Westboro Baptist Church family disowns daughter — 20/20 (June 4, 2010)

7-Year Old Spews Hate As Coached By Parents, Parents Disown Daughter
The Westboro Baptist Church has always had a reputation for being prejudice towards certain ethnicities, races, and religions. However, very few people realize how much discrimination this church really preaches. The video above is a chilling documentary about one family who belongs to the Westboro Baptist Church. Children are taught, from birth on, that certain groups of people such as Jews, homosexuals, and men and women who fight in the military are wicked and hated by God. Anyone who disagrees with their beliefs are banished from their families and communities. Take a look and post your thoughts.

The Inspiring Yet Unknown History Of Mormonism In Africa

All italicized text is taken from a 1998 devotional talk by E. Dale Lebaron entitled:

“African Converts Without Baptism: A Unique And Inspiring Chapter In Church History.”

Full text available at the following link:

http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/daily/history/blacks/lebaron_africa.htm

The significance of this unique chapter of Church history was summed up by Brother Jude Inmpey from Nigeria. At a social gathering with mission couples, the mission president called on him to share his feelings about the gospel coming to his people. He related a dream that he had not understood until that moment. He had dreamed that he was in a gathering where an organ was playing background music. It sounded terrible, and people were complaining. They discovered that the organist was playing only on the white keys. Brother Inmpey then observed, "For many, many years the Church has been playing only the white keys, but now we are playing on the white and the black keys, and the music is much, much sweeter" (in LeBaron, All Are Alike unto God, p. 123).

In the L.D.S. faith, we routinely discuss the powerful stories of missionary work in England, from Wilford Woodruff to Dan Jones. We discuss without hesitation the unfolding of the gospel in South America and the Pacific Islands. We are familiar with the miracles of the restoration. I think that we are missing one of the most powerful and rich pieces of our history. The history of Mormonism in Africa is, in my opinion, one of the singular most powerful testimonies to the truthfulness of the church, and we don’t seem to know it. Is it because the stories of faith are surrounded by a story we fear to discuss (the priesthood ban) that we shy from sharing them?

This article that I have taken excerpts from, is worth reading top to bottom. Africans, before the revelation on the priesthood, were recipients of visions and revelations. They gained testimonies, powerful and sure. They wanted baptism, were denied it, and still waited for it. They had testimonies just like you and I, testimonies of living prophets and one true church—but theirs was a story of having to wait. Part of “playing on the black keys” is not only accepting the current presence of black membership, but discovering the beautiful past that led to the present. The following are several stories taken from the history of Christ’s dealing with His saints in Africa—they speak for themselves:

The first missionaries sent to Africa were Rendell and Rachel Mabey and Ted and Janath Cannon. They arrived in Nigeria just five months after the revelation. Their first baptism was an Elias named Anthony Obinna, who had waited and pleaded for membership for 13 years. In 1965 he had a dream that he did not understand but that impressed him deeply. He said:

One night I was sleeping and a tall man came to me . . . and took me to one of the most beautiful buildings and showed me all the rooms. At the end he showed himself in the crucified form. Then in 1970 I found [a] Reader's Digest article titled "The March of the Mormons," with a picture of the Salt Lake Temple. It was exactly the same building that I had seen in my dreams. [Interview with Anthony Obinna in Mbaise, Nigeria, 4 June 1988]

Immediately Brother Obinna wrote to Church headquarters requesting literature and baptism. He received literature, organized a congregation, and continued writing letters requesting baptism. Finally, after years of pleading, he wrote directly to the Council of Twelve, saying, "Your long silence about the establishment of the Church in Nigeria is very embarrassing. . . . Did Christ not say, 'Go ye and teach all nations?'" (Obinna interview).

