The June 1

[Topper]

I think LDS women in the first world is exactly what Kristoff had in mind when he wrote that.

It was probably the first concern when he wrote that. The Letter in fact is aptly named, "Ode to LDS Women Worldwide".

[Topper]

This is what Kelly wrote on the OW website about her interaction with her SP and bishop prior to any disciplinary action being taken against her:



I'm sure attorneys can parse the language of Kelly's posting and representation to the Daily Beast, but she leaves the average reader with the impression she only met once with the SP shortly before her move from DC and writes her bishop never personally met with her during the time she was involved in OW activities. Maybe she can claim her December 2013 meeting with the SP and bishop was the result of a request she made. She also writes a narrative that portrays her bishop as completely disengaged regarding OW, never having once called her to meet with him and not having any questions regarding her OW activities. Unless the bishop is lying, there is a series of meetings/communications months prior to May 2014 where counsel was being given by the SP and bishop to disassociate from OW. She rejected that counsel and then claimed she was "shocked" to have a disciplinary council initiated against her. Sorry, but I'm skeptical of her account.

It is also possible both parties are shading the contacts in a light most favorable to their arguments.

[I.J. Reilly]

That's okay. I don't mind being wrong- especially since it doesn't affect me. I don't think I've even touched this topic outside of the board.

*and it's not her sincerity to her cause I'm doubting.

I'll be honest, your reaction to this has been most surprising. Maybe I just haven't been paying attention.

[Pelado]

This is what Kelly wrote on the OW website about her interaction with her SP and bishop prior to any disciplinary action being taken against her:



I'm sure attorneys can parse the language of Kelly's posting and representation to the Daily Beast, but she leaves the average reader with the impression she only met once with the SP shortly before her move from DC and writes her bishop never personally met with her during the time she was involved in OW activities. Maybe she can claim her December 2013 meeting with the SP and bishop was the result of a request she made. She also writes a narrative that portrays her bishop as completely disengaged regarding OW, never having once called her to meet with him and not having any questions regarding her OW activities. Unless the bishop is lying, there is a series of meetings/communications months prior to May 2014 where counsel was being given by the SP and bishop to disassociate from OW. She rejected that counsel and then claimed she was "shocked" to have a disciplinary council initiated against her. Sorry, but I'm skeptical of her account.

She definitely gives the impression that she only met with the SP once:

I have moved away from the Washington, DC area, and after I left my former Stake President sent me a letter outlining what he called “informal probation” after meeting with me one time, while I was packing to move.

I could make an argument that she wasn't being untruthful, but it would sound pretty contrived.

[Commando]

I'll be honest, your reaction to this has been most surprising. Maybe I just haven't been paying attention.

How interesting that an anonymous stranger has such a firm grasp of my personality, beliefs, and social tendencies that I could surprise him with an online response to a current event!

[FMCoug]

It is also possible both parties are shading the contacts in a light most favorable to their arguments.

Indeed. Those in the "The Lord's anointed would never lie" camp will believe everything in the excommunication letter and say Kate is not being truthful. Those who have Kate Kelly on their ProgMo pedestal will say it's clear the Bishop is not. The truth is likely in between.

[Topper]

Indeed. Those in the "The Lord's anointed would never lie" camp will believe everything in the excommunication letter and say Kate is not being truthful. Those who have Kate Kelly on their ProgMo pedestal will say it's clear the Bishop is not. The truth is likely in between.

My suspicion is Kate may have glossed over a meeting or two; and the bishop or SP may have conducted a "meeting" in the hallway. "Sister Kelly, I really don't think you should be doing what you are doing." "Uh okay. I'm busy now, could we talk about it later?"

[Pheidippides]

My suspicion is Kate may have glossed over a meeting or two; and the bishop or SP may have conducted a "meeting" in the hallway. "Sister Kelly, I really don't think you should be doing what you are doing." "Uh okay. I'm busy now, could we talk about it later?"

She was upfront about her multiple meetings with her SP on one of the podcasts I listened to. Seriously, does nobody else obsessively listen to every podcast they can get their hands on?

[TripletDaddy]

How interesting that an anonymous stranger has such a firm grasp of my personality, beliefs, and social tendencies that I could surprise him with an online response to a current event!

he is paying you a compliment. What he is saying is that you usually aren't a dickhead.

[I.J. Reilly]

How interesting that an anonymous stranger has such a firm grasp of my personality, beliefs, and social tendencies that I could surprise him with an online response to a current event!

You say that as if you don't have 8,000 posts here. Does it normally take more than 8,000 points of reference for you to feel like you have a sense of someone when you have met in the flesh?

[Topper]

She was upfront about her multiple meetings with her SP on one of the podcasts I listened to. Seriously, does nobody else obsessively listen to every podcast they can get their hands on?

Other than for purposes of continuing education, I have never listened to a single podcast. Frankly, I know there are people like you and JL who will summarize them for us so that I don't have to waste my time.

[wuapinmon]

Poke holes in my logic here, if we assume #1 to be true.

1. God exists.
2. God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent.
3. An omnibenevolent God wants goodness and only goodness
4. An omniscient God knows all that has happened, happens, will happen, and can happen
5. An omnipotent God can prevent evil from happening
6. God calls prophets to represent him on the earth
6. Revelations are the transference of knowledge of the will of god to men.
7. Doctrine is the commandments of god and the laws of the church, demonstrating his will for us.
8. We can know that a revelation is true because the prophet declares it as such and then the Spirit confirms its truthfulness to us.
9. We can know that a revelation is doctrine when it has been presented to the membership as such and a sustaining vote has been held.
10. Teaching against sustained doctrines is apostasy.
11. There is no sustained doctrine of the priesthood that establishes that only men may hold the priesthood.
12. Kate Kelly has been excommunicated for apostatizing the doctrine of the priesthood.
13. I can't figure out what it means.

[Dwight Schr-ute]

At least the Pope is getting in on some of the excommunication fun. Nice to see the two organizations lock step on. Rumor has it, the Italian mafia had a website set up seeking scriptorial evidence of indulgences. Stop asking questions Italian mafia! And you should probably stop killing people too.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/21/world/...ion/index.html

[pellegrino]

She was upfront about her multiple meetings with her SP on one of the podcasts I listened to. Seriously, does nobody else obsessively listen to every podcast they can get their hands on?

the problem is that she stated elsewhere (live SLtribune interview) that neither leader had spoken with her at all about her activities with OW.

It is most unfortunate that Kate insisted upon being the face of this organization. I can think of half a dozen other feminists that would have been much better suited, but she ended up being the one. It makes defending the idea and the movement to orthodox and moderate Mormons excruciatingly painful, if not impossible.

[creekster]

Poke holes in my logic here, if we assume #1 to be true.

1. God exists.
2. God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent.
3. An omnibenevolent God wants goodness and only goodness
4. An omniscient God knows all that has happened, happens, will happen, and can happen
5. An omnipotent God can prevent evil from happening
6. God calls prophets to represent him on the earth
6. Revelations are the transference of knowledge of the will of god to men.
7. Doctrine is the commandments of god and the laws of the church, demonstrating his will for us.
8. We can know that a revelation is true because the prophet declares it as such and then the Spirit confirms its truthfulness to us.
9. We can know that a revelation is doctrine when it has been presented to the membership as such and a sustaining vote has been held.
10. Teaching against sustained doctrines is apostasy.
11. There is no sustained doctrine of the priesthood that establishes that only men may hold the priesthood.
12. Kate Kelly has been excommunicated for apostatizing the doctrine of the priesthood.
13. I can't figure out what it means.

I think you have to assume #2 to be true as well.