Church ends saturday evening sessions for general conference

[ttribe]

8 minutes ago, Calm said:

Rate that use a 3...

On a scale of 1-3, of course!

[JAHS]

25 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I don't think we can make a blanket statement like this.  I know a lot of women were reading the priesthood session talks long before they could watch it live, for example.

I couldn't wade thorough all the donut posts to see what was already said about this but I'm old and was referring to times back in the 60's. I know my mother couldn't have cared less about priesthood talks.

[ttribe]

1 minute ago, JAHS said:

I couldn't wade thorough all the donut posts to see what was already said about this but I'm old and was referring to times back in the 60's. I know my mother couldn't have cared less about priesthood talks.

And that would be a sample size of 1.  Not exactly generally accepted as representative of the population.

[Calm]

22 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I would have gone with this. 

 

More on point, but works best when only thing in the post. 
 

Though JAHS was having a serious post and I think his comment was based on his experience and not dismissive, so I wouldn’t have gone with a meme in the first place and just commented on it...though I get the reaction because I was interested and I know many women who were. We talked about it at church even.

Edited June 10, 2021 by Calm

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Calm said:

More on point, but works best when only thing in the post. 
 

Though JAHS was having a serious post and I think his comment was based on his experience and not dismissive, so I wouldn’t have gone with a meme in the first place...though I get the reaction because I was interested and I know many women who were. 

I get that. I don’t think I’d even know if my mom would be interested in the priesthood session, and even if I did know, I wouldn’t extrapolate beyond her. 

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, JAHS said:

know my mother couldn't have cared less about priesthood talks

Probably many weren’t.  My mom certainly was, probably more interested than my dad.

[secondclasscitizen]

4 hours ago, sheilauk said:

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?

Are you the one who is cancelling the church meetings? It would be the church cancelling them. That said they are creating the imposition on your friends. I don’t know what they have to do with the frequency of meetings but ok. 

Edited June 10, 2021 by secondclasscitizen

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

It could be that after you implied she was being irrational, she didn't see the point in continuing the discussion.  

Are you asking if the church leaders sinned by not offering public accessible live broadcasts of the priesthood sessions?

False accusation and cheap shot 

And no, I didn’t ask if they “sinned.” I’m asking if they were wrong. 
 

Can you answer the question without altering it?

Edited June 10, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[bluebell]

34 minutes ago, JAHS said:

I couldn't wade thorough all the donut posts to see what was already said about this but I'm old and was referring to times back in the 60's. I know my mother couldn't have cared less about priesthood talks.

I admit, the donut posts took over for a while.

[bluebell]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

False accusation and cheap shot 

 

You told her to ponder something after she had "calmed down".  If you didn't mean to imply that she was being irrational then don't say stuff that implies that.  Why would she need to wait until she had calmed down to think about something if there wasn't something deficient in her thinking in the moment before calming down?   

Don't shoot the messenger.

Quote

And no, I didn’t ask if they “sinned.” I’m asking if they were wrong. 

When we sin we do something wrong, right?  It's not like they are two completely different concepts. 

I asked that clarifying question because the question didn't make any sense to me.  If what they did wasn't a sin, then what do you mean by asking if it was 'wrong'?  Wrong how?  

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

And it's interesting that your leaders never thought they needed to prohibit women and children from being there.  

Or men.

[bluebell]

Just now, Hamba Tuhan said:

Or men.

Well, here in the states (and maybe some other places too) there were always men present at the women's sessions since they couldn't be in the building without "priesthood" there.  And then some of the speakers were always men.  So having men at the women's session was normal.  Meanwhile, women who tried to attend the priesthood session in chapels could be/were turned away/prohibited. 

I think that scott said even members of the press had to be male to gain entrance to the conference center to report on the session.  I don't think they cared if they were members but they couldn't be female.

[Hamba Tuhan]

11 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Well, here in the states (and maybe some other places too) there were always men present at the women's sessions since they couldn't be in the building without "priesthood" there.

I just searched the Handbook to see if that's a policy. I couldn't find it. Is it? Our RS are having an event tonight. I would be surprised if any men attended.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, ttribe said:

On a scale of 1-3, of course!

Of course.

[Calm]

22 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I just searched the Handbook to see if that's a policy. I couldn't find it. Is it? Our RS are having an event tonight. I would be surprised if any men attended.

We talked about it back when OW was going on, I might try to find the thread to see if anyone had old handbooks to reference. The policy that a man had to be in the building for RS get togethers was standard in any ward I was in, most of the time they would say for safety or an emergency blessing...which made no sense because the female leaders would be alone in the building with activity girls or when I was Akela or when the YM were off doing an activity. Apparently a group of adult women were more likely to get hurt than a crowd of Cubs (I had 14 boys).

