sheilauk

I expect attendance is down, it has gone down in my wards over the years, pre pandemic. Attendance went up during the pandemic with zoom meetings! I reckon though that the monthly attendance in my stake is definitely more than 32 per month, each ward I’ve been in is probably at least 20 a week, probably 30+ each a month and there are 5 wards in my stake. btw,church attendance is down across the board as is people identifying with any religion. I think our church is doing better than many. The previous church I attended is struggling far more. Too much to do on a Sunday than attend church.

The UK has lifted all restrictions (no idea why other than the economy given delta ) but our stake is still social distancing, sanitising, wearing masks and using separate sections for bread (we don't use cups, but put individual pieces where the cups would go). I will keep social distancing and masks until covid is much more under control. I welcome the latest statement from the First Presidency.

Paras 4 and 5 I think, tacenda. He refers to the core hymns and puts the list in an appendix, you need to go to the end of the article where there is a list of hymns, which he suggests are the core hymns. praise to the man is in that list.

More than that, he wants the money to come to him. That "prayer for relief" is a crock.

Is it legal to behave in a disorderly way even in a public place? It's not in the UK. My solution would be to stay calm and avoid interaction, I wouldn't talk to them or approach them, i'd call the police and photograph/video them and if they stayed, form a choir and sing hymns and pray. When I've faced disruptive people and got out my camera, they've walked away. Might not work for these narcissists but you'd have evidence for the police and they'd have a film showing them being filmed and with a gospel soundtrack. You could also perhaps create a cordon, at a distance from them and leaving them a way out, so that they could only get close enough to get details by forcing their way through. That would mean them risking getting arrested for assault.

Yes, it’s stupid and it’s bullying. Do bullies go if you ignore them? And hard to ignore when they stand right in front of your car and take photos of personal info that could subsequently be stolen and used by bad actors, or when they are taking photos of your children to put up on the internet. That in particular is an issue for me. I take photos in public places all the time of various items. I try not to include children or if it’s unavoidable, to make them indistinct and I don’t post them on social media without the consent of the parents. The reason should be obvious.

Oh, I originally read it as per annum. Apparently, according to the article, Gonzalez makes about $8600 per month from the YouTube channel, plus advertising, merchandising, donations etc. Franklin Ornelas makes about $500 a month. It may still be the case that they figure to make even more by religious harassment than by harassing police officers and in post offices. And obviously they are encouraged by those who donate or even just regularly watch, making them complicit in the harassment. In UK legal circles there was a saying that without handlers of stolen goods, there’d be no thieves (or at least far fewer). So, I guess as the Nehor said, we’ve become part of the problem! (How do you find out about it, condemn it and try to stop it without creating hits on YouTube which feed the profit and desire for fame element?)

The article does say that they aren’t making much, a few thousand at present, and the writer compares them to the hundreds of thousands others like Dehlin make. So my guess would be they’ve branched out into religious harassment to make a few more bucks. Of course, I could be wildly wrong and it may be a principled stand for the first amendment, but I don’t see how or why you need defend that principle by harassing private individuals including children who are on their private land, and taking private details ( eg vin numbers) even if they are in a public space. If it were me they confronted, I’d take photos of them, as personal as possible, get others to join me in a circle surrounding them and then very loudly sing some hymns! And loudly pray for their souls.

They profit by getting advertising revenue from YouTube. Controversial subjects - more hits - more money

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me. Pastor Martin Niemoller

I do know how ubiquitous banks of urinals are. You might be surprised by how many male bathrooms I've been in!

Why does there need to be a wall of urinals? A lot of toilets in business premises and pretty much every private home manages without a urinal. Put stalls there as well. You could even put a urinal in a stall.

Regarding trans women in women's sport, here's a thought. Supposing you were in the basketball team of company X. The company takes part in an amateur league. You do well. You get to the final, you're up against company Y They are a good team but you've a fair chance of beating them. You're feeling good about the upcoming match, confident that if you do your best, you can take home the trophy. You go on to the court and get a shock. The entire team of the Harlem globetrotters are there. You protest and are told that company Y employs them (from two days ago) so the substitution is fair, you're told to stop complaining, that you are racist and to get on with the match. How do you feel? What is the inevitable outcome?

