Woman Denied Temple Recommend for ...

[Calm]

13 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

And sometimes it’s no matter how well a bishop or stake president handles a situation the people involved don’t like it.  

Power hungry can be on the other end...and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it was a bigger problem since bishops and stake presidents don't appoint themselves, but ward busy bodies do.

[Exiled]

51 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Do you really believe that bishops are “power hungry individuals” who are looking to force their views on the members of their congregations?  My experience has been the bishops are good people who hold down full time jobs, do their best to be good husbands and fathers, and work hard to follow the spirit and help the members of their wards.  Dealing with complaints from one ward member about another is about the last thing they want to deal with.  Power hungry?  If you knew some of the problems bishops have to deal with you’d understand just how power hungry they really are and why most are relieved when it comes time to be released.

Some are.  There were a few in the stake where I grew up or the surrounding stakes, and some I came across on my mission.  However, most had good intentions.  Nevertheless, I don't think it is sin to admit that there are always a few bad apples here and there.  Also, good bishops can make mistakes as well.  They aren't infallible.

Edited July 29, 2018 by Exiled

[Exiled]

47 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

And sometimes it’s no matter how well a bishop or stake president handles a situation the people involved don’t like it.  

It has to be a tough job at times.

[juliann]

4 hours ago, Exiled said:

Well, I guess I don't understand why it was a story in the first place if there was so much more to it, if the woman was showing too much as alleged or there were other things involved.  I would think the media would check out a story like this before even publishing, but the media make mistakes all the time and have agendas.  Do you think this is just a KUTV smear?  If so, I would think the other witnesses would respond, if the story does in fact need correcting.

Exponent blogged it immediately.  There was never any effort that I saw to verify anything. In fact, if you read comments people were not allowed to even suggest there might be more to the story. 

And you read Peggy Stack’s Trib article and tell how much effort was put in to giving a balanced story. What I have seen every report on this do is only give the woman’s account about an odd event in one ward. They then announce the church hasn’t responded to them  like huh? What would “the church” know about it? No effort whatsoever has been made to contact the participants or witnesses that I have seen.  

Now I have seen a report from a ward member that she wasn’t always sitting after she exposed herself. I have heard nothing that has gotten closer to the witnesses that gives any indication this was a display that should have been tolerated in public space. 

Rather than helping this woman resolve this and giving her the support she needs, Exponent fems are exploiting her.

 

[juliann]

And BTW, saying that unidentified sources from the ward aren’t reliable when you have accepted an unidentifed accuser from the same ward isn’t too convincing. 

[Scott Lloyd]

18 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

Just trying to understand the context of your comments. If I worked for one company for hours a day for many years, that would shape my view.

My attitude toward the Church and gospel of Jesus Christ was well established many years before I began my job. 

[Bernard Gui]

12 hours ago, Exiled said:

I think discretion should be the name of the game in these matters.  Also, people should realize that breastfeeding is part of life and not get too excited about it when it occurs.  There should be some happy medium that can resolve this "major" issue.

Why the need for discretion if it is just a normal part of life? Would that apply to a Church foyer?

Edited July 29, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[SouthernMo]

6 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

My attitude toward the Church and gospel of Jesus Christ was well established many years before I began my job. 

That’s great. Consistency is admirable. How long would you say your views haven’t changed?

[Exiled]

7 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Why the need for discretion if it is just a normal part of life? Would that apply to a Church foyer?

I don't think anyone is advocating that the woman be allowed to go to the pulpit, stop the meeting and then breastfeed her infant in front of everyone.  On the other hand, one time I was at Disneyland with my cousins when I was around 8 or 9. We were having lunch and my infant cousin was hungry. So, my aunt breastfed him while sitting at the table at the restaurant at Disneyland. I don't think there was anything wrong with it. It stopped my cousin from crying and we were able to then go to pirates of the caribbean.

[Bernard Gui]

2 hours ago, Exiled said:

I don't think anyone is advocating that the woman be allowed to go to the pulpit, stop the meeting and then breastfeed her infant in front of everyone.  On the other hand, one time I was at Disneyland with my cousins when I was around 8 or 9. We were having lunch and my infant cousin was hungry. So, my aunt breastfed him while sitting at the table at the restaurant at Disneyland. I don't think there was anything wrong with it. It stopped my cousin from crying and we were able to then go to pirates of the caribbean.

