Something Troubling in Sunday School

[_consiglieri]

I just find it objectionable to liken slavery and its ill effects with women not getting the priesthood in the Church.

Saying the priesthood ban against women is wrong doesn't make slavery not more wrong.

Nobody is saying this except you, Stem.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_stemelbow]

It's not a deflection. I'm really not getting your difficulty here. It's simple - slavery and Jim Crow were both based on racism against blacks. Jim Crow is an echo from slave times. Under Jim Crow, blacks were banned from doing certain things - like going to certain restaurants, marrying certain people, sitting in certain seats, etc.

How is that night and day different from banning women from the priesthood?

That was deflection, Buffalo. Obviously. The treatment received by blacks, during slavery, was far more than not being allowed to do certain things. And let's be clear, the certain things that wasn't be allowed to be done was clearly something other than presiding over religious ritual.

[_stemelbow]

Stem, does that woman (or any LDS woman) have the power to change her situation re: priesthood? Can a woman in the church bring about her own ordination to the priesthood?

A man can't bring about his own ordination to the priesthood. To liken priesthood activities within the LDS Church to legal rights granted to members of a nation is just plain silly. I'm getting more eager to see how far you guys will take this.

[_Buffalo]

It's not a deflection. I'm really not getting your difficulty here. It's simple - slavery and Jim Crow were both based on racism against blacks. Jim Crow is an echo from slave times. Under Jim Crow, blacks were banned from doing certain things - like going to certain restaurants, marrying certain people, sitting in certain seats, etc.

How is that night and day different from banning women from the priesthood?

That was deflection, Buffalo. Obviously. The treatment received by blacks, during slavery, was far more than not being allowed to do certain things. And let's be clear, the certain things that wasn't be allowed to be done was clearly something other than presiding over religious ritual.

Explain why it's a deflection? If Jim Crow is related to slavery (and I haven't seen you deny that), then how is sexism not related as well? Sexism and Jim Crow laws are fairly comparable.

[_stemelbow]

Saying the priesthood ban against women is wrong doesn't make slavery not more wrong.

Nobody is saying this except you, Stem.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

You are not digging yourself out of this hole by claiming I said something I clearly did not say. I have not said anything near "the priesthood ban against women is wrong doesn't make slavery not more wrong". What kind of twisting of words and ideas are you promoting, Consig? I expected more out of you.

You clearly attempted, in some weird way, to suggest that women not getting the priesthood, and their attitudes about it is akin to the treatment slaves received and the attitudes that could have resulted among slaves. I find it objectionable to think women who aren't interested in receiving the priesthood in the Church are in any way seen or treated like slaves were, or that sharing their opinion about it is akin to a slave way back when biting his tongue regarding his true feelings and kissing owners butts. It is clearly an absurd proposition. I know you see it as a great idea. I don't' know why. I find it pathetic.

[_LDSToronto]

And that is just talking about the "power" part of the priesthood. The "authority" part would allow women to preside in Church. After correlation, women can "preside" over Relief Society and Primary, but really they are just subordinates to the bishop who is the one doing the real presiding.

I'd like to point out that LDS men are in a similar position. In a stake, here are the people that have authority - Stake President, Bishop, Elders Quorum President, Teachers Quorum President, Deacons Quorum President. In practical terms, it's really just bishops and stake presidents who ever exert any real decision making authority.

YM presidents, Sunday School Presidents, high councilors, clerks, secretaries, all counselors in all presidencies, all of them are powerless to make any type of autonomous decision without the approval of the either a bishop or a stake president.

H.

[_stemelbow]

Explain why it's a deflection? If Jim Crow is related to slavery (and I haven't seen you deny that), then how is sexism not related as well? Sexism and Jim Crow laws are fairly comparable.

Oh brother. What are we playing here the 5 or 6 degrees game again?

[_Buffalo]

Saying the priesthood ban against women is wrong doesn't make slavery not more wrong.

Nobody is saying this except you, Stem.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

You are not digging yourself out of this hole by claiming I said something I clearly did not say. I have not said anything near "the priesthood ban against women is wrong doesn't make slavery not more wrong". What kind of twisting of words and ideas are you promoting, Consig? I expected more out of you.

I think what he's saying is you seem to think that our objection to institutional sexism in the church trivializes slavery because we compare it to slavery. He's saying that slavery remains very wrong even when we compare it to sexism.

Both are evils of the same type, but different degree. Just like shoplifting and robbery are crimes of the same type, but different degree.

[_consiglieri]

Oh brother. What are we playing here the 5 or 6 degrees game again?

Perhaps a different question is in order, Brother Stem.

Setting aside the issue of whether you see any similarity between slavery and sexism, do you think it sexist for the LDS Church to refuse priesthood ordination to women based solely on their gender?

A yes or no will suffice.


All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_just me]

Stem, does that woman (or any LDS woman) have the power to change her situation re: priesthood? Can a woman in the church bring about her own ordination to the priesthood?

A man can't bring about his own ordination to the priesthood. To liken priesthood activities within the LDS Church to legal rights granted to members of a nation is just plain silly. I'm getting more eager to see how far you guys will take this.

Actually, you are the one who took it too far and we're trying to bring you back down. Why you have chosen to blow this out of the water and focus on it rather than the amazing discussion about the sexism that exists in the church is beyond me....but I think I can guess.

A man absolutely does have control over receiving the priesthood in the church. Again, why you choose to misunderstand my words is beyond me. All a man has to do is....actually, you know what? All a boy has to do is turn 12. The bishop automatically pulls him in for an interview and assuming he answers all the questions properly he is ordained. A convert goes through the same process. He is very much able to bring about his ordination to the priesthood.

A woman has no such thing available to her. If I go to my bishop and tell him I am ready for the priesthood what do you think would happen?

That is why we get responses like the woman in the OP! "Oh, no, I wouldn't want the priesthood anyway. How aweful! What a terrible responsibility. I am just a woman, I have more responsibility than I want already."

At this point I feel that you are willfully trying to misunderstand the members of this board. You willfully avoid meaningful conversation in favor of attacking peripheral and minor points of discussion. And you rarely make a stand on anything.

Let's talk about sexism, stem.