It is not often that the Brethren are chastised by a nonmember of the Church for not baptizing converts. However, when Brother Obinna learned that the revelation had been received, he wrote the following to President Kimball:

We are happy for the many hours in the upper room of the temple you spent supplicating the Lord to bring us into the fold. We thank our Heavenly Father for hearing your prayers and ours and by revelation [confirming] the long promised day . . . to receive every blessing of the gospel. [Letter on file]

On the day Brother Obinna was baptized, he was ordained to the priesthood and set apart as the first black African branch president, and Sister Obinna became the first Relief Society president. Soon after his baptism Brother Obinna prophesied, "The seed of the gospel will grow into a giant tree. The Church in Nigeria will surprise the world in its growth" (letter on file). And so it has.

Brother Johnson also knew that the Lord called him to be an Elias. He said:

One early morning . . . I saw the heavens open and angels with trumpets singing songs of praise unto God. . . . In the course of this I heard my name mentioned thrice, "Johnson, Johnson, Johnson. If you will take up my work as I will command you, I will bless you and bless your land." Trembling and in tears I replied, "Lord, with thy help I will do whatsoever you will command me."

From that day onward, I was constrained by that Spirit to go from street to street . . . to deliver the message which we had read from the Book of Mormon. . . . I did exactly as the Lord commanded me . . . and immediately our persecutions started. [Johnson interview; also a letter from Brother Johnson to the First Presidency, 9 September 1978, and a handwritten document on the history of the Church in Ghana. These are on file with the author. See also E. Dale LeBaron, "All Are Alike unto God" (Orem, Utah: Granite Publishing, 1998), pp. 16–17]

Brother Johnson also reported that at a time of great trial early in his ministry, his deceased brother appeared to him in a dream and said:

"Don't worry. . . you have chosen the only true church on earth . . . and I am now investigating your church." I was surprised. I never knew that the Church extended to another world. It was my brother who brought that knowledge to me. He said that if I didn't believe him, he would sing a song from my church, and he sang "Come, Come, Ye Saints." That was the first time I had heard that hymn. He said, "Don't leave the church, my brother. . . . Please see that I am baptized."

Brother Johnson then noted:

It was my brother who enlightened me about baptism for the dead and brought it to my knowledge. . . . Most of my relatives appeared to me in dreams [saying,] "Reverend Johnson, do you know you have a work to do for us? Our great grandsons and daughters will be in your church soon. See that we are baptized." . . . I learned these doctrines before the missionaries arrived. Nothing they taught us seemed strange. They simply confirmed what we had heard. . . . Each time the Lord addressed us in dreams, He addressed us as Latter-day Saints, even though we had not yet become members.[Johnson interview; see also LeBaron, "All Are Alike," pp. 19–20]

A wonderful sister who performed an Elias-like mission to her people in Ghana was Priscilla Sampson-Davis. She obtained a Book of Mormon in 1963, then studied, prepared, and waited for 15 years. Soon after her baptism she had a vision that she described as follows:

I wasn't asleep. I saw myself at a sacrament meeting and we were singing when I saw a personage in very bright apparel standing in front of the congregation. The Personage called me by name and requested that I come and stand by Him. . . . He then asked me why some were not singing with the others. I told him that they could not read English. . . . He asked me if I wouldn't like to help my sisters and brothers sing praises to our Heavenly Father. I said that I would do my best. Then the vision passed away.

Immediately I . . . started translating the hymn Redeemer of Israel into Fanti [the major dialect in Ghana]. [From interview with Priscilla Sampson-Davis by E. Dale LeBaron in Cape Coast, Ghana, 19 May 1988; see also LeBaron, "All Are Alike," pp. 48–50]

Sister Sampson-Davis translated the hymns, the missionary pamphlets, and Gospel Principles. Then, under assignment, she translated the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price into Fanti. She said, "It was the Lord Himself who commissioned me to do the translation. . . . By translating these things, my brothers and sisters who can't understand English will be able to see and read the true gospel for themselves" (LeBaron, "All Are Alike," pp. 49–50).

Fluent in nine languages, Moses taught from the Book of Mormon and gathered many followers before he ever learned the name of the Church and made contact with it. Then, for more than 14 years he waited, preparing himself and others for baptism. During this time he frequently came to the mission office in Johannesburg to obtain copies of the Book of Mormon and other literature, and I was therefore privileged to know him.

