Ow Movement Tactics

[cdowis]

From my side of the fence...the OW group appears to be that child that is laying prone on the floor kicking and screaming..pitching a fit....then getting up and holding their breath until their face turns blue.  At the end of the day....the OW group to me appears to be acting somewhat childish in how they're persisting in their approach.

 

Colour me skeptical, but it's clear to me that the OW movement has little to do with priesthood and women , just as Global Warming movement has little to do with climate and saving the planet.  Listen carefully to what they have to say.  And their real purpose will become obvious during conference inside and inside the conference building.

 

Listen carefully to their media sessions.  

Edited April 3, 2014 by cdowis

[randy]

Agreed.

[JAHS]

The problem is that church leadership have set up policies and procedures so it is near impossible for an individual member to petition those who have authority to make changes.  Write a letter to a GA and it gets returned to your stake president.  Talk to your Bishop and hope it gets passed up the chain to the prophet?  Good luck with that.

 

I think the OW is out of place in some of their demands and we can debate whether they should have accepted the first "no" and quietly went away.  Obviously the OW feels their demands are appropriate and it is appropriate for them to continue voicing them. So the better question is how should they be voicing their opinion to church leadership?  If what they are doing is inappropriate, how would you have them do it?  

 

They simply should not do it any more. I am sure church leaders and God have gotten their message by now. Time to be patient and wait, not embarrass the church and its leaders through what the world would see as protesting. 

[Bikeemikey]

I don't call what they are doing conversation. That would be done within the privacy of the church structure.  What I call it is making their demands known through social and public pressure.

 

OK so the issue is what is a conversation... 

 

I think it is a valid conversation. 

 

I guess we wont reconcile that.

[Bikeemikey]

From my side of the fence...the OW group appears to be that child that is laying prone on the floor kicking and screaming..pitching a fit....then getting up and holding their breath until their face turns blue.  At the end of the day....the OW group to me appears to be acting somewhat childish in how they're persisting in their approach.

 

Please provide one example of a Church leader (Apostle or church presidency member) who has come out and told them the answer to their request is no. Please limit the response to comments made since the OW movement has begun making the request.

 

This is a CFR.

 

There has been no response from the church that states, we have heard your question, we have asked God, and the answer is No to womens ordination.

 

Nor has the church asked them to stop.

 

Comparing them to your grandkids is way out of line and totally contrary to how the church is treating them.

[Bikeemikey]

I think the OW is out of place in some of their demands and we can debate whether they should have accepted the first "no" and quietly went away.  Obviously the OW feels their demands are appropriate and it is appropriate for them to continue voicing them. So the better question is how should they be voicing their opinion to church leadership?  If what they are doing is inappropriate, how would you have them do it?  

 

Where was the first no? Was it the no to attending conference... that has been answered...

 

However, no answer has been provided to the question of womens ordination.

[Bikeemikey]

They simply should not do it any more. I am sure church leaders and God have gotten their message by now. Time to be patient and wait, not embarrass the church and its leaders through what the world would see as protesting. 

 

So you are embarrassed? And because you are embarrassed other should stop?

 

So far we have not even been informed that the church leaders have asked God the question, let alone that there has been an answer...

[why me]

You ask the Lord via the church leaders, by asking them to ask the Lord. This is not a complicated concept that requires a lot of hand wringing and consternation. It is very simple. As individuals we do not have the authority to petition the lord for change with in the church. However, the prophet and apostles have that exact authority. The OW movement have asked the church leaders to go to the lord. That is how the lord is included.

And if the church leaders say that the lord said no? Would the OW movement go away? I don't think so. Like any leader of any organization the power of being known and media championed is a very powerful stimulus for the ego.

[JAHS]

OK so the issue is what is a conversation... 

 

I think it is a valid conversation. 

 

I guess we wont reconcile that.