My favorite feature at Disneyland, but we’re talking about the foyer of the church, not Disneyland. Everyone who is in the chapel is also in the foyer. Why would one need to be discrete at the pulpit but not in the foyer?

Edited July 29, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[Rain]

3 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

My favorite feature at Disneyland, but we’re talking about the foyer of the church, not Disneyland. Everyone who is in the chapel is also in the foyer. Why would one need to be discrete at the pulpit but not in the foyer?

Just do I can be clear. Are you trying to make a point here or are you really trying to understand the difference?

[Exiled]

14 hours ago, juliann said:

And BTW, saying that unidentified sources from the ward aren’t reliable when you have accepted an unidentifed accuser from the same ward isn’t too convincing. 

I don't know if I care too much any more about the breastfeeding controversy.  It seems to have run its course with me.  However, just point me to where the ward members controvert her story and that would satisfy me.  At present, how can one determine if ward members said anything about this?  Or am I just supposed to trust that you read something and be fine with it?  As for trusting that there is a controversy in the first place, my last ward had a similar issue with the mother's room and not being able to attend or at least hear the meeting proceedings when breastfeeding.  We had a problem with the audio in the mother's room and the mothers were out in the foyer breastfeeding away in protest and in plain view of inquisitive deacons.  It was utter chaos! (just kidding)  Anyway, it was an issue and some mothers who hated the isolated room would breastfeed in the foyer.  In reality, I didn't even notice it was going on and our bishop didn't make an issue over it I assume.

[Exiled]

7 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

My favorite feature at Disneyland, but we’re talking about the foyer of the church, not Disneyland. Everyone who is in the chapel is also in the foyer. Why would one need to be discrete at the pulpit but not in the foyer?

I think this issue has run its course with me.  I agree that it is a local issue and probably shouldn't have resulted in one losing a recommend (unless there was something more as Juliann says).  I just alluded to a similar controversy that happened in my last ward.  The mothers complained about the audio and the isolation in the mother's room and some breastfed in the foyer.  The bishop seemingly tolerated it as it continued periodically.  I don't see anything wrong with it.

[Bernard Gui]

4 minutes ago, Exiled said:

I think this issue has run its course with me.  I agree that it is a local issue and probably shouldn't have resulted in one losing a recommend (unless there was something more as Juliann says).  I just alluded to a similar controversy that happened in my last ward.  The mothers complained about the audio and the isolation in the mother's room and some breastfed in the foyer.  The bishop seemingly tolerated it as it continued periodically.  I don't see anything wrong with it.

There’s a big difference between covering up and not covering up. That is the issue.

[Bernard Gui]

12 minutes ago, Rain said:

Just do I can be clear. Are you trying to make a point here or are you really trying to understand the difference?

What is not clear?

[ALarson]

17 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

There’s a big difference between covering up and not covering up. That is the issue.

I agree that this is part of "the issue" regarding this story.  But the other part is how the leaders handled it.  If what is being reported is true, I believe it was wrong to make part of it about causing men to have sexual thoughts or about telling her husband to "control her".  

Also, if the husband was refused a temple recommend, that was wrong, IMO.  

But, we are still just getting bits and pieces of the details and I think we all need more info before we can come to definitive opinions on a lot of this story.

Edited July 29, 2018 by ALarson

[Bernard Gui]

10 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I agree that this is part of "the issue" regarding this story.  But the other part is how the leaders handled it.  If what is being reported is true, I believe it was wrong to make part of it about causing men to have sexual thoughts or about telling her husband to "control her".  

Also, if the husband was refused a temple recommend, that was wrong, IMO.  

But, we are still just getting bits and pieces of the details and I think we all need more info before we can come to definitive opinions on a lot of this story.

Like most other social issues discussed on this board, we usually operate from our own set of assumptions rather than from an understanding of the facts....especially when it comes to anonymous reports on what was said or not said in confidential interviews.

Regarding this particular issue, it is not clear why uncovered nursing is perfectly fine in the foyer, but it should be discrete in other places in the chapel. Can you clear that up?

Edited July 29, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[Scott Lloyd]

14 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I agree that this is part of "the issue" regarding this story.  But the other part is how the leaders handled it.  If what is being reported is true, I believe it was wrong to make part of it about causing men to have sexual thoughts or about telling her husband to "control her".  

Also, if the husband was refused a temple recommend, that was wrong, IMO.  

