The Ongoing Impact Of Ordain Women

[Tacenda]

Works for me.

As long as it's not from a fallable prophet. And who's to say there aren't still prophetesses? Did men completely shut their mouths, or only let them speak with permission, along the way? Edited August 17, 2014 by Tacenda

[Stone holm]

Another thread on gender inequality vs viva la difference . Same arguments rehashed. Don't question Church policy, don't be an automaton. Women are being intimidated , don't insult the sisters by suggesting that they are submitting to authority or being browbeaten. There is no gender inequality, haven't you been to the Temple, and they get to hold the Priesthood gender slam pun intended. Boy kittens, girl kittens, let's put it to a vote..isn't that a profound joke?

[sethpayne]

Another thread on gender inequality vs viva la difference . Same arguments rehashed. Don't question Church policy, don't be an automaton. Women are being intimidated , don't insult the sisters by suggesting that they are submitting to authority or being browbeaten. There is no gender inequality, haven't you been to the Temple, and they get to hold the Priesthood gender slam pun intended. Boy kittens, girl kittens, let's put it to a vote..isn't that a profound joke?

 

I have no idea what you just said, but for some reason I like it.

[wenglund]

I have no idea what you just said, but for some reason I like it.

 

I don't particularly like self-serving caricatures, but to each their own.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited August 17, 2014 by wenglund

[ether_ore]

I always thought that the basic unit of the church was the family.  It seems however, that modern socialist thinking has made the organization at large a more important interest.  Just as in socialism, the state (or the beast) is what matters and individuals are expendable; traditional family structure is become expendable and seeking for power at the church organization level is more important than the power and influence already extant in the family structure.

 

Women already have the greater power and influence in the organization of house and home.  Children naturally give more deference to the mother than they do the father.  Apparently, this is not enough.  Ordaining women will have the effect of making the father's priesthood contribution to the eternal family redundant and unnecessary whereas before it was necessary.  What is the benefit for a man to marry?

 

One of the lower kingdoms is starting to look attractive.

[Tacenda]

I always thought that the basic unit of the church was the family.  It seems however, that modern socialist thinking has made the organization at large a more important interest.  Just as in socialism, the state (or the beast) is what matters and individuals are expendable; traditional family structure is become expendable and seeking for power at the church organization level is more important than the power and influence already extant in the family structure.

 

Women already have the greater power and influence in the organization of house and home.  Children naturally give more deference to the mother than they do the father.  Apparently, this is not enough.  Ordaining women will have the effect of making the father's priesthood contribution to the eternal family redundant and unnecessary whereas before it was necessary.  What is the benefit for a man to marry?

 

One of the lower kingdoms is starting to look attractive.

You live in each of these homes?

[why me]

I always thought that the basic unit of the church was the family.  It seems however, that modern socialist thinking has made the organization at large a more important interest.  Just as in socialism, the state (or the beast) is what matters and individuals are expendable; traditional family structure is become expendable and seeking for power at the church organization level is more important than the power and influence already extant in the family structure.

 

Women already have the greater power and influence in the organization of house and home.  Children naturally give more deference to the mother than they do the father.  Apparently, this is not enough.  Ordaining women will have the effect of making the father's priesthood contribution to the eternal family redundant and unnecessary whereas before it was necessary.  What is the benefit for a man to marry?

 

One of the lower kingdoms is starting to look attractive.

You may be a little off the mark with the socialism part. Socialism is not just about individual values but about collective values. And so, under a more socialist government, the family becomes a collective value and so, socieity works to make the social environment family friendly: affordable health care, work, education that stresses social equality and social justice, state daycare for working families or single parents etc. It embodies all that was good in the nordic welfare state. However, with capitalism, family is an individual value as are many other values and each family is responsible for its own well being regardless of its economical and social condition.

[katherine the great]

I always thought that the basic unit of the church was the family.  It seems however, that modern socialist thinking has made the organization at large a more important interest.  Just as in socialism, the state (or the beast) is what matters and individuals are expendable; traditional family structure is become expendable and seeking for power at the church organization level is more important than the power and influence already extant in the family structure.