Soon after the revelation was announced, I sought out Moses. As we embraced I asked him if he had heard about the revelation. He said, "Yes. Does this mean that I can now be baptized?"

I asked, "Moses, would you like to be baptized?"

His eyes welled up with tears as he said softly, "I have waited for 14 years."

Feel free to share any reactions to this article and these stories. In particular, I think it would be good to consider how powerful these stories are and why they are not better known in the church. What should change (if you think change is due at all) about our willingness to discuss the stories surrounding our church’s history of racially based policies?

plans for mosque next to World Trade Center Memorial

1,000 protest planned Islamic center, mosque near Ground Zero

Daily News Staff

Monday, June 7th 2010, 7:22 AM

Siegel for News

Vincent and Joyce Boland, whose son Vincent died on 9/11, were among hundreds who rallied across the street from the World Trade Center site on Sunday to protest plans to build a mosque nearby.

More than 1,000 people turned out Sunday to protest an Islamic community center and mosque planned near Ground Zero.

Waving U.S. flags and signs that said, "No 9/11 Mega Mosque," the crowd condemned the proposal to put the Islamic center near the site where nearly 3,000 people died when Islamic terrorists flew planes into the World Trade Center.

The proposed 13-story Cordoba House will be opened in a former Burlington Coat Factory on Park Place - two blocks from Ground Zero. It would include classrooms, a fitness center and a mosque.

The project's boosters say it would be similar to the 92nd St. Y and point out that it has the backing of the local community board and many politicians in lower Manhattan.

But the proposed mosque has also drawn criticism, including a blast from a Tea Party bigwig who said it would serve as a tribute to the 9/11 terrorists "for the worship of the terrorists' monkey-god."

I heard about this on the news the other day and I thought that the debate it has raised brings up a lot of interesting questions on both sides. Religious freedom is a right protected by the constitution but do you think that it would be in the best interest of the Muslim community to build a mosque just two blocks away from the site where misguided men killed nearly 3,000 people in the name of Islam? What do you think?

p.s. We'll just try to ignore the comment about Islam's "monkey-God"

Miss USA says 'American' is her preferred label

"Religion does not identify me," Miss USA Rima Fakih tells CNN.

Rima Fakih's beauty pageant sash declares that she is Miss USA, but journalists want to find other labels for her.

Questions about Fakih's ethnic and religious identity have been nearly as frequent as questions about photos of her dancing against a stripper's pole.

"I'd like to say I'm American first, and I am an Arab-American," Fakih said. "I am Lebanese-American, and I am Muslim-American."

Fakih, 24, was born in Lebanon, but her family moved to New York when she was 7 years old. She later moved to Michigan, where she went to college.

The rarity of a woman born in the Middle East representing the United States in the Miss Universe pageant spurred internet buzz. One rumor was that Fakih had family connections to Hezbollah, a Lebanese Shiite group that the U.S. designates as a terrorist organization.

"Absolutely not," Fakih told CNN's Octavia Nasr. "That is a stereotype and a prejudiced statement made by only one reporter who had made that title before I was crowned Miss USA."

The blogger's accusation "was completely made up out of her own prejudiced mind," she said.

Contrary to some reports, she said, her family did not live in Southern Lebanon, the hub of Hezbollah.

"We lived in the mountain area of Lebanon, which is predominantly Christian-based," she said. "The majority of my family is diverse. It's Muslim and Christian."

Fakih said religion should not be a question for Miss USA winners.

"Religion does not identify me, I would like to say that," she said. "My family is more of a spiritual family rather than religious. We've never been religious, we've been never known to be religious, and on top of everything, we celebrate Christmas."

Fakih attended a Catholic high school in New York, she said.

"We are Muslim," she said. "However, we appreciate and admire all faiths."

The reaction to Fakih's selection was cause for celebration for many in Lebanon, a country she visited just a few months ago.

"I want them to know that the United States is not what they see on TV," she said. "It is still a country of freedom and opportunity."

Fakih said she has been invited to visit Lebanon and meet with leaders there, including President Michel Suleiman.


