angry clusterf*ck.
Bad Candy on December 16, 2007 at 9:03 PM
Is it just me? Or, did i just skim through all this name-calling about racism and not see a SINGLE post dealing with the truly egregious error by Romney today: Saying that he would have supported an extension of the 1994 Clinton gun ban?
I don’t think anyone thinks a Northeastern RINO like Romney could be much of racist — at least in terms of public policy. (Finding black faces at Romney mansion parties might be another matter.)
I am, however, VERY worried about his stances on guns and illegal immigration.
In fact, from my point of view, you can put a fork in Mitt: He is done.
Why don’t we talk up Hunter and Tancredo? And, as a last resort, Thompson? Clearly, McCain, Romney, Giuliani, and the Hick are RINOs.
P.S. The elitism of Romney is also palpable: Not one of his five (able-bodied, military-age) sons has served a single day in the military in the past five years while we have had two shooting wars going on. As a military retiree with a military son (my only child) who was severely injured in Afghanistan, that hardly endears me to Romney. He is an empty suit: Away with him.
sanantonian on December 16, 2007 at 9:04 PM
Entelechy, I thought most of the ethnic Germans left after the war? There must not have been a lot of you left.
Bad Candy on December 16, 2007 at 9:06 PM
what’s new. this is h.a.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 9:06 PM
And another thing: I can’t wait until Michael Savage tears Mitt to shreds for crying on national television.
sanantonian on December 16, 2007 at 9:06 PM
I agree, Mitt’s stance on gun control is abhorrent. Not that Rudy’s is any better. Fred!
Bad Candy on December 16, 2007 at 9:07 PM
Yeah, but its a bit different when you’re in the fray from the beginning and walking in during the middle…
Bad Candy on December 16, 2007 at 9:08 PM
You talked about how just because you were a German you were called a Nazi. There is nothing that you said that would have led me to believe that they were (quite the contrary) and I did not mean to insinuate that they were. That’s why I said “hypothetically”. I was making an analogy that (hopefully) any of us could relate to on an emotional level, but I apologize if you or anyone else misunderstood.
I think there are arguments that can be made for or against continuing the embargo. Clearly Republicans oppose Castro, they differ on how to handle the situation. They certainly do not demean Cubans, so why would Cubans feel they have to leave the Party? That is a policy question, not a case of bigotry.
Buy Danish on December 16, 2007 at 9:09 PM
Not at all. If someone challenges you on it, you just claim you had been distracted by your bag of Cheetos.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 9:09 PM
Well if blackrepublican belongs to the same religion as The Race Card, then he should have to apologize anyway and go on TV with Tim Russert and give a speach denouncing whatever religion he and The Race Card belong to.
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 9:11 PM
huh?
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 9:14 PM
I’ll make this easy. Anybody who scolded me for making a very offensive remark was right to do so.
The point I was trying to make is unimportant. What is important that I own up to going over the top. Nothing I wished to impart is worth directly stating that anybody wishes they were a Nazi.
Entelechy, you expressed sentiments which I had no business mocking. I know you have thick enough skin to easily deflect such stupid remarks. But that does not make it OK.
I lose the argument by default for making such an obnoxious allegation. There is no way you could answer fairly.
Please do not mistake any other HotAir commenters for me, nor mistake my statements for theirs. I am alone on this one.
I would love to continue contributing to this thread, but I must sanction myself. Please disregard any provocative or otherwise interesting comments made myself.
My comments have not been helpful in this thread. There are many others who have soundly stated what I overstated.
Entelechy, I apologize to you. I offer no excuses, only regret.
The Race Card on December 16, 2007 at 9:17 PM
Very few these days serve in the military. Even less among the upper income families.
Just as long as his sons are not “beating the war drums”, I have no problem with them not going in.
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 9:18 PM
What part of Mitt’s response provoked your concern?
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 9:18 PM
Oh joy! Just what we needed – pile on now with a chickenhawk argument. Military service is a virtue; bitterness is not.