 

Women already have the greater power and influence in the organization of house and home.  Children naturally give more deference to the mother than they do the father.  Apparently, this is not enough.  Ordaining women will have the effect of making the father's priesthood contribution to the eternal family redundant and unnecessary whereas before it was necessary.  What is the benefit for a man to marry?

 

I don't understand this argument.  Are LDS men the only ones who will have to adjust to the changing status of women in our society?  I am perfectly happy with the male having the priesthood, but if I lived in a world where women and men both had priesthood authority, I don't see how that would diminish our happy home.  We both work, we both parent our children, we both take out the garbage, we both have church callings, we both participate in civic organizations, etc.  How would a woman holding the priesthood adversely affect a couple in a society where women and men both contribute to the household?  I think the greater impact by far would be to the church on an administrative level.  Do you feel that women would cease to respect their husbands in such a scenario?

[rockpond]

Women already have the greater power and influence in the organization of house and home.  Children naturally give more deference to the mother than they do the father.  Apparently, this is not enough.  Ordaining women will have the effect of making the father's priesthood contribution to the eternal family redundant and unnecessary whereas before it was necessary.  What is the benefit for a man to marry?

 

When I read a description of marriage/family like this one, it becomes clear to me why someone who thinks similarly cannot fathom the idea of women holding the priesthood or of a homosexual couple getting married.

[Stone holm]

I have no idea what you just said, but for some reason I like it.

Basically, have heard all these arguments before. I did forget one of course, to question gender stereotyping is to attack family values, don't you know the family unit will collapse if women start wearing slacks...it's really all a socialist conspiracy. If you will remember. ETB said the Civil Rights Movement was a Communist plot. We have heard all this before.

[sethpayne]

Basically, have heard all these arguments before. I did forget one of course, to question gender stereotyping is to attack family values, don't you know the family unit will collapse if women start wearing slacks...it's really all a socialist conspiracy. If you will remember. ETB said the Civil Rights Movement was a Communist plot. We have heard all this before.

 

LOL  

[ERayR]

Not my will, but thine be done.  Though I find the difference in this sub-conversation more about semantics than real disagreement.  I have always felt that a significant decision before us is to submit our will to the Father's.  That is not becoming an automaton, but a willing servant and disciple.  I may want to choose to stay focused on my carnal desires, but as a disciple I set them aside to follow Christ.  I have not lost my individuality by following Christ, but in submitting I find my true self and fulfill my true purpose.  

 

We may be talking past each other but I do not think God wants us to unwillingly set our will aside.  Rather he wants us to change and let his will be our will because it is the best choice.

[Calm]

As long as it's not from a fallable prophet. And who's to say there aren't still prophetesses? Did men completely shut their mouths, or only let them speak with permission, along the way?

Not sure how you are connecting the above to the submission/alignment of our will with God's Will discussion.

[Calm]

.

 

Women already have the greater power and influence in the organization of house and home.  Children naturally give more deference to the mother than they do the father.

Not in my experience. It varies with different families. In my family, Dad got more deference for example. Seen plenty of both.

[Tacenda]

Not sure how you are connecting the above to the submission/alignment of our will with God's Will discussion.

How do we know if it's God's will through a prophet that doesn't really get that information straight from the horse's mouth? How do we know if they are or aren't especially with the more controversial issues. We don't unless we think the prophet is infallable. And if we did have prophetesses at one time in the bible and probably plenty on earth, why do we exclude the LDS women from that calling? We all know that a prophet isn't made overnight, it takes many years of service for that and supreme obedience to the laws and ordinances. Women will never go through that chain, ever. ETA: Correction: maybe never. Edited August 18, 2014 by Tacenda

[Stone holm]

I don't particularly like self-serving caricatures, but to each their own.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Really? I mean to each his own? Would never have guessed you supported that concept Wade!

[cdowis]

 We don't unless we think the prophet is infallable. And if we did have prophetesses at one time in the bible and probably plenty on earth, why do we exclude the LDS women from that calling? We all know that a prophet isn't made overnight, it takes many years of service for that and supreme obedience to the laws and ordinances. Women will never go through that chain, ever. ETA: Correction: maybe never.

 

How exactly are you defining prophetess.

