Changes to church handbook re: homosexuality

[statman]

Because promiscuous gays are subject to HIV but promiscuous heteros are not?

In terms of the odds? Yeah, pretty much. HIV is much more easily through homosexual sex than heterosexual sex.

Don't get me wrong - it can definitely be transmitted through heterosexual sex, just not as easily.

[Donuthole]

Because promiscuous gays are subject to HIV but promiscuous heteros are not?

You make the point in jest, but a sexually active gay male is much more likely to contract HIV than a sexually active straight male. I'm not really sure what that has to do with anything, though.

[Danimal]

In terms of the odds? Yeah, pretty much. HIV is much more easily through homosexual sex than heterosexual sex.

Don't get me wrong - it can definitely be transmitted through heterosexual sex, just not as easily.

I believe that heterosexual women are at highest risk at this time.

[statman]

please send them to me. I want to read them!

Ps how silly that members must be secretive or have special conncetions to read the Official Handbook of Instructions for their own Church.

It's not silly at all.

There is nothing in the HOI that can' be discussed between leadership and membership. The content is not secret. The purpose is to limit legal-type arguments over what "the Church says."

Frankly, much (most?) of the CHOI is nothing more than guidelines for leadership - guidelines that can be preempted by the leaders' leaders or by his own discernment. The open publication of the CHOI would spur improper behavior by many rank-and-file members who would try to hold a Bishop or Stake President accountable to the 'letter of the law.' In reality, leaders are expected to use their discernment when applying "the law." Allowing members the ability to make legalistic, "The CHOI says X"-type arguments would only be opening a big old can of nasty worms.

To the extent that it can be avoided in the digital age, it makes things a lot easier for volunteer bishops adn stake presidents to lead if they don't have sister so-and-so coming to him every other week telling him that he's not following the CHOI to the letter...

[OrangeUte]

It's not silly at all.

There is nothing in the HOI that can' be discussed between leadership and membership. The content is not secret. The purpose is to limit legal-type arguments over what "the Church says."

Frankly, much (most?) of the CHOI is nothing more than guidelines for leadership - guidelines that can be preempted by the leaders' leaders or by his own discernment. The open publication of the CHOI would spur improper behavior by many rank-and-file members who would try to hold a Bishop or Stake President accountable to the 'letter of the law.' In reality, leaders are expected to use their discernment when applying "the law." Allowing members the ability to make legalistic, "The CHOI says X"-type arguments would only be opening a big old can of nasty worms.

To the extent that it can be avoided in the digital age, it makes things a lot easier for volunteer bishops adn stake presidents to lead if they don't have sister so-and-so coming to him every other week telling him that he's not following the CHOI to the letter...

so, why not publish them on the church website, and why sue when they are posted elsewhere?

[OrangeUte]

It's not silly at all.

There is nothing in the HOI that can' be discussed between leadership and membership. The content is not secret. The purpose is to limit legal-type arguments over what "the Church says."

Frankly, much (most?) of the CHOI is nothing more than guidelines for leadership - guidelines that can be preempted by the leaders' leaders or by his own discernment. The open publication of the CHOI would spur improper behavior by many rank-and-file members who would try to hold a Bishop or Stake President accountable to the 'letter of the law.' In reality, leaders are expected to use their discernment when applying "the law." Allowing members the ability to make legalistic, "The CHOI says X"-type arguments would only be opening a big old can of nasty worms.

To the extent that it can be avoided in the digital age, it makes things a lot easier for volunteer bishops adn stake presidents to lead if they don't have sister so-and-so coming to him every other week telling him that he's not following the CHOI to the letter...

nevermind, you already answered my question. i disagree, though, that the reason for not publishing these manuals is because of ease to bishops in not having to have Sister so-and-so coming in with complaints. It is more likely an effort to keep an aspect of control in the church's official hand by holding on to the knowledge and not sharing it with every member of the church.

[TripletDaddy]

It's not silly at all.

There is nothing in the HOI that can' be discussed between leadership and membership. The content is not secret. The purpose is to limit legal-type arguments over what "the Church says."

Frankly, much (most?) of the CHOI is nothing more than guidelines for leadership - guidelines that can be preempted by the leaders' leaders or by his own discernment. The open publication of the CHOI would spur improper behavior by many rank-and-file members who would try to hold a Bishop or Stake President accountable to the 'letter of the law.' In reality, leaders are expected to use their discernment when applying "the law." Allowing members the ability to make legalistic, "The CHOI says X"-type arguments would only be opening a big old can of nasty worms.

To the extent that it can be avoided in the digital age, it makes things a lot easier for volunteer bishops adn stake presidents to lead if they don't have sister so-and-so coming to him every other week telling him that he's not following the CHOI to the letter...

No doubt that it is easier for a leader of ANY organization to be able to lead if that leader can do so without being questioned. That is your best explanation? Making this info accessible to members would make things tough for the Bishop because he would have to answer to the members of his ward?

You seem to only be arguing one side of the coin. What about the incremental time savings for Bishops that don't have to meet with members to answer any little silly question. The CHOI has a bunch of info that affects the daily lives of members. If the info is accessible, members don't have to ask the Bishop about the minutiae.

[statman]

I don't think so. The church performs civil marriages to facilitate the baptism and/or eventual sealing of that couple. I guess it's possible there may be weddings at LDS chapels where both are not members and don't intend to become members, but I've never heard of that before.

We had a rather remarkable one when I was a teenager (marriage of two non-members). The people whose daughter got married lived right next to the church - and were royal pains in the butt for about the two decades prior to the wedding - complaints to local members (my parents and others who lived in the subdivision), the bishop, town government, police, etc about activities going on at the Church "at all hours." They were active in local politics, and there was constant bitching and moaning on their part about the local LDS church.

They kind of sheepishly asked the bishop if it would be okay to have their daughter's wedding at the church - and if he would perform the ceremony. He consented. They were surprised.

They asked that two local guys from the neighborhood be allowed to give brief talks/sermons/messages - my dad and and another HP from the ward. Both my dad and the other guy had been at the epicenter of many of the complaints over the previous 20 years - not about them, but to them.

They really didn't didn't expect the bishop to consent, and when he did they didn't expect much...

But the services were impressive. It started with young men dressed in more-or-less matching suits wearing ties that matched the wedding party's colors (RS Pres - my mom - bought them) directing parking and leading guests to where they needed to go. The music was first rate (college music professor was our ward music director). The talks were all on the Plan of Salvation and how marriage applies to it all - although not in exactly those terms. There was no weird Mormon Doctrines taught. In fact very much the opposite. They were impressed at how simple and straight forward the talks were and were especially impressed by how well they were delivered by 'laymen' - the guys from the neighborhood (who were probably included on the requested list of speakers as ways to slam them, although who knows...).

Anyway, the only negatives about the whole thing was they were asked not to serve alcohol at the reception - they understood, but would've liked an exception. Since they lived literally next to the church, it was easy enough to have the dinner, dancing, cut the cake part of the reception in the cultural hall - and the drinking part at their house. With people kind of going back and forth all afternoon. The bishop was a little perplexed about having a bunch of intoxicated/semi-intoxicated people at church, but pretty quickly just decided to roll with it.

And it was all for free (of course). And then on top of it, the local relief society did all the 'catering' at cost - and it was actually good food, not the standard church function food. They decked the whole place out as I've never seen an LDS chapel & cultural hall been docorated before or since. All very nice - flowers everywhere. When you're not paying anything for the 'hall' and the catering is done at cost, you can go nuts on decorations...

It was a really nice 'community outreach' type effort. And it worked - these folks turned from being locally active antagonists of the church at all local government functions, to big proponents.

About 15 years later, that building burned down (arson - a disgruntled guy hired by the general contractor that was doing a full building renovation), and these folks became the biggest drivers in local government for getting the church a new piece of land. they put the Church and a local developer together - he gave the Church a fantastic deal on a piece of land. It would've been great for a business, but not great for residential, but it wasn't zoned for commercial. He'd been trying to get it rezoned, but was bumping heads with local government. These folks put the developer in touch with the Church, and helped work out a deal. They also helped push everything through the local building permit process, getting environmental impact studies, etc.

The stake president at the time - responsible for locating and buying the land and getting the permit stuff done - was the bishop who'd allowed for their daughter's wedding. He said at the time they were building the new building, that he was most definitely inspired to let them have the wedding at the meetinghouse - that his first impulse was to tell them to go pound sand - they'd been such douche bags over the years (my words!). But several years later their new views of the Church turned out to be VERY beneficial...

[Mormon Red Death]

No doubt that it is easier for a leader of ANY organization to be able to lead if that leader can do so without being questioned. That is your best explanation? Making this info accessible to members would make things tough for the Bishop because he would have to answer to the members of his ward?

No the real answer is that we have the secret formula that if other churches found out it would increase their membership and tithing receipts ten fold! The church needs to keep these policies secret so they don't lose their spot in the US news world report most efficient church rankings.

[LA Ute]

No the real answer is that we have the secret formula that if other churches found out it would increase their membership and tithing receipts ten fold! The church needs to keep these policies secret so they don't lose their spot in the US news world report most efficient church rankings.

You're in a lot of trouble now for revealing that.

[Mormon Red Death]

You're in a lot of trouble now for revealing that.

They will never catch me!!!

[TripletDaddy]

No the real answer is that we have the secret formula that if other churches found out it would increase their membership and tithing receipts ten fold! The church needs to keep these policies secret so they don't lose their spot in the US news world report most efficient church rankings.

This is actually a funny concept. The Church has its own version of the "11 Herbs and Spices."

[beelzebabette]

This is actually a funny concept. The Church has its own version of the "11 Herbs and Spices."

I'm of the opinion that, if someone actually wades through the books of the CHOI--wikileaks or not--that person deserves the recipe.

[Lost Student]

This is actually a funny concept. The Church has its own version of the "11 Herbs and Spices."

I like it. As an IP lawyer, I always see a lot of businesses that screw up their trade secret rights by failing to put the proper NDA/non-compete agreements in place. I hope the Church has prepared the proper documents for everybody to sign at the leadership meeting.

[SloanHater]

please send them to me. I want to read them!

Ps how silly that members must be secretive or have special conncetions to read the Official Handbook of Instructions for their own Church.

How silly that you don't have the balls to ask for a copy.