Far too many men want to silence women. For some reason, it seems to be an affront to their manliness for women to have an opinion and to speak out. They view women as objects that need protection (from the wolves at the door? The marauders roaming the land with swords drawn?), rather than as individual humans with a brain and thoughts of their own. If a group of men disagreed with their position, there would be no accusations of a pile on. But somehow, when it's a group of women, it's dismissed - it's just the "sisterhood" attacking them, rather than maybe what they said was disagreeable to a lot of individuals. And then the insults fly, women are mean and nasty, because they dared to hold and express a contrary opinion. The insults are designed to shut us up. Because women have been conditioned to want to be liked. We are in the 21st century. Women shouldn't still be fighting to be seen and heard. Time for men to leave behind the attitudes of times long past. Until they do, women will continue to be afraid of them. This is the problem with the "trans rights" "movement". Women grow up knowing they need to be wary of men, all men. It's not as if the ones who will assault you have a mark on their forehead. All women by the time they are in their early twenties will have faced male aggression, from a stranger. All women have to decide, every time they go out, how to deal with it. When they go on a first date, how do they get home if they don't like the guy? What will he do if rejected? Where do you park the car? Will it be dark and isolated when you come back? When walking home, are the streets well lit? That man walking behind her, is he safe? Where do you run to for help? Is your mobile charged up? Keys in hand? Or do you just not go out? We get called names if we're sexually active and names if we're not. When with a group of men, at work or socially, even with other women there, the men dominate, if a woman speaks, too often she's ignored or her ideas usurped. Men who are supportive and who get it are rare and don't speak out enough to support women. It's exhausting emotionally and physically to be on guard all the time, to be thinking how to handle aggression all the time and to be trying to be heard without being insulted. And that's why women want a space to be with other women. A place to relax and be heard, to have the kind of conversation, atmosphere and experience that men take for granted. And that's the issue over trans women in that space. They don't have the same emotional experiences, though they have probably experienced male violence. But the conditioned response of a woman to a man is fear. Will this man be safe? Even men that are known to a woman can't be presumed to be safe. So women can't relax even if the man says he's one of them and that removes the safe space. It's just another area where you have to watch out all the time. How an individual woman reacts will depend on her. Contrary to male opinion, we're not all the same. Some choose to push the fear aside, sone feel it and take various steps (a friend will never park on the street if returning late at night from an event, always in a well lit car park), many simply give up, they disappear from society and stay home. If you dont have to make those choices every day, all day, stop telling us what you think we should be thinking and try to listen instead. Be part of the solution. Yes, I know trans people suffer a lot of abuse and violence and share that female experience in that way, but theit response when going into a female space will be very different to that of the women in there seeing a "man" walk in. I'm not sure what the solution is, given the violence that occurs in unisex places, but until the issue is acknowledged and women's feelings are recognised as valid, there will continue to be problems and women will continue to be disappeared.

The daily mail really isn't a good source. It is very biased. Check out the whole statement by the school. Non binary was a factor, however, the main reason for the school making the change was led by the young women at the school feeling that the word girl denoted immaturity. It certainly started a few conversations in the UK media though! https://www.indy100.com/news/st-pauls-head-girl-binary-b1869002

Beautiful churches and interesting videos! You have a drone! I enjoyed them, very well done. I used to live in East Sussex. Btw, did you know that when first built, the walls would have been highly and colourfully decorated, not the white plaster or even bare stone that we see now. The decoration was done away with during Cromwell’s Puritanism. He and Henry VIII did much to change religion in England!

Go back and re-read my posts. The easiest solution is for those who don’t want to attend church to not attend church and let the rest of us have the opportunity that we want.