 

 

Conversations don't cause contention within the church:

 

Let there be no strife between me and thee:Gen. 13:8;

Pride causes contention:Prov. 13:10;

Avoid foolish questions and contention:Titus 3:9;

The Lord commands men not to contend with one another:2 Ne. 26:32;

Alma commanded that there be no contention among Church members:Mosiah 18:21;

Satan spreads rumors and contention:Hel. 16:22;

The devil is the father of contention and stirs up men to contend with one another: 3 Ne. 11:29; ( Mosiah 23:15; )

Establish my gospel, that there may not be so much contention:D&C 10:62–64;

Cease to contend with one another:D&C 136:23;

 

What they are doing is causing great contention on both sides. Just check out the Ordain Women Facebook page.

[why me]

You ask the Lord via the church leaders, by asking them to ask the Lord. This is not a complicated concept that requires a lot of hand wringing and consternation. It is very simple. As individuals we do not have the authority to petition the lord for change with in the church. However, the prophet and apostles have that exact authority. The OW movement have asked the church leaders to go to the lord. That is how the lord is included.

 

 

 

You right... this is horrible. Men coming to priesthood may see women standing in line as they enter the conference center. This is an outrageous offense to our liberty as priesthood holders. 

 

The OW movement have been to conference already as a group. They stood at the door in an orderly fashion and no issue was generated. If men in the church are so affronted by women in lines expressing a view point then we really have a much larger gender issue than I thought.

First the lds members will need to pass by the haters outside the temple, then, they need to pass by the exmormons and the atheists holding up signs and chanting. Then, they enter the temple grounds and see another protest. Yes, this is a wonderful way to go to a worship service. I feel the love and peace already, not to mention the holy spirit.

 

People do have a right to worship in peace. Like I said, it would be great if the Mormons for Polygamy would also be on the grounds. Why not? We can also have the gay rights activists there holding up signs. Why not? Let all who have a beef be present to greet the mormons as they go and listen to their leaders. Why should the mormons have any peace when they go to worship. Right?

[Bikeemikey]

 

Conversations don't cause contention within the church:

 

Let there be no strife between me and thee:Gen. 13:8;

Pride causes contention:Prov. 13:10;

Avoid foolish questions and contention:Titus 3:9;

The Lord commands men not to contend with one another:2 Ne. 26:32;

Alma commanded that there be no contention among Church members:Mosiah 18:21;

Satan spreads rumors and contention:Hel. 16:22;

The devil is the father of contention and stirs up men to contend with one another: 3 Ne. 11:29; ( Mosiah 23:15; )

Establish my gospel, that there may not be so much contention:D&C 10:62–64;

Cease to contend with one another:D&C 136:23;

 

What they are doing is causing great contention on both sides. Just check out the Ordain Women Facebook page.

 

 

There is a big difference between contention and confrontation in my mind.

 

There is no need for strife with the OW movement. They are standing in a line quietly. They are asking our church leaders to ask god a question. You may not like the question, but does that warrant the creation of strife?

 

However, given that we are human and strife will persist where it ought not due to human fallibility it is important do be able to stay with challenging conversations that cause confrontation and yet attempt to avoid the contention. 

 

This is entirely possible to do. 

 

At the root of this it seems to me that those attempting to vilify OW are saying we dont like your questions, stop asking them. This is out of touch with the principles of the restoration, it is also out of touch with the actual church response to the group.

Edited April 3, 2014 by Bikeemikey

[why me]

 

Conversations don't cause contention within the church:

 

Let there be no strife between me and thee:Gen. 13:8;

Pride causes contention:Prov. 13:10;

Avoid foolish questions and contention:Titus 3:9;

The Lord commands men not to contend with one another:2 Ne. 26:32;

Alma commanded that there be no contention among Church members:Mosiah 18:21;

Satan spreads rumors and contention:Hel. 16:22

The devil is the father of contention and stirs up men to contend with one another: 3 Ne. 11:29; ( Mosiah 23:15; )

Establish my gospel, that there may not be so much contention:D&C 10:62–64;

Cease to contend with one another:D&C 136:23;

 

What they are doing is causing great contention on both sides. Just check out the Ordain Women Facebook page.

 

Which of course is their plan: to sow contention.

[JAHS]

So you are embarrassed? And because you are embarrassed other should stop?