So I wanted to post this for two reasons. First, the town meeting today was

"Is the emphasis on a color-blind society an answer to racism?"

I thought this tied in with the question of today, and my question to all of you is if you think this is a move toward a color blind society. I feel safe in saying that we live in a society that has an over-heightened fear of anyone of Middle-Eastern origin. This is thanks in part to 9/11 of course. Yet here we have a Muslim as the face of the most beautiful woman in all of America. Doesn't this signify a change in the right direction, or is it, as some have claimed, a show- a false move towards assimilation of all beliefs? Clearly some still are overly sensitive, what with the claims in the article that she is tied to Hezbollah. And of course, there is the whole controversy over the loaded question regarding the Arizona state law. What sayest thou?

Shocker: Most Backers of Arizona Law Support Humane Immigration Reform

This is part of an article from the Huffington Post written by Frank Sharry:

With national polls showing majority support for Arizona’s harsh immigration law, you probably think these voters are hard liners determined to rid the country of immigrants and deny a path to legal status for all of the undocumented immigrants in the U.S., right?

Wrong.

Here’s a shocker: four out of five voters who support Arizona’s new “papers-please” law also support comprehensive immigration reform that includes a pathway to citizenship for the undocumented. On the flip side, a paltry one in five support rounding up and deporting everyone here illegally.

In a bipartisan survey sponsored by America’s Voice Education Fund and conducted by Lake Research Partners and Public Opinion Strategies of 800 registered voters nationwide, with an oversample of 300 Latino registered voters, we sought to understand the motivations and sentiments underlying the top line support for Arizona’s tough immigration law. Here is what we found:

• Three out of five voters nationwide do indeed support the Arizona law. Not surprisingly, a majority of Latino voters oppose the law.
• At the same time, four out of five of the voters who support the Arizona law also support comprehensive immigration reform with a path to legal status for undocumented immigrants. Only one out of five support deportation as the preferred policy option when asked what to do about the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the country.
• In addition, strong majorities believe that illegal immigration is a national problem, prefer comprehensive reform to Arizona-style laws in their state, and want the problem of illegal immigration acted on now.

Here are the numbers. Like other polls, our latest shows that 60% of voters support the Arizona law nationwide, while 23% oppose it. No news there. But consider this finding: Fully 78% of all voters supported comprehensive immigration reform. Moreover, a whopping 84% of those who supported the Arizona law also supported comprehensive immigration reform.

This bears repeating:

More than 4 out of 5 voters who support the Arizona law support comprehensive reform with a path to citizenship. And 67% of them strongly support comprehensive immigration reform.

How can voters enthusiastically support an Arizona law aimed at expelling undocumented immigrants and even more enthusiastically support comprehensive immigration reform that brings undocumented immigrants onto a path to citizenship? What underpins these seemingly irreconcilable points of view?

At the core, voters’ support was rooted in frustration with lack of action at the federal level. When we asked voters why they supported Arizona’s law, the number one answer– by a whopping 52% – was that voters believed the federal government had failed to solve the problem. Only 28% said it was because they thought the law would reduce illegal immigration, and only 12% supported it because they thought it would reduce crime.

Furthermore, by a margin of 53% to 18% voters prefer a comprehensive national solution to a version of Arizona’s law in their own state. This is consistent with the finding that voters believe immigration is a national problem appropriately dealt with at a federal level (56%) rather than handled by individual states (22%).

The passage of the Arizona law has not lessened these voters’ appetite for immediate federal action. Three quarters of voters (76%) want action taken now, as opposed to waiting for action, and two thirds (67%) strongly desire action now.

Voters were asked to choose between three policy options: deporting immigrants in the U.S. illegally; having them stay only as temporary workers; or requiring them to undergo registration with the government, background checks, payment of taxes, learning English, and going to the back of the citizenship line. The results show 22% chose deportation, 8% chose the temporary worker solution, and the third option, the path to legal status, was by far the most popular at 64%.