But, we are still just getting bits and pieces of the details and I think we all need more info before we can come to definitive opinions on a lot of this story.

For one who keeps lecturing about the need for more information before arriving at a conclusion, you seem to be quite readily arriving at conclusions. 

[ALarson]

17 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

For one who keeps lecturing about the need for more information before arriving at a conclusion, you seem to be quite readily arriving at conclusions. 

No conclusions (and I've been very clear about that!).

Thus the words "If what is being reported is true"....."IF".  So no, I've made no conclusions on this.  But did the husband get his recommend?  Did the SP tell him to control his wife?  Did the SP tell her that she was causing men to have sexual thoughts?  

Those are the details we'd need to know before coming to any conclusions.

From what I've read, I do believe her behavior put the leaders in a really tough spot.  But I would like more details on how the leaders chose to handle it.

Edited July 29, 2018 by ALarson

[ALarson]

27 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Like most other social issues discussed on this board, we usually operate from our own set of assumptions rather than from an understanding of the facts....especially when it comes to anonymous reports on what was said or not said in confidential interviews.

Regarding this particular issue, it is not clear why uncovered nursing is perfectly fine in the foyer, but it should be discrete in other places in the chapel. Can you clear that up?

I've never mentioned nursing in the foyer vs. nursing at the pulpit (like you're discussing above).  I think it's kind of an odd question....but carry on with that if you choose.

My issue is regarding the husband being refused a recommend (if true) and what was told to both the husband and the wife by the SP (if what we've been told is the truth).  I'm not sure any more will be revealed on that, but I'm not assuming it was handled correctly or mishandled at this point.  

I was just pointing out that there are possibly more issues that can be discussed here (other than just how much she covered up when nursing).

Edited July 29, 2018 by ALarson

[Exiled]

21 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Like most other social issues discussed on this board, we usually operate from our own set of assumptions rather than from an understanding of the facts....especially when it comes to anonymous reports on what was said or not said in confidential interviews.

Regarding this particular issue, it is not clear why uncovered nursing is perfectly fine in the foyer, but it should be discrete in other places in the chapel. Can you clear that up?

This seems to be a big issue for you.  Does breastfeeding bother you that much?

[Bernard Gui]

15 minutes ago, Exiled said:

This seems to be a big issue for you.  Does breastfeeding bother you that much?

I knew it would come to this. I find this comment insulting. Can’t we discuss something without casting undeserved oprobrium?

[Scott Lloyd]

2 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

I knew it would come to this. I find this comment insulting. Can’t we discuss something without casting undeserved oprobrium?

This seems to be endemic. I endured the same thing from ALarson earlier in the thread, immediately after I had explicitly stated I believe society needs to be more tolerant of breastfeeding in public! 

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, ALarson said:

I've never mentioned nursing in the foyer vs. nursing at the pulpit (like you're discussing above).  I think it's kind of an odd question....but carry on with that if you choose.

My issue is regarding the husband being refused a recommend (if true) and what was told to both the husband and the wife by the SP (if what we've been told is the truth).  I'm not sure any more will be revealed on that, but I'm not assuming it was handled correctly or mishandled at this point.  

I was just pointing out that there are possibly more issues that can be discussed here (other than just how much she covered up when nursing).

I believe it was Exiled who brought up the pulpit. 

Quote

BG:Why the need for discretion if it is just a normal part of life? Would that apply to a Church foyer?

Exiled: I don't think anyone is advocating that the woman be allowed to go to the pulpit, stop the meeting and then breastfeed her infant in front of everyone.  On the other hand, one time I was at Disneyland with my cousins when I was around 8 or 9. We were having lunch and my infant cousin was hungry. So, my aunt breastfed him while sitting at the table at the restaurant at Disneyland. I don't think there was anything wrong with it. It stopped my cousin from crying and we were able to then go to pirates of the caribbean.

It’s an issue for me because it is used in the media and here on this board as just another club to unfairly bludgeon the Church and its leaders.

Edited July 29, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[ALarson]

14 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

I knew it would come to this. I find this comment insulting. Can’t we discuss something without casting undeserved oprobrium?

You seem to be the one pushing this issue.  I haven't seen anyone claim that it was fine for this sister to be nursing uncovered (as described by juliann) in the foyer.

The same would be true if it were at the pulpit.

 

Edited July 29, 2018 by ALarson