 

So far we have not even been informed that the church leaders have asked God the question, let alone that there has been an answer...

 

Didn't say I was embarrassed. The movement puts the church in a bad light, causing some outsiders to think less of it, thus negatively impacting the missionary effort.

The fact that women have not been give the priesthood yet means that God has given his answer on it.

[why me]

There is a big difference between contention and confrontation in my mind.

 

There is no need for strife with the OW movement. They are standing in a line quietly. They are asking our church leaders to ask god a question. You may not like the question, but does that warrant the creation of strife?

 

Maybe the GAs already asked god the question and got the answer. What then? If the answer was no, would you accept the answer and change your mind about the OW movement's tactics?

[Bikeemikey]

First the lds members will need to pass by the haters outside the temple, then, they need to pass by the exmormons and the atheists holding up signs and chanting. Then, they enter the temple grounds and see another protest. Yes, this is a wonderful way to go to a worship service. I feel the love and peace already, not to mention the holy spirit.

 

People do have a right to worship in peace. Like I said, it would be great if the Mormons for Polygamy would also be on the grounds. Why not? We can also have the gay rights activists there holding up signs. Why not? Let all who have a beef be present to greet the mormons as they go and listen to their leaders. Why should the mormons have any peace when they go to worship. Right?

 

Lets be clear here. They will see some women standing in a line (thats if last years attendance is anything to go by).

 

Conflating that with chanting and placard waving is extreme and untenable. 

 

Also, if you were sitting next to me in priesthood you would be sitting next to someone who agrees with the majority of the OW group agenda. Would you be sitting next to a protestor? 

 

What if I leaned over and expressed my disappointment that the women were not let in? Or asked why so many people were so hostile to these women? Or suggested that one day I lot forward to having a women prophet.

 

Would I become a protestor to you?

 

Is a protestor anyone saying something you dont like?

[Bikeemikey]

Maybe the GAs already asked god the question and got the answer. What then? If the answer was no, would you accept the answer and change your mind about the OW movement's tactics?

 

Please show me this has happened so I can consider that as a non-hypothetical. As it is I would pray and ponder such a statement and its impact on my view of the OW movement. Unless the HG will testify to hypotheticals I cant answer this until it happens.

 

All I can tell you for now is that my prayer and pondering has lead me to support the conversation, even as championed by the OW movement.

Edited April 3, 2014 by Bikeemikey

[Bikeemikey]

Didn't say I was embarrassed. The movement puts the church in a bad light, causing some outsiders to think less of it, thus negatively impacting the missionary effort.

The fact that women have not been give the priesthood yet means that God has given his answer on it.

 

So you were opposed to the prop 8 action taken by the church as well?

 

The whole "bad light" principle is only a concern if you think the church needs, wants or seeks "good light", something it obviously does not.

 

I am not concerned about good or bad light to outsiders, im concerned with the presence or absence of real revelation in the church. Revelation that is capable of aligning both individual and the institution with the will of god... even if that requires great and painful change.

 

The fact women do not have the phood obviously means god has not given his answer... that does not mean we should either stop asking or that he has been asked.

Edited April 3, 2014 by Bikeemikey

[JAHS]

Lets be clear here. They will see some women standing in a line (thats if last years attendance is anything to go by).

 

Conflating that with chanting and placard waving is extreme and untenable. 

 

Also, if you were sitting next to me in priesthood you would be sitting next to someone who agrees with the majority of the OW group agenda. Would you be sitting next to a protestor? 

 

What if I leaned over and expressed my disappointment that the women were not let in? Or asked why so many people were so hostile to these women? Or suggested that one day I lot forward to having a women prophet.

 

Would I become a protestor to you?

 

Is a protestor anyone saying something you dont like?

 

"Is a protester anyone saying something you don't like?"

 

No. Saying something to me I don't like is conversation. A protester is someone who tries to incite public opinion for whatever they want, thus inviting criticism against the church leaders.

[JAHS]

"Is a protester anyone saying something you don't like?"

 

No. Saying something to me I don't like is conversation. A protester is someone who tries to incite public opinion for whatever they want, thus inviting criticism against the church leaders.

