Status of the Church 2.0

[Rain]

18 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

Why else would they all of a sudden make these statements?

The context is that there are a lot of members who are crying about "inequality" and "sexism" against women in the church and calling for women to be ordained and/or given more authority in the church.

Let me be clear.  I was giving you a CFR or call for reference.  On this board, it is against the rules to "(Refuse) to provide appropriate references to support your statements."

Your statement again, "They are made largely to defuse the hostility and confusion created by the ordain women movement."

So provide a reference showing this is true or retract your statement.   

[MacGyver]

2 minutes ago, Rain said:

Let me be clear.  I was giving you a CFR or call for reference.  On this board, it is against the rules to "(Refuse) to provide appropriate references to support your statements."

Your statement again, "They are made largely to defuse the hostility and confusion created by the ordain women movement."

So provide a reference showing this is true or retract your statement.   

Do I really need to post links to dozens, if not hundreds, of articles and blog posts in the past decade where members are crying about sexism and inequality towards women in the church? 

I thought this was common knowledge?

Just in case you were unaware of this here is a link to get you started:

https://youngmormonfeminists.org/2013/08/09/how-the-temple-is-sexist-and-the-church-is-too/

[Rain]

1 hour ago, MacGyver said:

Do I really need to post links to dozens, if not hundreds, of articles and blog posts in the past decade where members are crying about sexism and inequality towards women in the church? 

I thought this was common knowledge?

Just in case you were unaware of this here is a link to get you started:

https://youngmormonfeminists.org/2013/08/09/how-the-temple-is-sexist-and-the-church-is-too/

This is not a reference supporting your statement.

Your statement again, "They are made largely to defuse the hostility and confusion created by the ordain women movement."

A reference would show that the men we are referring to meant what you said.  We are not talking about the actions of dozens/hundreds of people.  We are talking about the intent of a few men and specific quotes mentioned in this thread.

An example (fictional) would be President Oaks in the Deseret News saying, "when we said those things in conference it was only to diffuse the ordain women situation."

If you can't provide a reference then we can only count what you said as an assumption and your statement stated as fact needs to be withdrawn.

[MacGyver]

32 minutes ago, Rain said:

This is not a reference supporting your statement.

Your statement again, "They are made largely to defuse the hostility and confusion created by the ordain women movement."

A reference would show that the men we are referring to meant what you said.  We are not talking about the actions of dozens/hundreds of people.  We are talking about the intent of a few men and specific quotes mentioned in this thread.

An example (fictional) would be President Oaks in the Deseret News saying, "when we said those things in conference it was only to diffuse the ordain women situation."

If you can't provide a reference then we can only count what you said as an assumption and your statement stated as fact needs to be withdrawn.

You aren't the judge of what is an acceptable reference or not. Those statements were made at a time when the church was under serious attack and being accused of sexism and discrimination against women, particularly in regards to women not holding the priesthood. 

This is the context for those statements. They addressed these attacks and the confusion and disillusionment they were creating. 

You'll notice that the first of these types of statements, the 2014 talk from Elder Oaks, was made right in the middle of the madness. The correlation is obvious. 

[Rain]

5 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

You aren't the judge of what is an acceptable reference or not. Those statements were made at a time when the church was under serious attack and being accused of sexism and discrimination against women, particularly in regards to women not holding the priesthood. 

This is the context for those statements. They addressed these attacks and the confusion and disillusionment they were creating. 

You'll notice that the first of these types of statements, the 2014 talk from Elder Oaks, was made right in the middle of the madness. The correlation is obvious. 

That's fine.  I'll report you for failing to provide a reference and let the mods judge the situation.

[MacGyver]

8 minutes ago, Rain said:

That's fine.  I'll report you for failing to provide a reference and let the mods judge the situation.

I did provide a reference. And I can provide many more. But if you want to be petty and run to the mods because you don't like the reference, I guess there's no stopping you. 

[MacGyver]

@Rain since this obviously means a lot more to you than it does to me and you insist on making a big deal out of this, I will amend my statement. 

I'm of the opinion that considering the context of what was and is going on with the church being accused of sexism and a growing disillusionment over this issue, that these statements about women already having the priesthood were made largely to defuse the hostility and confusion created by the ordain women movement.