If only the meaning of the nationwide reaction to Arizona’s tough new law broke through to more in the political class. At least Chris Mathews of MSNBC’s Hardball seems to get it. Watch the video in which he concludes that voters want solutions now and yet much prefer comprehensive reform with a path to legal status. He concludes:

"...So why is it so hard to do what the American people -- most of us -- so plainly want done?"

An excellent question. If anything, support for the Arizona law proves that the American people are growing increasingly impatient with Washington’s ineptitude on immigration.

President Obama, Arizona, and Immigration Hardball | America’s Voice

Reading the responses to the bill became reminiscent to the response many had over socialized healthcare passing in the House; although many did not approve of the contents in the bill, many were excited to see legislation of any kind be put into effect. It was as if any action of the federal government’s part was good action.

Those voters from the article who liked the bill but were also in favor of increasing legal immigration might be experiencing the same thing. For so long the government has been lackadaisical when it has come to dealing with immigration. History has shown their inability to even decide whether or not they want Mexican Immigrants here. Although this bill may be infuriating and flawed, it is a progressive step from the government at a high level to deal with the immigration issue, and that is worth applauding.

Second Grader Asks Michelle Obama About Immigration Reform

We've been talking a lot about illegal immigration and its' effects in class lately. I thought this was an interesting and thought-provoking video. When most of us think of illegal immigrants, typical stereotypes come to mind. We think of people who can't speak English, who work for low-paying jobs, and who are taking away from America's economy. I thought that this little girl was a great example of the face of illegal immigration today. On Yahoo News, there was an article about the story behind this little girl and her family's illegal entrance to America. Turns out that while this little girl, Daisy, has automatic US citizenship from being born here, her older sister, July, was left in Peru with grandparents so that the parents could come to the US. July still lives in Peru and only gets to see her parents via email, pictures, and videos. When footage of this video hit the news, Daisy's parents had to go into hiding because they were afraid of being sent back to Peru. While US officials have said that Daisy's parents will not be sent back to Peru based on the what Daisy said on TV about her parents, I believe Daisy brings up a good point. What is the solution to situations like Daisy's? What did you think of Michelle Obama's answer? Is there a viable solution to this problem we face as a nation?

America's Black Founding Fathers

As I washed the dishes, my roomate tuned into the Glenn Beck Show. It is "Founder's Friday." He discusses the role of African-Americans in the founding of America, not just post civil war. This is really interesting. I have found a video link for the program.



Interesting Facts:

The Painting of the Battle on Bunker Hill
Peter Salem, the hero of the battle, is painted behind a white guy. He saved scores of American lives.
Battle of Lexington
No people of color are painted, but there were equal number of whites and blacks in the battle.
George Washington Crossing
Prince Whipple helping row, he was a instrumental soldier.
James Armistad: was a double spy that basically won the Revolutionary War


A the first black judge was appointed in New Hampshire in 1770 and served in that capacity for 49 years. Judge Wentworth Cheswell (1746-1817) was a contemporary of Paul Revere who rode north proclaiming, "The English are coming, the English are coming!" He was also a teacher, war veteran, assessor, auditor, selectman, and first New Hampshire archeologist.
------------------------------------------
I found that Glen Beck offers brilliant historical insight that we were never taught in school. I can't believe that we weren't taught these things. The clip is a little long, but the insights of the various historians are priceless.

If we are "living in a color blind society" or in an era where people of color are treated equally, why are our history books not being reevaluated for additional multicultural truth? This information indicates that the struggle for civil rights has been in the works since the institution of the American democratic ideals.

Mexico backs U.S. border troops plan in principle

The following is an article from Reuters. It reads:

OTTAWA (Reuters) – Mexico does not object to U.S. plans to station troops along the border between the two nations as long as the soldiers do not arrest Mexicans trying to get into the United States, President Felipe Calderon said on Thursday.

U.S. President Barack Obama, reacting to drug violence in northern Mexico, said on Tuesday he would send 1,200 more National Guardtroops and ask for an additional $500 million to secure the almost 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border.

Calderon said that until now Washington had not properly addressed the need to stop what he called the trafficking of weapons and money into Mexico.