 

So you were opposed to the prop 8 action taken by the church as well?

 

The whole "bad light" principle is only a concern if you think the church needs, wants or seeks "good light", something it obviously does not.

 

I am not concerned about good or bad light to outsiders, im concerned with the presence or absence of real revelation in the church. Revelation that is capable of aligning both individual and the institution with the will of god... even if that requires great and painful change.

 

The fact women do not have the phood obviously means god has not given his answer... that does not mean we should either stop asking or that he has been asked.

 

"So you were opposed to the prop 8 action taken by the church as well?"

 

Actually yes I was opposed to the action taken although not opposed to the proposition itself, but I kept my opinion about it to myself. 

Nothing wrong with asking, but what they are doing is demanding. 

Again from Ordain Women website:

"As much as possible, encourage the Mormon community to coalesce around the goal of women’s ordination. Help them see that anything less is insufficient to address the gender inequality in the Church."

[Bikeemikey]

"Is a protester anyone saying something you don't like?"

 

No. Saying something to me I don't like is conversation. A protester is someone who tries to incite public opinion for whatever they want, thus inviting criticism against the church leaders.

 

Well im not wanting to quibble with definitions. So you can have it your way.

 

It is however possible to be legitimately seeking discourse with the church leaders on a subject as the OW movement are (in my opinion) and also look like your definition of a protester at the same time.

 

For me, im not sure when being a protester became unacceptable. I have no issue with it as long as it is kept safe and respectful.

Edited April 3, 2014 by Bikeemikey

[Bikeemikey]

"So you were opposed to the prop 8 action taken by the church as well?"

 

Actually yes I was opposed to the action taken although not opposed to the proposition itself, but I kept my opinion about it to myself. 

Nothing wrong with asking, but what they are doing is demanding. 

Again from Ordain Women website:

"As much as possible, encourage the Mormon community to coalesce around the goal of women’s ordination. Help them see that anything less is insufficient to address the gender inequality in the Church."

 

Sure I have no issue with people demanding anything either.

 

As our church does not capitulate to either nice requests or angry demands both would have the same impact on the church decision to change of not to change.

 

As long as they demand in a respectful fashion I have not issue.

[why me]

 

For me, im not sure when being a protester was became unacceptable. I have no issue with it as long as it is kept safe and respectful.

What would the apostle paul say about the early church having protestors? Could it be 'be of one mind'? Or would he have supported the protestors? If so, you will need to support it with a reference.

[awyatt]

I'm getting ready to go to General Conference day after tomorrow. This morning, while preparing, I was listening to my iPod and Light My Fire by The Doors came into rotation. Listening to the song, oddly enough, triggered some thoughts on the tactics (not the objectives, mind you, but the tactics) of Ordain Women. It spurred me to write a blog post on those tactics.

 

Feel free to comment there or here; I don't mind either way.

 

-Allen

[awyatt]

For me, im not sure when being a protester became unacceptable. I have no issue with it as long as it is kept safe and respectful.

 

The organizational Church has no problem with it, either. That's why the OW leaders were asked to join others in the free speech areas around Temple Square. They do, however, have a problem with protesters coming onto Temple Square itself.

 

The OW folk don't want to be labeled as "protesters," though they really are. It strikes me as odd that they want to come onto Temple Square -- even after being asked not to -- and request tickets -- even when a recent request was denied -- and still, somehow, be viewed as sustaining, supportive members of the Church.

 

-Allen

[Bikeemikey]

What would the apostle paul say about the early church having protestors? Could it be 'be of one mind'? Or would he have supported the protestors? If so, you will need to support it with a reference.

 

Given that Paul spent most of his time traveling around visiting protesters i'm sure he didn't like them very much.

 

That said the church at the time was basically made up of groups in protest relationship with each other.

 

I just dont see any equivalency between the institution at Paul's time and our time. We are far more centralized and uniform that we have ever been before.

 

That said, I it totally possible to have legitimate areas of disagreement and still be of on mind regarding christ and all sorts of stuff.. I think your use of this scripture is wresting it some what.