tyler90az Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 (edited) Its that you are 22 that you feel this way, I hope.As I have grown older I have been increasingly aware of the appropriateness and considerate value of having men to protect women, walking them to the car and generally helping to make them feel more secure and safe.If you are not able to convey the sense of increasing security and safety for women then you probably are best not volunteering but otherwise -- be of service!Incidentally, I do not think it is required that men must be at every meeting of women.I think LDS women are stronger and smarter then you think. One man is going to do nothing except give them a false sense of security. It is hard to believe that one man is going to do anything that twenty five women can not. If a woman is truly scared about not having a man always present, dare I say, that falls on the shoulders of her parents. I know that is not the case because they have meetings at each others houses regularly. Edited August 17, 2012 by tyler90az
Bernard Gui Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 So much of the story is anecdotal. For what it's worth, in our stake and ward many of those things are already happening.
KevinG Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 I think LDS women are stronger and smarter then you think. One man is going to do nothing except give them a false sense of security. It is hard to believe that one man is going to do anything that twenty five women can not. If a woman is truly scared about not having a man always present, dare I say, that falls on the shoulders of her parents. I know that is not the case because they have meetings at each others houses regularly.Chivalry is dead. 3
ERayR Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 I think LDS women are stronger and smarter then you think. One man is going to do nothing except give them a false sense of security. It is hard to believe that one man is going to do anything that twenty five women can not. If a woman is truly scared about not having a man always present, dare I say, that falls on the shoulders of her parents. I know that is not the case because they have meetings at each others houses regularly.Often one man gives someone who might otherwise do harm to a woman pause to reconsider their actions. Just someone else there for safety. You know the old safety in numbers thing 2
happy Posted August 17, 2012 Author Posted August 17, 2012 So much of the story is anecdotal. For what it's worth, in our stake and ward many of those things are already happening.What things?
KevinG Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 Often one man gives someone who might otherwise do harm to a woman pause to reconsider their actions. Just someone else there for safety. You know the old safety in numbers thingWell that and providing a nursery so the woman can all be in their meeting. 3
tyler90az Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 Here we go... Surprise, Surprise... I have another idea(some call it murmuring) Don't like it? Don't care. Does it offend you? I am sorry.The article has another great point that I have thought forever. Before I was baptized I was asked a scary question(to me) rather I masturbated. I remember being in complete shock and that could easily throw somebody off the path to baptism. Anyways... It has only gotten worse as I now have two baby girls. I am absolutely terrified that when my girls are teens they will be asked that question. If a man has power to ask that question he could take it anyway he wants. I believe in revelation and everything, yada, yada, yada. It is just you can never know about a perverted guy taking it too far.That is why I agree... Let a woman sit in on interview with young women. I am truly terrified about that future day...
ERayR Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 What things?Well I don't know about Bernard's ward but in ours Women actual give prayers and talks in church and serve on the scout committee. Stuff like that.
ERayR Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 Well that and providing a nursery so the woman can all be in their meeting. Yep but you had already mentioned that. Didn't want to seem like a copy cat. 1
happy Posted August 17, 2012 Author Posted August 17, 2012 Well I don't know about Bernard's ward but in ours Women actual give prayers and talks in church and serve on the scout committee. Stuff like that. That's new?
KevinG Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 Here we go... Surprise, Surprise... I have another idea(some call it murmuring) Don't like it? Don't care. Does it offend you? I am sorry.The article has another great point that I have thought forever. Before I was baptized I was asked a scary question(to me) rather I masturbated. I remember being in complete shock and that could easily throw somebody off the path to baptism. Anyways... It has only gotten worse as I now have two baby girls. I am absolutely terrified that when my girls are teens they will be asked that question. If a man has power to ask that question he could take it anyway he wants. I believe in revelation and everything, yada, yada, yada. It is just you can never know about a perverted guy taking it too far.That is why I agree... Let a woman sit in on interview with young women. I am truly terrified about that future day...Priesthood holders are counseled not to get into the details of sins. But let me ask this- because someone doesn't run the program correctly should that mean the whole program should be changed?
