"Jeffrey Bennett" <jeffrbenn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:6d92cea9-18fd-4038-8bd8-d581a865f02c@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Assuming, however, that Brigham's mind WAS changed, you are probably
>going to have Utah win a few more friends in the Republican Party
>because of the anti-slavery thing, and it's possible that some Mormon
>soldiers could be used on the Northern side in the Civil War (I'm not
>sure if they were OTL or not),
Some LDS soldiers were raised to protect stage and mail routes, esp in
Wyoming Territory. Afaik, none served in the east. See
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20080526/ai_n25465423
for mote details.
Incidentally, I'm a bit unclear as to what exactly President Young is
supposed to change his mind _about_. A Vermonter by birth, he never
exhibited any particular Confederate leanings (whether from principle or
because he was too smart to back a loser) and in 1859 he told Horace
Greeley
that Utah would undoubtedly be a free state [1]. By 2008 standards he was
undoubtedly racist, and did not believe that Blacks were or should be
equal
to whites, but that was what most white Americans (even antislavery ones)
thought at the time.
If the Church had been more "colour-blind", about the only change I see is
that we avoid some embarrassment in the 1960s and '70s, as we don't have a
colour bar on the Priesthood. However, once that started to become an
issue,
it was disposed of in a decade or so anyway, so the effects are probably
marginal. Maybe we start making converts in South America a bit sooner and
faster, but even that's uncertain.
>but the polygamy issue will continue to
>dominate Mormon/non-Mormon relations.
It sure will.
[1] See Greeley's _An Overland Journey_, 1859.
--
Mike Stone - Peterborough, England
Q) In the Roman Civil Wars, why did all the bachelors fight for Sulla?
A) Because they weren't the Marian kind.
|