Buy Danish on December 16, 2007 at 9:20 PM
I was planning to vote for Romney, if he were the nominee until I saw this clip. But it just infuriated me as a gay man. I’m totally fine with people being apathetic about issues of equality which are often overrated. However, to claim to be so teary-eyed about blacks and then turn around and oppose gay marriage is more than I can stomach.
Either care about issues of basic equality for all human beings or don’t. Given the basic decency of society, it really doesn’t matter. But don’t be partial when playing this game. It’s just revolting.
thuja on December 16, 2007 at 9:21 PM
That was suppose to be sarcasm directed at some of the comments made on this thread.
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 9:22 PM
Do not let my apology stem the tide of your ire. I deserve it. I would also be interested to read and learn from any responses and/or input.
I hit a low. Up is looking good.
Now for your listening pleasure — I present my silence.
The Race Card on December 16, 2007 at 9:23 PM
How does opposition to gay marriage clash with issues of basic equality for all human beings? Genuine curiosity, not meant to be a challenge.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 9:24 PM
Thank you sir.
Griz on December 16, 2007 at 9:24 PM
Fred IS right Romney is becoming quite the actor
Gatordoug on December 16, 2007 at 9:24 PM
thuja,
Can you tell me what candidates support gay marriage, of either Party?
Buy Danish on December 16, 2007 at 9:27 PM
The Race Card:
Entelechy’s the one who needs to respond. I’ve got my fingers crossed.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 9:28 PM
Crazy people!
baldilocks on December 16, 2007 at 9:30 PM
Gay marriage isn’t about basic equality. Gay marriage is nothing more than handing out benefits to any two people who walk up to the justice of the peace and say they are married.
Gays are free to marry any person of the opposite gender they please, just like heterosexuals. They have equal voting and occupational rights. The Homosexual agenda is about indoctrinating children to view inherently dysfunctional relationships as equal to functional, healthy ones. Granting public acceptance through gay marriage is just the foot in the door to the real agenda.
I should know, we have “marriage equality” in Massachusetts and already homosexual advocates have swarmed here to indoctrinate our children.
BKennedy on December 16, 2007 at 9:32 PM
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 9:11 PM
If my religion stood for discriminating against 35 million Americans while I was an active proponent/promoter of it, I guess there’d be a few questions raised/denunciations in order if I was going to try to represent all Americans and earn the votes of those who I used to have no problem with my religion discriminating aginst.
We rightly want Barack to denounce the black separatist teachings of his pastor (from years ago). What’s so complicated about this?
blackrepublican on December 16, 2007 at 9:32 PM
I don’t know about anyone else, but with an apology like that, if I was a woman, I’d be ready to marry him!!!
That was every woman’s dream!!!
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 9:34 PM
It is turning into a bit of a whine fest.
It’s not from years ago. Behold the website to the Trinity United Church of Christ, which he claims to belong to now.
Buy Danish on December 16, 2007 at 9:40 PM
The apology was eloquently written, so you project female responses to it. Not one of your most brilliant contributions, MB4.
As one human being to another, don’t you recognize that none of us, besides E, can accept the proffered apology?
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 9:40 PM
As I understand it, the discrimination was only to a high position like Bishop or something and that is now history and no Romney was ever in favor of it.
Romney’s own father was one of a minority of Republicans backing the civil rights movement of the sixties. I think that his mother was active too.
The Catholic Church still will not allow women, half the population, to be Priests. I doubt that there are many blacks as ministers in Evangelical Churches that are mostly white.
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 9:41 PM
I found and interesting link Ya’ll….
Seems like Black members of Mitts church have their own web site I would suggest reading this before ya’ll bloviate any further…
http://www.blacklds.org/
Love ya’ll and peace!!!!
-Wasteland Man
WastelandMan on December 16, 2007 at 9:41 PM
Could be the first time I have agreed with every word of a BKennedy post. w00t!
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 9:43 PM
My memory must be failing me as I don’t seem to be able to recall you EVER thinking that ANY of my contributions were even luminescent.
