How did the LDS church violate civil rights laws?
It is alleged that the US government forced the LDS church to finally give ALL men in the LDS church the priesthood, when before 1978, blacks of African descent were not permitted to have the priesthood.
It is my understanding that, in order for it to be in violation of civil rights laws, it would have to be a paid position, a job. Our Priesthood is NOT a paid position, so no civil rights laws were violated, right?
Answers:
M4J- I understand your confusion, wanting to understand the Anti thought. We all know that the Church didn't make this change due to pressure from Uncle Sam. The civil rights movement was in the 1960s.. Whatever pressure President Kimball felt was from male members who didn't know their herritage and wanted temple blessings (and hence needed the priesthood), and that was in the late 1970s-- 10 years later.
Unfortunately, most anti-Mormon literature and thought is regurgitated and recycled baloney. But I agree- I'd like to know HOW they come to these conclusions.
Another good question would be--
HOW are equal rights laws to be applied in non-profit organizations... when all positions are volunteer?
The bigger question is why wouldn't you moonies allow blacks to be priests?
there was no goverment involvement. it was the result of revelation. churches are allowed to operate as they choose. the government has no say; hence the separation of church and state
You mean Spencer Kimball's revelation was faked due to political pressure?
Absolutely not. Civil rights laws apply to all instances of segregation, such as public schools, and the private sector (hiring practices, for example).
Welcome to the 21st century.
No, you are not correct.
Under the 13th Amendment, Congress can legislate anything that is a "badge or incident of slavery" -- as interpreted by the Supreme Court, that allows laws that make any kind of racial discrimination illegal, even non-commercial.
That being said, since it's now a matter of conflict between a fundamental right (1st Amendment, free exercise of religion) and a fundamental protection (13th Amendment) -- Congress should have stayed out of it.
Note that I am accepting (without verifying) your premise that Congress did mandate the change. If so, then checking the Congressional record (thomas.loc.gov) would help you to understand what actually happened, and how they justified the law (assuming there was such a law passed).
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question:
More Law Questions and Answers: