You obviously did not click the link to the Peterson article. I suggest you do so. You will find THIS:
The reason that one would lose his blessings by marrying a Negro is due to the restriction placed upon them. "No person having the least particle of Negro blood can hold the Priesthood" (Brigham Young). It does not matter if they are one-sixth Negro or one-hundred and sixth, the curse of no Priesthood is the same. If an individual who is entitled to the Priesthood marries a Negro, the Lord has decreed that only spirits who are not eligible for the Priesthood will come to that marriage as children. To intermarry with a Negro is to forfeit a "Nation of Priesthood holders"....
(Try this one, Dengar)
Those were cultural beliefs of the time as much as they were part of their church. You can find statements from may American churches just like this; from Baptist to Pentecostal.
Why get into the liberals trick of guilt by association. They have used the same tactic against other Republicans because of past beliefs of their church.
Group damnation is just as much a liberal fallacy as group salvation.
I am perfectly well aware of BY’s position on the issue.
My post was to defend the Bible against the implication that it is racist.
Which it is not.
That’s the problem with “living prophets.” Their prophecies, which oddly enough tend to fit the prejudices of the times, often become a little more difficult to swallow when those prejudices change.