DiscussMormonism.com

OK, it was lifted for a few folks but it is still in place for half the LDS population.

I find it interested how the media (thank you Mitt), has recently discussed the LDS Priesthood ban for black folks of African descent, but as far as I know, has not mentioned the fact that the ban is still alive and well for women.

In this country, moving toward equality and basic human rights, I find it strange that this wouldn't at least be minimally addressed by someone.

Why is it wrong for the LDS church to ban blacks from the Priesthood but discrimination toward women is not even a blip on the screen?


~dancer~

For me, this is like the Hooters situation when a few gay men sued the comapny because it only hired women as waitresses.

Becoming a priest isn't a right, so I don't think this is an equal rights isssue. And most women don't care to be priests anyway. So it isn't exactly the same thing as with the negro situation.

Hi Kevin... :-)

Becoming a priest isn't a right, so I don't think this is an equal rights isssue. And most women don't care to be priests anyway. So it isn't exactly the same thing as with the negro situation.

What is the difference between banning someone because of skin color versus banning them because of body parts (or lack thereof... smile)?

I have a difficult time with the idea that anyone can ban others using the excuse, "well they don't want to do such and such anyway."

While obviously the lack of women priests in the Catholic church is much different since only a handful of men are priests, (not that it seems remotely Godly), in the LDS church virtually all males twelve years old and up have the priesthood and it is indeed banned from ALL women.

I personally don't think the priesthood is anything other than a way for men to have power, nevertheless, I'm surprised the media hasn't even mentioned it... maybe they do not know how it all works in the LDS church?

~dancer~

Priesthood is a privilege when you can have it and someone else can't.

The reason this won't come up in scrutinizing Romney's beliefs is due to the fact that many mainstream Christian sects, notably Catholicism and some fundamentalist Baptist sects, also ban women from being priests/preachers.

beastie wrote:The reason this won't come up in scrutinizing Romney's beliefs is due to the fact that many mainstream Christian sects, notably Catholicism and some fundamentalist Baptist sects, also ban women from being priests/preachers.

Apples and oranges. Catholic priests and Baptists preachers self-select to enter the priesthood. The Mormon priesthood is for every male over 12. Still fruit, just different kinds.

truth dancer wrote:Hi Kevin... :-)

Becoming a priest isn't a right, so I don't think this is an equal rights isssue. And most women don't care to be priests anyway. So it isn't exactly the same thing as with the negro situation.

What is the difference between banning someone because of skin color versus banning them because of body parts (or lack thereof... smile)?

I have a difficult time with the idea that anyone can ban others using the excuse, "well they don't want to do such and such anyway."

While obviously the lack of women priests in the Catholic church is much different since only a handful of men are priests, (not that it seems remotely Godly), in the LDS church virtually all males twelve years old and up have the priesthood and it is indeed banned from ALL women.

I personally don't think the priesthood is anything other than a way for men to have power, nevertheless, I'm surprised the media hasn't even mentioned it... maybe they do not know how it all works in the LDS church?

~dancer~

A lot of other Christian religions believe in the priesthood of all believers, so whether or not someone has the ordained priesthood, all men and women are considered to have priesthood. I believe this is also true in religions like Catholicism where only men are officially ordained. All faithful laypersons still hold the priesthood.

It's possible the media doesn't bother with it for two reasons. First, some religions (like Catholic) have kept ordained priesthood only for men, even though some Protestant denominations ordain women, so Mormonism wouldn't be a sole offender on that level, and second, those who come from a vantage point of lay priesthood of the faithful might think that Mormonism actually embraces that (which, on a certain level, it does).

truth dancer wrote:OK, it was lifted for a few folks but it is still in place for half the LDS population.

I find it interested how the media (thank you Mitt), has recently discussed the LDS Priesthood ban for black folks of African descent, but as far as I know, has not mentioned the fact that the ban is still alive and well for women.

In this country, moving toward equality and basic human rights, I find it strange that this wouldn't at least be minimally addressed by someone.

Why is it wrong for the LDS church to ban blacks from the Priesthood but discrimination toward women is not even a blip on the screen?


~dancer~

Why the hell should Romney discuss this? What has it got to do with his political race? Should Rudy discuss the fact that Catholics don't let woman or even married men hold the priesthood? Should Huckabee discuss the fact the the SBC believes a women should not pastor a church?

Write the prophet on this would ya?

harmony wrote:

beastie wrote:The reason this won't come up in scrutinizing Romney's beliefs is due to the fact that many mainstream Christian sects, notably Catholicism and some fundamentalist Baptist sects, also ban women from being priests/preachers.

Apples and oranges. Catholic priests and Baptists preachers self-select to enter the priesthood. The Mormon priesthood is for every male over 12. Still fruit, just different kinds.

Can a women self select to be a preist or a SBS preacher? Nope. It is the same.

the road to hana wrote:

truth dancer wrote:Hi Kevin... :-)

Becoming a priest isn't a right, so I don't think this is an equal rights isssue. And most women don't care to be priests anyway. So it isn't exactly the same thing as with the negro situation.

What is the difference between banning someone because of skin color versus banning them because of body parts (or lack thereof... smile)?

I have a difficult time with the idea that anyone can ban others using the excuse, "well they don't want to do such and such anyway."

While obviously the lack of women priests in the Catholic church is much different since only a handful of men are priests, (not that it seems remotely Godly), in the LDS church virtually all males twelve years old and up have the priesthood and it is indeed banned from ALL women.

I personally don't think the priesthood is anything other than a way for men to have power, nevertheless, I'm surprised the media hasn't even mentioned it... maybe they do not know how it all works in the LDS church?

~dancer~

A lot of other Christian religions believe in the priesthood of all believers, so whether or not someone has the ordained priesthood, all men and women are considered to have priesthood. I believe this is also true in religions like Catholicism where only men are officially ordained. All faithful laypersons still hold the priesthood.

It's possible the media doesn't bother with it for two reasons. First, some religions (like Catholic) have kept ordained priesthood only for men, even though some Protestant denominations ordain women, so Mormonism wouldn't be a sole offender on that level, and second, those who come from a vantage point of lay priesthood of the faithful might think that Mormonism actually embraces that (which, on a certain level, it does).

So in other words they don't bring in up because they can't just beat the Mormon boy on this one. They have to bear a whole bunch of others too and that is on acceptable. Stick to the odd Mormon things so they can whip it up against Mitt.