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 9:47 PM
Assumes facts not in evidence.
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 9:48 PM
Obama’s church links directly to “Trumpet Magazine”. Note the adoring article on Louis Farrakhan.
Buy Danish on December 16, 2007 at 9:53 PM
I do not give an apology with the expectation of forgiveness.
Entelechy, you do not even owe me a response; my apology stands.
So much for silence, sorry.
The Race Card on December 16, 2007 at 9:57 PM
I have coldly, brutally, sadistically, and with planning aforethought, withheld approval of your contributions. Except when you admitted you like cats. :grin:
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 10:04 PM
Humanity debate not for these pages. I would challenge you to a face-to-face. But! You have already responded that us “people” “scare [you]“.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 10:06 PM
Well, I’m under the impression that all the Democratic candidates support de facto gay marriage or domestic partnerships, but I haven’t checked. And its not just the Democrats. I had a conversation with a very conservative young woman going to Iraq soon and she said opposed gay marriage. But she was all in favor of equal benefits for gay and straight couples. How does anyone expect to stop gay people from calling their domestic partnerships “marriage” and what possible force in our society will stop just about everyone else from following?
RushBaby,
I fear I’m so right-wing that I’m not really good at articulating arguments why gay marriage is an issue of basic equality. It’s just too backwards to my usual way of thinking as a fan of Dick Cheney. I’ll try to come up with a good argument tomorrow morning, if I’m being flippant and I do fear I’m being too flippant. I apologize for this bad answer, but I’m going to sleep.
thuja on December 16, 2007 at 10:08 PM
Sweet dreams, Thuja. And a ginormous Hug from Texas.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 10:18 PM
Well at least it sounds like you have been enjoying yourself.
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 10:25 PM
Some of you do.
MB4 on December 16, 2007 at 10:26 PM
What do you say about the substance of my reponse?
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 10:28 PM
or domestic partnerships, but I haven’t checked.
thuja on December 16, 2007 at 10:08 PM
You are under the wrong impression about Dems and gay marriage.
goodnight.
Buy Danish on December 16, 2007 at 10:28 PM
Woops.
I messed up the quote from Thuja but I think you all can figure it out.
Buy Danish on December 16, 2007 at 10:29 PM
Government ought to get out of the marriage game. Let people define marriage themselves. I really don’t give a crap if some gay dude wants to call himself married to some other dude, and I don’t care if a church wants to only marry straight couples. As long as they’re adults capable of true consent, go wild.
I’m as tired of the slapfights on gov’t definition of marriage as I am aggro atheist/religious slapfights.
Bad Candy on December 16, 2007 at 10:30 PM
Cute, from a fighter such as yourself. See ya in the fray.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 10:34 PM
Dear Race Card, apology unequivocably accepted, and we are as good as we’ve been before. Please carry on as if nothing ever happened untoward between us.
p.s. I’m not responding because I have to, but because I want to.
p.p.s. The only reason for the delay was that I went to cook dinner. Sorry for the wait. If I’d have been here, you would have heard from me instantly. Btw, my skin’s not that thick (I blush a lot) – it’s my rationale and good nature which can handle just about anything.
p.p.p.s If you’re a guy, I can’t marry you, because I’ll wait for MB4, if RushBaby doesn’t kill him in a duel :)
Entelechy on December 16, 2007 at 10:35 PM
Hey, I’m fighting, I’m in favor of reducing gov’t power!
Bad Candy on December 16, 2007 at 10:35 PM
Heh, wait and you will see – RushBaby’s pen is way sharp, his sward, not so much.
Entelechy on December 16, 2007 at 10:37 PM
If any long-time commenter can point to a record of flawless posts, let him or her claim it.
Never gonna happen.
No worries.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 10:38 PM
You think I’m on a side in the aggro atheist/religious fight? Hardly! I’d like everyone to mellow the hell out, I just think that atheists are more venomous in their rhetoric and attitudes right now.