There are you happy now?

 

[Calm]

My son when he was about 2 and a half fell down from the top of the uncarpeted stairs all the way to the bottom ending in the basement at his grandparents and ended up thoroughly bruised, including some awful looking ones on his head. When I came back and saw him, I was horrified….and pissed.  Shortly after, the stairs were nicely padded and carpeted even though they had for the previous 30 years of raising her own kids as well as babysitting many other grandkids remained hard edged.  
 

Was there a correlation?  Most definitely.  Was it just to make me less hostile because I was right royally ticked that they had not kept him away from the top of the stairs?  There was a very high probability visits to grandma’s would be a lot less if the stairs had remained naked, after all.  Seems logical as they were very fond grandparents and he was particularly adorable. 
 

When she explained she had always thought it had needed to be carpeted before, but she just never got around to it until some of the potential for harm became reality and made it clear it could be much worse next time…why would I not believe her and instead think she didn’t really think the stairs were that dangerous and instead she was more worried about defusing my negative reactions than about kids being hurt?
 

One can believe the apostles and others gave those talks in order to defuse hostility, etc created by the Ordain Women movement or one can believe they were shared for the reasons given, because the apostles believed they were the truth and people needed to understand it better. 
 

Perhaps the talks were given at that time because the discussions about and around the Ordain Women movement showed how poorly many understood the relationship of women and the priesthood. But this only provides further support to the explanation that they were shared because it was truth needing to be taught clearer and stronger and not to just provide fuzzy warm feelings through intentionally misrepresented teachings. 

Edited January 22, 2022 by Calm

[Rain]

1 hour ago, MacGyver said:

@Rain since this obviously means a lot more to you than it does to me and you insist on making a big deal out of this, I will amend my statement. 

I'm of the opinion that considering the context of what was and is going on with the church being accused of sexism and a growing disillusionment over this issue, that these statements about women already having the priesthood were made largely to defuse the hostility and confusion created by the ordain women movement.

There are you happy now?

 

Thank you for framing it as opinion.

[Tacenda]

On 1/19/2022 at 10:30 PM, Olmec Donald said:

WOW.  This is amazing to me:

"“How I yearn for you to understand that the restoration of the priesthood is just as relevant to you as a woman as it is to any man..."  It’s a process, however, that is not spelled out in any manual. “The Holy Ghost will be your personal tutor as you seek to understand what the Lord would have you know and do,” he said. “This process is neither quick nor easy, but it is spiritually invigorating."" [emphasis Donald's]

It sounds to me like the Holy Spirit is to be YOUR PERSONAL TUTOR when it comes to YOUR priestesshood.  No lesson manuals, no classes, no earthly instructor.  You have a direct line, and a green light from President Nelson to follow what the Holy Spirit reveals to you.

WOW.

THANK YOU, Tacenda!!

YOU'RE WELCOME, Olmec Donald!!

Here's an interesting Sunstone Podcast about women that have the PH already. https://sunstone.org/the-demise-of-the-patriarchal-priesthood/

And here's where you can download it on his website: 

http://oneeternalround.org/articles/recent-talks-two-papers

[Olmec Donald]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Here's an interesting Sunstone Podcast about women that have the PH already. https://sunstone.org/the-demise-of-the-patriarchal-priesthood/

And here's where you can download it on his website: 

http://oneeternalround.org/articles/recent-talks-two-papers

Thank you VERY MUCH, looking forward to reading them!

[Chaos]

13 hours ago, MacGyver said:

I did provide a reference. And I can provide many more. But if you want to be petty and run to the mods because you don't like the reference, I guess there's no stopping you. 

When you are asked to provide a reference you must do it. This is a fundamental rule of this board. You have been put on limited posting status because of your behavior.

[MacGyver]

What does limited posting status mean?

[MacGyver]

2 hours ago, Chaos said:

When you are asked to provide a reference you must do it. This is a fundamental rule of this board. You have been put on limited posting status because of your behavior.

Is there any way to appeal this decision without violating board rules?

I wasn't trying to avoid providing a reference and I modified my claim to an opinion after Rain was dissatisfied with the reference and explanation I provided.