The first general conference session I attended was while I was an investigator, it was one session at the stake centre. The Chapel was overflowing. My impression was that everyone happily attended conference. Soon after, I became a member. At the next general conference, I duly noted the times of the sessions (my first surprise, that there was more than one session). I went along to the first session. Hardly anyone was there and they were all men. Hmm. It did make me think, but I sat down anyway. Got some strange looks. Someone approached me, I don't remember if he was a stake leader. He explained it was the priesthood session, for men, but I was welcome to stay! Nothing else to do by then so I stayed and enjoyed the talks. But it did feel a bit uncomfortable. So, I don't think my stake prevented women attending, but they didn't go. I certainly paid more attention to the announced times and didn't go to another priesthood session, but I did and do read the talks. There were likewise, no men who sat in and listened to the women's session. There was a man present. Until very recently, my stake and the wards in it believed at least one man had to be present when anyone was in a building , so one would be there during RS activities, the women's conference or sessions, primary events and if the YM were off site, during YW activities. I questioned it once. Some thought it was for security, to which I pointed out that there were quite a few single sisters at these events who handled their own security pretty well most of their time, others thought it was because a man needed to be there to preside! Like the RS and YW and primary presidents couldn't preside at their own meetings. And then suddenly, a few years ago, maybe 2018, new counsel was issued that women could manage on their own after all (though I think it was said we should lock the doors. To be fair, I think a lot of the women feel safer with a man about or the doors locked. I'm fine with locking the doors. Not sure one man makes it safer!) (And yes, we have to lock the doors if there solo, which is absolutely necessary. I wouldn't be alone in a building with the doors open. )

It was your hope that the church reduce the number of meetings. Others have previously expressed a preference for "home church". So, my question remains. How do single people, especially women, get to take the sacrament if a meeting is cancelled? Yes, if the leaders go along with these expressed wishes/hopes, they would be the ones cancelling the meetings. But, in my view, it would be the ones asking for change who were creating the imposition. I think the Prophet and Apostles are aware that when changes are considered, there is more than one demographic to think about. I don't think fortnightly meetings are likely to happen (really not sure what is so difficult about going to church weekly. I think every other church has at least weekly services). It would be nice if those who call for change thought of the whole membership too. Of course, if you don't like going every week, don't. Nothing to stop you from going less often, you'd still be considered an active member even.

You assert that their worship is false. Yet you do not say how. And you admit they have some elements of truth. How is their worship false? What elements of truth do they have? Are their hymns true? Their prayers? Their quoting of Scripture? I don't think logic dictates that just because the church is false, an individual's worship is. Would you say that a member of the LDS church can never worship falsely? If so, does it matter if their worship is not in an LDS building? I don't have the priesthood in my home. If the proper priesthood is required for true worship, how is my worship in my home not false?

The ordinances are not the only way to worship God and you don't need the priesthood to pray, which is one way to worship God, or to sing, which is another way. Those of other faiths are not engaged in false worship nor are they worshipping a false God. God is God, He is unchanging. Their ordinances are ineffectual because they don't have the priesthood but their worship of God isn't. They all have a measure of the Holy Spirit. I attended other churches for many years. My worship of God while in those churches was not false. He revealed Himself to me before I began to investigate the Mormons. He hasn't changed since I joined the church. I've been to services in other churches since then as well. Joining in with their worship of God wasn't false. God knew what was in my heart and mind. Joseph said there was good in all of the other churches. And the Spirit has testified to me that my worship in other churches was acceptable. I have a testimony of this Church as the true church, but that does not mean I am dismissive of nor denigrate my previous methods of worship or the worship of God by family and friends who are in those other churches. To say it's false worship is insulting and wrong, it's more like being on the first rung of a ladder or taking your first steps as a toddler.

Why would it be the church? You suggested fortnightly meetings. How do you propose single members have the sacrament in the weeks not at church if not by asking / imposing on others?

If/when you do, bear in mind that Church of England services vary substantially and one service isn't as representative as attending one LDS service would be. To start with, there is the high church/low church split. Some are very traditional, others can be very evangelical, or very modern. The nature of the service very much depends on the style of the vicar and the wardens. There are 3 C of England churches in the town I recently lived in. I've been to services in all of them and they were all very different, even different hymn books! I'm sure it will be interesting though! And they have some very beautiful buildings. I enjoy photographing churches and cathedrals. Christmas would be a good time to visit, the services are often at different times and there will be one on Christmas day whether its a Sunday or not. Midnight Mass on Christmas eve is often very enjoyable. Or a christingles service which is often held in the evening.

I love that painting! It was in the foyer of my old ward until this year when it was removed and replaced because Lehi's dream painting isn't on the official church list and all foyer art work had to be on that list.

I have more than once heard mainly older members be dismissive or worse about other churches. As a former member of other churches and still having family and friends who go to other churches, I have always spoken up to support other churches. Over the years, the views of even the most die hard have softened!