Bad Candy on December 16, 2007 at 10:39 PM
When overly religious start getting too aggro, I’m ready to crack skulls too, I’ve been critical of the people unfair to Mitt and his Mormonism in the past as well.
Bad Candy on December 16, 2007 at 10:41 PM
Now I can sleep easily. :-)
Later.
baldilocks on December 16, 2007 at 10:43 PM
See,this is why. This is the reason. *stammering*
A poem met with a simple answer.
This, my friends, is humanity.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 10:44 PM
Did you happen to see my “aiming outside the circle” comment?
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 10:47 PM
Never mind, it was a totally narcissistic brag about my New Years Resolution:
If you’re aiming outside the circle, come stand by me.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 10:50 PM
Ah, nah, didn’t see it.
Bad Candy on December 16, 2007 at 10:55 PM
little wonder. crapcomment, after all.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 10:57 PM
Du bist ein Engel, aber ich wiederhole doch :) Respectfully, always,
Entelechy on December 16, 2007 at 11:02 PM
s/b sword. Limerick, I keep trying :)
Entelechy on December 16, 2007 at 11:05 PM
I am a harmless lovable marshmallow. Too bad I scared you.
RushBaby on December 16, 2007 at 11:09 PM
As a white LDS member, I wish you all could understand why Mitt and other LDS members would be hesitant to say that the LDS church was wrong to restrict Black members from being ordained to the priesthood. We believe that Jesus Christ is the actual head of our church and that He speaks through his prophet. So saying the church was wrong would be like saying that the Lord was wrong. However, we do believe that the leaders of the church are human beings with human failings and that they can make mistakes.
Brigham Young was the leader of the church who said that blacks could not hold the priesthood. The founder of the church Joseph Smith ordained several black men to the priesthood (see WastelandMan’s link) and was very anti-slavery. Brigham Young and many members at the time held views on blacks similar to those of other Americans at the time. Most white Americans at that time viewed Blacks as inferior. These views are appalling to most modern Americans, especially those of us born after the 60’s.
I was a very young child when 1978 policy change was made and so it has been very hard for me to understand why it took so long for the change to come. I was raised to follow the Golden rule and to treat everyone equally regardless of race. I do remember my grandparents (who were converts to the LDS church) occasionally said racist things that wouldn’t be out of place in their era, but would be considered offensive now.
After much contemplation, I believe that although the Lord’s gospel is perfect, the people who claim to follow His gospel are not and that is sometimes reflected in church policies. Why the Lord didn’t reveal the change to the prophet sooner, I don’t know for sure, but I believe that He was waiting for the white members to want it for black brothers–to stop being racist so to speak and see them as spiritual equals even though the Lord had always seen them that way.
Some of you that aren’t LDS may scoff at this, but the prophet at the time, President Spencer W. Kimball, agonized and prayed for months for the Lord to tell him personally that the priesthood could be given to every male. If you have ever heard him speak, you’d know that he was a kind and sincere person. I don’t think the Lord always tells us what to do, He expects us to figure it out on our own and to exercise faith and then ask Him if it is right. Sometimes it takes a while to hear His answer. Why? I don’t know.
For a long time, there weren’t many black LDS members, so the issue wasn’t really addressed, but then in the 60s the church took off in Brazil and later in Africa. Many blacks joined even though they knew they couldn’t have the priesthood. Some in Africa set up whole congregations without any help from LDS church headquarters. Why? Because they believed in the message of the gospel and they believed that someday their faith would be rewarded.
The LDS don’t believe that the priesthood can be handed out like candy to anyone that asks for it. It’s God’s to give to us through His servants that have His authority. I’m a woman and I wouldn’t presume to tell God that I have the right to His priesthood. Plus, I’d rather not have to go to all the extra meetings that my husband has to attend every week. :-) We’ve all got our own roles to play in this life.
Anyway, sorry for the long post. This is an issue that I feel passionate about.
drflykilla on December 16, 2007 at 11:12 PM
Geez. My long comment seems a little out of place after that friendly banter between ya’ll. ;-)
drflykilla on December 16, 2007 at 11:17 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »