If a female tried to get into the priesthood session of GC...

[smokymountainrain]

Shall we subject seminary teachers and run-of-the-mill Sacrament Meeting speakers to the same scrutiny? How about Sunday School teachers? How about any number of GAs?
I've heard bat-shit crazy of the conservative variety on a routine basis at church and it is inevitably overlooked.

Could this be just the tiniest bit of the bias and alienating behavior that she references?

Yes, yes and yes.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Yes, yes and yes.

SiEQ obviously does not read the Foyer.

[Northwestcoug]

When a person makes up stats like that just for shock value, I think it severely damages the credibility. Too bad, because if she had said 20% of homeless teens are gay or lesbians who have been kicked out of their LDS homes, that would have been plenty shocking.

Perhaps she is aware of some other study that would lend credibility to that comment.

(edit) you could be right, NWC, but to err in her own favor like that really makes me question whether she deserves that benefit of the doubt.

I hear you. And we still don't know the data that these estimates are based on. That number could be way off.

[pellegrino]

Shall we subject seminary teachers and run-of-the-mill Sacrament Meeting speakers to the same scrutiny? How about Sunday School teachers? How about any number of GAs?

I've heard bat-shit crazy of the conservative variety on a routine basis at church and it is inevitably overlooked.

Could this be just the tiniest bit of the bias and alienating behavior that she references?

[pellegrino]

SiEQ obviously does not read the Foyer.

I don't think that was his point.

[All-American]

Supposedly this talk was given in sacrament meeting the other day by an OW supporter...

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6sd...dzg/edit?pli=1

So who heard this talk?

I hate crap like this.

Look, if you have your cause, by all means, fight it. Talk to your friends. Talk to your enemies. Knock on doors. Hold meetings. Fine by me. I am even somewhat sympathetic to the overall ideas in the talk (while reserving a great many quibbles-- how exactly, for example, did she come across the knowledge of how the family proclamation came about?).

But there is a place for this conversation and it is not at worship service.

[myboynoah]

I hate crap like this.

Look, if you have your cause, by all means, fight it. Talk to your friends. Talk to your enemies. Knock on doors. Hold meetings. Fine by me. I am even somewhat sympathetic to the overall ideas in the talk (while reserving a great many quibbles-- how exactly, for example, did she come across the knowledge of how the family proclamation came about?).

But there is a place for this conversation and it is not at worship service.

Agreed. Take it elsewhere.

[Pelado]

I hate crap like this.

Look, if you have your cause, by all means, fight it. Talk to your friends. Talk to your enemies. Knock on doors. Hold meetings. Fine by me. I am even somewhat sympathetic to the overall ideas in the talk (while reserving a great many quibbles-- how exactly, for example, did she come across the knowledge of how the family proclamation came about?).

But there is a place for this conversation and it is not at worship service.

http://rationalfaiths.com/why-arent-the-women-included/

https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-c..._V45N01_CO.pdf

Greg Prince: Should the Relief Society president sit in on bishopric
meetings?

Chieko Okazaki: It would be a great idea. They are in the council
meetings, but in many council meetings the person who is in
charge is the only one who is talking. I’m on several community
boards, and sometimes I’m the only woman there or one of two or
three women. I’m on the YWCA advisory board; I’m on the advisory
board for the University of Utah Graduate School of Social
Work; and I’m on the Belle Spafford Chair board. If I got the message
that I was supposed to just sit there and listen to the men, I’d
quit that board. I’d say, “What am I here for?” I speak up a lot in
all of these board meetings.

In contrast, in 1995 when “The Family: A Proclamation to the
World” was written, the Relief Society presidency was asked to
come to a meeting. We did, and they read this proclamation. It
was all finished. The only question was whether they should present
it at the priesthood meeting or at the Relief Society meeting.
It didn’t matter to me where it was presented. What I wanted to
know was, “How come we weren’t consulted?”

Greg Prince: You didn’t even know it was in the works?

Chieko Okazaki: No. They just asked us which meeting to present it
in, and we said, “Whatever President Hinckley decides is fine with
us.” He decided to do it at the Relief Society meeting. The apostle
who was our liaison said, “Isn’t it wonderful that he made the
choice to present it at the Relief Society meeting?” Well, that was
fine, but as I read it I thought that we could have made a few
changes in it.

Sometimes I think they get so busy that they forget that we are
there.

[pellegrino]

I hate crap like this.

Look, if you have your cause, by all means, fight it. Talk to your friends. Talk to your enemies. Knock on doors. Hold meetings. Fine by me. I am even somewhat sympathetic to the overall ideas in the talk (while reserving a great many quibbles-- how exactly, for example, did she come across the knowledge of how the family proclamation came about?).

But there is a place for this conversation and it is not at worship service.

https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-c..._V45N01_CO.pdf

I get your opinion on the venue, but she has a point. Official worship services are doing a very very poor job of meeting the needs of a growing population in the church. Are we to satisfy the needs of the ninety and nine at the expense of the one?

[pellegrino]

Agreed. Take it elsewhere.

Where? Seriously, where can conversations like this happen in a way that reaches the general body of the church? Sure, the internet has proven to be a gathering place for like-minded Mormons, but that just gives them a way to bitch and moan. It does nothing to start a meaningful dialogue between members who differ on issues like this, which is what really needs to happen. As uncomfortable as it is to the orthodox members, I think there have to be times when uncomfortable topics like this are discussed and alternate points of view are put forth, even in Sacrament meeting.

[All-American]

http://rationalfaiths.com/why-arent-the-women-included/

https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-c..._V45N01_CO.pdf

Ah. Interesting.

[All-American]

https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-c..._V45N01_CO.pdf

I get your opinion on the venue, but she has a point. Official worship services are doing a very very poor job of meeting the needs of a growing population in the church. Are we to satisfy the needs of the ninety and nine at the expense of the one?

We can absolutely improve. But I dare say actions like this talk have much more to do with satisfying the needs of the one at the expense of the ninety and nine.

[All-American]

Where?

utahbyfive.

Seriously, where can conversations like this happen in a way that reaches the general body of the church? Sure, the internet has proven to be a gathering place for like-minded Mormons, but that just gives them a way to bitch and moan. It does nothing to start a meaningful dialogue between members who differ on issues like this, which is what really needs to happen. As uncomfortable as it is to the orthodox members, I think there have to be times when uncomfortable topics like this are discussed and alternate points of view are put forth, even in Sacrament meeting.

There I have to disagree. The purpose of sacrament meeting is communion, particularly with Jesus Christ, but also with the body of the church. The talk was contentious and divisive-- and was probably meant to be. Entirely inappropriate, in my view.

[Uncle Ted]

Agreed. Take it elsewhere.

Folks are taking it elsewhere and not coming back to the church. From the interview of Chieko Okazaki, for example:

Greg Prince: So how do we stop the hemorrhage? We have lost so many people. To me there is a double tragedy. It’s not just that they leave our church; it’s that usually they don’t leave it to go to another one. They just abandon religion in general.


Chieko Okazaki: I heard President Hinckley talk about the impor- tance of retention, and he was really worried.

[pellegrino]

utahbyfive.

There I have to disagree. The purpose of sacrament meeting is communion, particularly with Jesus Christ, but also with the body of the church. The talk was contentious and divisive-- and was probably meant to be. Entirely inappropriate, in my view.

I don't think her intent was to be divisive. I honestly think it was a lot of pent up emotion that just boiled over. I get what you're saying about sacrament meeting, and I'll concede that it wasn't the BEST place to have that conversation. The problem is that things that are on the opposite end of the spectrum (women should only be mothers, they must dress modestly to avoid tempting males, they shouldn't work outside of the home) are regularly said in sacrament meeting and nobody so much as bats an eye over it. As I've said before, the most conservative viewpoint will almost always get a free pass in any church meeting, regardless of how sexist, exclusionary, or even flat out false it is. If sacrament meeting is supposed to be a pace for communing with Christ, then perhaps the church should do a better job at ensuring that neither end of the spectrum has a strong voice in that meeting. Until then, I applaud the courage it took for her to give that talk, even if it offended 99% of the congregation. Mormons need to wake up and realize that the status quo isn't cutting it anymore.