"They have a commitment to uphold the law on the American side and not to use the National Guard for immigration purposes or to deal withimmigration issues," Calderon told a news conference in Ottawa after talks with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

"If the National Guard helps toward a common purpose of having a safer border and if they can do this without detaining Mexican migrants, I think this (planned deployment) could bring about positive results," said Calderon, speaking through an interpreter.

The flow of illegal immigrants from Mexico is a very sensitive issue in the United States. Washington says the question can only be solved through comprehensive reform.

The U.S. ambassador to Mexico said on Wednesday that the extra troops would be working in back offices helping intelligence officials process information, or be posted as lookouts between ports of entry.

(Reporting by David Ljunggren; editing by Peter Galloway)

Mexico seems to be sending conflicting signals in an already tricky situation. Felipe Calderon says that the U.S. is doing its part on stopping the drug flow across borders, which is supportive to our cause. Yet he says it will only bring about positive results "if they can do this without detaining Mexican migrants." It is obvious the Mexican government is in favor of Mexicans illegally crossing the border, because the money immigrants send back to Mexico is a huge portion of their revenue, but shouldn't they be more supportive of the U.S.?

We Hold The Rock

In November of 1969, a group of Native American students from the Bay Area of San Francisco symbolically claimed the Island of Alcatraz for themselves. They were led by Richard Oakes and made demands for use of the island as a cultural center and and Indian university. The longest occupation lasted 19 months. Eventually people from the hippie and drug culture joined the Indians.

The government refused to give them any of their demands and made it appear that they were negotiating but in all actuality were just waiting, assuming the occupation would die out and the Indians would give up. The government shut off electricity and took the water barge that supplied fresh water to the island.

Originally the press was sympathetic to the Indians but after a year began publishing stories of beatings and assaults occurring on the island.

Finally Nixon gave the okay to remove the Indians from the island. Although the Indians didn't get the land, during their occupation on Alcatraz, Nixon returned Blue Lake and 48,000 acres of land to the Taos Indians. the Bureau of indian Affairs offices lead to the hiring of Native American's to work in the federal agency, and occupied land in California became a Native American University.

*info obtained from nps.org

How much crime is committed by illegal immigrants?

Here is another statement from Utah Representative Stephen Sandstrom:

"Illegal aliens [are] committing a disproportionate amount of murders [and] rapes in our state."

Representative Sandstrom was interviewed by Doug Fabrizio on Radiowest:

KUER: 5/18/10: Immigration and America's Identity (2010-05-18)

So, how much crime is really being committed by illegal immigrants?

Dora the Explorer: Illegal immigrant?

Dora the Explorer, the star of a popular children's show, is becoming a target during this controversy over Arizona's immigration law. In an article on MSNBC, a sociologist at the University of Cincinnati, Erynn Masi de Casanova says that although this above picture seems harmless it is really is a way for people to "project their thoughts and feelings about Latinos," Ironically, Dora is being used by both those who oppose and support the immigration law. She used to simply be a character in a children's show but she has now become a target in a political battle. The article mentions that although Nickelodeon refuses to comment on Dora's background the scenery in the show places Dora everywhere from a tropical land with pyramids, to a park with oak trees and a fox named Swiper. The article states "Many immigrant families, particularly Latinos, see Dora as a symbol of freedom, someone to relate to. She's a young girl with brown skin who lives in a borderless world and can travel anywhere she wants without consequence." Unfortunatley, the ambiguity of Dora's background makes her a target for supporters of Arizona's law. The interesting thing to me is the tactics people use to make a political point. Dora is not the only fictional character to become victim on political propaganda, remember Tinky Winky and Bert and Ernie, or how shocked we all were when J.K. Rowling annouced that Dumbledore is gay? I think this shows how important it is to be smart consumers of media and to not let it tell us how to think.

Read more: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/37279132/ns/us_news-life/?GT1=43001#ixzz0oiOLT7YQ

John Legend: It's OK to see race

This is an interesting video of John Legend talking about race, a colorblind society, and lack of education society.



Do you agree or disagree with his view? Why?