Edited June 10, 2021 by Calm

[Rain]

15 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I just searched the Handbook to see if that's a policy. I couldn't find it. Is it? Our RS are having an event tonight. I would be surprised if any men attended.

Policy? I don't know.  But it has been a thing in every ward I have lived in.   

[Hamba Tuhan]

8 minutes ago, Rain said:

Policy? I don't know.  But it has been a thing in every ward I have lived in.   

Interesting. I've never observed this before. The women in my stake have keys to the buildings and use them whenever they need to. When I was Young Men president, the girls were often at the chapel whilst the boys were off-site.

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

The policy that a man had to be in the building for RS get togethers was standard in any ward I was in, most of the time they would say for safety or an emergency blessing...

I feel reasonably confident that the women in my ward are quite capable of protecting themselves!

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Interesting. I've never observed this before. The women in my stake have keys to the buildings and use them whenever they need to. When I was Young Men president, the girls were often at the chapel whilst the boys were off-site.

I feel reasonably confident that the women in my ward are quite capable of protecting themselves!

Western culture..

[Rain]

1 minute ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Interesting. I've never observed this before. The women in my stake have keys to the buildings and use them whenever they need to. When I was Young Men president, the girls were often at the chapel whilst the boys were off-site.

The women presidents have always had keys as far as I know.  We just couldn't have an RS meeting without priesthood holders - and in most stakes we needed 2.

1 minute ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I feel reasonably confident that the women in my ward are quite capable of protecting themselves!

 

[Hamba Tuhan]

This is all I can find in the Handbook:

Quote

At least two adult supervisors must be present at all Church-sponsored activities attended by children, youth, and young single adults. Additional adults may be needed depending on the size of the group, the skill level of the group (for activities requiring certain skills), anticipated environmental conditions, and the overall degree of challenge of the activity. Parents should be encouraged to help.

All adults participating in activities for children and youth are to complete children and youth protection training (ProtectingChildren.ChurchofJesusChrist.org) before the activity.

And: 

Quote

Leaders should be prepared for emergencies that may occur. They should also know in advance how to contact local law enforcement and emergency services.

ETA: I found a conversation on this topic on the Exponent II website with the following clarification:

Quote

Pro tip: Church Handbook 1, 8.3.5: “Priesthood leaders instruct members, especially women and youth, not to be alone in an unlocked church building.” So if a person is alone in a church building, regardless of gender, the doors should be locked. If more than one person is in the church building, regardless of gender, the doors do not need to be locked. There is no church policy that states there must be priesthood holders in the building while it is in use by women.

The quoted language doesn't appear to exist in the current Handbook, according to my search.

Edited June 10, 2021 by Hamba Tuhan

[Rain]

16 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

This is all I can find in the Handbook:

And: 

ETA: I found a conversation on this topic on the Exponent II website with the following clarification:

The quoted language doesn't appear to exist in the current Handbook, according to my search.

But it doesn't really matter if that is what your bishop or stake president decides.  I never would have been able to get my bishop to agree the men weren't needed. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

26 minutes ago, Rain said:

But it doesn't really matter if that is what your bishop or stake president decides.  I never would have been able to get my bishop to agree the men weren't needed. 

Which is precisely why Handbooks need to trump false traditions.

Elder Bednar's closing words to our regional leadership training meeting 7 or 8 years ago: Brethren, there is far, far too much tradition in this room. I don't care if this is your third time serving as a stake president. Stop doing what you've done before and what you've seen be done, and start doing what we and the handbooks tell you to do.

By the way, I honestly can't imagine what would drive a man to think he needed to attend an event for women that he wasn't needed/required at. I have much, much better things to do ...

Edited June 10, 2021 by Hamba Tuhan

[JAHS]

45 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

This is all I can find in the Handbook:

Quote

At least two adult supervisors must be present at all Church-sponsored activities attended by children, youth, and young single adults. Additional adults may be needed depending on the size of the group, the skill level of the group (for activities requiring certain skills), anticipated environmental conditions, and the overall degree of challenge of the activity. Parents should be encouraged to help.

All adults participating in activities for children and youth are to complete children and youth protection training (ProtectingChildren.ChurchofJesusChrist.org) before the activity.

And: 

Quote

Leaders should be prepared for emergencies that may occur. They should also know in advance how to contact local law enforcement and emergency services.

 

That's all I can find too. Nothing about sisters having a meeting or activity.
I guess they are on their own unless the Stake President or Bishop have their own local policy about it.

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

And it's interesting that your leaders never thought they needed to prohibit women and children from being there.  

Hamba lives in an entirely different church universe than us.

[Hamba Tuhan]

7 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Hamba lives in an entirely different church universe than us.

This was in a branch on an island in the Caribbean. I only worked there for a year and haven’t lived there for many years. But yeah...

Edited June 10, 2021 by Hamba Tuhan