 

As the head of the church, the one with the keys of the President and apostles?  Was she able to replace Moses in his administrative duties, was she given the priesthood and keys of authority?

 

I think we have the role of a "prophetess" when we see our sister leaders speaking in General Conference.  They do not take the role of the President of the church, but preach the Gospel with the authority given to them from the Lord.

 

We have many of them in the church today.

[wenglund]

Really? I mean to each his own? Would never have guessed you supported that concept Wade!

 

Not surprising. There is much that is lost on you.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

OW is selfishly all about women, whereas the gospel is unselfishly about families. Two different paths and objectives and leaders. Choose ye this day...

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Calm]

Perhaps the goals appear that way to some, but I know a lot of women were/are interested in the Priesthood, including a good many in OW because they believe the teachings of the prophets that being a good priesthood holder will make a man a better husband and father and they assume that it will do the same for them as mothers.

[Tacenda]

This morning I listened to an excellent Sunstone Symposium podcast, SLC 2013 Symposium/ Session 255: Evolution of Early Mormon Priesthood Narratives

John Hatch, Dan Vogel, Greg Prince, D. Michael Quinn and Ryan Bingham present their panel on August 2, 2013.

 

As mentioned, Greg Prince was one of the presenters.  He has written a book about it, Power from on High: The Development of Mormon Priesthood.  He said it hasn't seen the light of day at Deseret Bookstores, apparently he worked on it for 8 years.  He came to find that the PH is more an authorization much as someone who grants someone Citizenship, or other such things.  And it has evolved through the years to be whatever the current church leadership says it is.  There was more he said but this stuck out to me.  Maybe women have something they need different from this or maybe they don't understand what they are asking for from the current leadership. 

 

I'm listening now to SLC 2013 Symposium/ Session 221: The Transformation of Mormon Priesthood Margaret Toscano and Nancy Ross present their topic on August 2, 2013.

 

 

Next I'll listen to this one... 

 

SLC 2013 Symposium/ Session 131: Ordain Women

Kate Kelly and the organizers of Ordain Women give a panel about women’s ordination in the LDS church on August 1st, 2013.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Tacenda

[juliann]

Basically, have heard all these arguments before. I did forget one of course, to question gender stereotyping is to attack family values, don't you know the family unit will collapse if women start wearing slacks...it's really all a socialist conspiracy. If you will remember. ETB said the Civil Rights Movement was a Communist plot. We have heard all this before.

 

 

I disagree. The real threat was in letting women talk directly to God by praying in General Conference! That one should really worry those who protect the purity of priesthood and prophets from the taint of women.

Edited August 20, 2014 by juliann

[Jeanne]

This is off the wall..but of course it is me, Jeanne.. Anyway, I just feel that no matter what stage in life, what religion or whatever level of grace, or heck..no level, it is so important that even in disagreement, that we all have a voice.  I think we take tahat for granted and it is good to be able to communicate ideas and personal beliefs for better understanding and growth.  Neither should be condemned.  For so long, women never had this kind of voice.  Using it wisely and with open hearts can be a wonderful thing..if only to express.

 

Jeanne

[Stone holm]

OW is selfishly all about women, whereas the gospel is unselfishly about families. Two different paths and objectives and leaders. Choose ye this day...

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Oh my. What does denying women access to authoritative positions in the Church have to do with families. Get so tired of people trying to preempt discussion by playing the, oh families will collapse if....fill in the blank card...all male leadership is unselfishly only about supporting families exactly how?

[Jeanne]

Ordain Women has opened a door ..a new door of perspectives and opportunities that some women have not even thought of.

It doesn't mean that they are going against the Prophet or God,it just means that they can fully understand better free agency and the usefulness of their talents and abilities which is uplifting and what is committed in Temple Ceremonies right?  Why in the world can't there just be openess instead of a "Us Versus Them" kind of attitude?  It could be that the greatest essence in thought are put to great use in deeds.  To deprive or even just feel deprived of giving better service should always be explored.  A loving Heavenly Father does not want his daughters to stagnate.  We should be able to grow on this earth with or without the priesthood on many different levels.  But those levels need to talked about..not disdained or shut up..I believe that we have forgotten what we want and or need may often be a good thing.  Just my IMO. 

 

Jeanne