KevinG Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 Well I don't know about Bernard's ward but in ours Women actual give prayers and talks in church and serve on the scout committee. Stuff like that. Right now my Scout calling for the 11 y/o boys reports through the Primary President who is a woman. As a High Priest I am fine submitting to their authority. 2
mapman Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 But what many are saying in the communities mentioned in the Trib article,is that through philosophies of men policies have been changed since the early years of the church.I know that and I agree that that is probably the case. There are a lot of things that are policies and traditions that can be done away to make things more fair and practical. Ordaining women to the priesthood is a really big deal, though, and it isn't obvious to me what the correct way to go is. We could copy other churches and ordain women to fill the same roles as men, we could make the Relief Society a parallel organization to the priesthood quorums, we could call couples to serve in offices jointly, etc. I've done a fair amount of reading about church history and its seems clear to me that there are no obvious answers there. That's why we have revelation. We are supposed to study things out in our minds, but ultimately we need revelation, and with something like this we need revelation to the president of the church. I guess what I'm trying to say is that we shouldn't get rid of one uninspired tradition for another. 1
ERayR Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 That's new?Nope but next thing you know they will want to be full fledged members of the ward. (duck) (crawl under the table) Sorry I just couldn't resist. 1
mapman Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 (edited) sorry double post Edited August 17, 2012 by mapman
KevinG Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 I know that and I agree that that is probably the case. There are a lot of things that are policies and traditions that can be done away to make things more fair and practical. Ordaining women to the priesthood is a really big deal, though, and it isn't obvious to me what the correct way to go is. We could copy other churches and ordain women to fill the same roles as men, we could make the Relief Society a parallel organization to the priesthood quorums, we could call couples to serve in offices jointly, etc. I've done a fair amount of reading about church history and its seems clear to me that there are no obvious answers there. That's why we have revelation. We are supposed to study things out in our minds, but ultimately we need revelation, and with something like this we need revelation to the president of the church. I guess what I'm trying to say is that we shouldn't get rid of one uninspired tradition for another.My only fear with ordinations of women is not women being priesthood holders but rather men excusing themselves from an active role as teachers and nurturers because the women are there to do it. There are far too many households already where the men are not taking full responsibility for their duties. 3
ERayR Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 I know that and I agree that that is probably the case. There are a lot of things that are policies and traditions that can be done away to make things more fair and practical. Ordaining women to the priesthood is a really big deal, though, and it isn't obvious to me what the correct way to go is. We could copy other churches and ordain women to fill the same roles as men, we could make the Relief Society a parallel organization to the priesthood quorums, we could call couples to serve in offices jointly, etc. I've done a fair amount of reading about church history and its seems clear to me that there are no obvious answers there. That's why we have revelation. We are supposed to study things out in our minds, but ultimately we need revelation, and with something like this we need revelation to the president of the church. I guess what I'm trying to say is that we shouldn't get rid of one uninspired tradition for another.If you don't mind I think that until that revelation is received and passed down to the church through proper channels i will just stick to the handbook as written. 3
KevinG Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 If someone feels strongly about women receiving the priesthood they should not protest but rather do what the West African Saints did when they felt God wanted them to have the priesthood. Write the brethren and ask them to prayerfully consider it- but be willing to submit to God's will revealed through the Prophets and Quorums.I think those who believe protests or political pressure will change policy are gravely mistaken and in danger of apostasy not because their ideas are bad but because they fail to understand how God works with us and still maintains a house of order. 2
mapman Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 My only fear with ordinations of women is not women being priesthood holders but rather men excusing themselves from an active role as teachers and nurturers because the women are there to do it. There are far too many households already where the men are not taking full responsibility for their duties.I haven't done any research on this topic so I don't know how much of it is biological and how much of it is cultural. I think you could definitely make an argument that men and women need different roles in the church. I do think that it is possible to have women ordained and still have a separate role. But as I said, I'm agnostic on the issue of ordination of women until revelation provides more clarification. 1
Tacenda Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 Here we go... Surprise, Surprise... I have another idea(some call it murmuring) Don't like it? Don't care. Does it offend you? I am sorry.The article has another great point that I have thought forever. Before I was baptized I was asked a scary question(to me) rather I masturbated. I remember being in complete shock and that could easily throw somebody off the path to baptism. Anyways... It has only gotten worse as I now have two baby girls. I am absolutely terrified that when my girls are teens they will be asked that question. If a man has power to ask that question he could take it anyway he wants. I believe in revelation and everything, yada, yada, yada. It is just you can never know about a perverted guy taking it too far.That is why I agree... Let a woman sit in on interview with young women. I am truly terrified about that future day...When I learned it was happening---the masturbation question to the young men--- I didn't know it happened to the young women as well (awful!) I don't ever remember being asked as a youth. And when I worried about my 15 yr. old son getting asked, I didn't even think he knew what that meant. But my husband said he knows.But I still can't see that being an appropiate question. Is this a fairly new question or does it just depend on the bisop?
mapman Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 If you don't mind I think that until that revelation is received and passed down to the church through proper channels i will just stick to the handbook as written. I certainly don't mind as I'll be doing that as well. 1
KevinG Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 But as I said, I'm agnostic on the issue of ordination of women until revelation provides more clarification.You make a very good point... I spend a lot of time with my kids and on this site trying to "reason" out why God has asked us to do certain things, but in the end our religion is a matter of faith in God, and that implies we trust Him and those as prophets and apostles to lead us in right ways.If we waited until we saw the whole eternal picture before we agreed to do anything we would be paralyzed.
ERayR Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 When I learned it was happening---the masturbation question to the young men--- I didn't know it happened to the young women as well (awful!) I don't ever remember being asked as a youth.And when I worried about my 15 yr. old son getting asked, I didn't even think he knew what that meant. But my husband said he knows.But I still can't see that being an appropiate question. Is this a fairly new question or does it just depend on the bisop?At least 60 years old.
tyler90az Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 Priesthood holders are counseled not to get into the details of sins. But let me ask this- because someone doesn't run the program correctly should that mean the whole program should be changed?I want a woman to sit in on interviews for the same reason most people want security systems on their house. A break in will probably never happen but it provides peace of mind. Just think about the power a Bishop has over the young women. Especially for your standard LDS family who says never turn down a calling or say no.
thesometimesaint Posted August 17, 2012 Posted August 17, 2012 Happy:While I have opinions on what he meant by "silent", why include this then? If his opinion is wrong, why include it?Probably cultural. We do the same thing today. As I look through all the talks our Prophets and Apostles have given over the last 182 years or so. Nearly all of those talks never make it into the canon. Good common sense ideas and opinions, applicable to their times, but not canon we have to follow today.
Recommended Posts