Women hear LDS Priesthood meeting, but not at conference center


Return To Article
  • johnpack Parker, CO
    Oct. 10, 2013 6:13 p.m.

    Hmmmm, let's see... If the church is true, then these women need to respect the will of the Lord.

    If the church is false, then the priesthood isn't worth having.

    Perhaps these women should adopt a consistent position? Either support the Lord's prophet or join a church that will be happy to ordain them.

  • Spider Rico Greeley, CO
    Oct. 10, 2013 4:00 p.m.

    @RedWings - you can see that same pattern in the comments here.

    Oct. 10, 2013 11:38 a.m.

    Anyone else wonder why the sister who was to lead the "300 protesters" in singing "The Spirit of God Like a Fire in Burning" did not know the hymn and needed a Hymnbook? This is not an obscure hymn. A news photographer separately noted that most of the protesters were the same people often seen at LGBT rallies.

    I am thinking this "movement" is not much of one at all. It is just another opportunity for the haters to make a scene.

    "You can leave the LDS Church but you can't leave the LDS Church alone".....

  • Baritone-33 Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 10, 2013 9:00 a.m.

    As far as I'm concerned, these sisters are welcome to the priesthood if they want it. I've got some hometeaching they can help me with.

  • 1.96 Standard Deviations OREM, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 7:31 a.m.


    One last note. Priesthood authority is not just about giving blessings. Priesthood authority is needed to administer ordinances such as performing baptism, giving the gift of the Holy Ghost, giving the sacrament, and so on. Another way to know women did not receive priesthood authority is because they did not performed priesthood ordinances (baptism, sacrament, etc). You should not get caught up about their giving prayers in faith by the laying on of hands. I repeat, Priesthood itself is not the laying on of hands.

  • 1.96 Standard Deviations OREM, UT
    Oct. 9, 2013 7:24 a.m.

    Silverprospector & DocHolliday-

    Both of you have missed the point and keep avoiding the key to everything. To have priesthood, it needs to be conferred upon you. It was never conferred upon women by the Prophet or by other church leaders who held Priesthood Keys.

    In short, a presiding authority (like the Prophet) holds priesthood keys which allows him to direct and preside over priesthood work (which includes conferring Priesthood on someone). Women were given permission to lay their hands on people in the prayer of faith (a prayer can include a request to rebuke illness). You have been terming this a "blessing," but it shouldn't be confused with having the priesthood or giving a priesthood blessing.

    Priesthood blessings start with a declaration, "By the authority of the Melchizedek Priesthood." The women never stated this when laying their hands on someone in the prayer of faith to call down God's blessings. Therefore, their prayers of faith by the laying on of hands were NOT priesthood blessings.

    Silverprospector - People can be healed with no priesthood involved. This is related to faith and a spiritual gift for some. Go read Moroni 10 if you do not believe me.

  • Silverprospector SAN ANTONIO, TX
    Oct. 8, 2013 3:15 p.m.

    1.96 Standard Deviations

    I have to comment here. You are the one that is spreading false information. You have done it before on other posts. The evidence is out there - women were encouraged to administer to the sick. Now they aren't. why is that? Did god change his mind? If women are allowed to give a blessing to heal the sick, but without the priesthood power, then what is the point of the priesthood? If anybody can give a blessing, and they don't need the priesthood to heal, then why would anybody ever use the priesthood to give a blessing. Your excuses are confusing, and it doesn't make sense.

  • DocHolliday reno, NV
    Oct. 8, 2013 1:58 p.m.


    in Cache Valley, Apostle Ezra T. Benson had called on women who had been ordained and held the power to rebuke diseases to do so and urged all the women to gain the same power by exercis[ing] faith.

    This was not in the early days of the church, as you claim, and plenty of men were present to give blessings (against what you claim). So why would they have women pronounce non-priesthood blessings by the laying on of hands? What good can a blessing do if it isn't by the priesthood? If it does work, then there is no use for the priesthood because anybody can do it by the laying on of hands.

    the picture you paint doesn't add up, and it doesn't make sense.

  • DocHolliday reno, NV
    Oct. 8, 2013 1:54 p.m.

    1.96 Standard Deviations

    Wrong. you are the one that is incorrect. you are spreading false information. You make excuses for them laying on the hands and giving blessings. You have also made other excuses that don't hold water regarding other topics, so it isn't surprising. So you think they used the layin on of hands, but didn't hold the priesthood? That makes sense. The only blessings I know of that use laying on of hands are priesthood blessings.

    Joseph Smith specifically addressed the propriety of women giving blessings:If God gave his sanction by healing there could be no more sin in any female laying hands [27] on the sick than in wetting the face with water. There were women ordained to heal the sick and it was their privilege to do so. If the sisters should have faith to heal the sick; he said, let all hold their tongues.(grand palmer, women and authority)

  • Dan Maloy Enid, OK
    Oct. 8, 2013 12:54 p.m.

    So, ladies, now you've seen behind the impregnable 'Priesthood Curtain', now that you've seen our most closely guarded 'secrets', 'secrets' like "love God, be kind to your neighbors", and, yes, most amazingly of all, "love and serve your wives and children", was the Priesthood session everything you hoped it would be?

    OK, I'm being teasingly sarcastic, but what is discussed at a General Conference Priesthood meeting was no 'secret' at all and is nothing worth "demanding" admittance to as a woman. Get real, you wanted "equality" when "equality" has existed all along.

    I agree with some other posters here: what may have started out as a desire to be treated as 'equal' (again, when it already exists) will result in some women AND some men choosing to lose their testimony (Yes, losing, or maintaining a testimony is indeed a "choice") because they were not admitted to the meeting.

    However, as the Church leaders said, it is simply a matter of logistics: seats for women means there's FEWER seats for Priesthood holders....Priesthood holders who desperately need to feel the Holy Spirit by attending the meeting.

    What's next?, men in Relief Society meetings?

  • 1.96 Standard Deviations OREM, UT
    Oct. 8, 2013 12:54 p.m.

    Brahmabull & DocHolliday-

    Please stop spreading false information about the church conferring the priesthood upon women in the 1800s. Women were given permission from the Prophet Joseph to lay hands on people in the prayer of faith -- likely related to the church being small at the time and many men called away to serve missions. This continued for a time and stopped. Women did not receive the priesthood or perform priesthood ordinances or perform priesthood blessings. The laying on of hands is not the priesthood itself and does not mean the women were given the priesthood. The women gave a prayer of faith on someone's behalf while laying their hands on a person. End of story.

  • DocHolliday reno, NV
    Oct. 8, 2013 10:09 a.m.

    I have tried several times to post references to women holding the priesthood in the early days of the church, but the moderators won't allow my comment to come through. Apparently they feel it is better to ignore historical facts.

    Nevertheless, women were given the authority to give blessings of healing using the laying on of hands in the 1800's, there are many examples of this, yet mainstream mormons seem unaware of this fact.

    That is why it is not so far fetched that women now want to be included. Why not? It happened in the past.

  • WYOREADER Gillette, WY
    Oct. 7, 2013 9:03 p.m.

    To Mom25 from Minot, ND! Thank you for saying exactly how I feel also!

  • Belinda, Melbourne Australia Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Oct. 7, 2013 3:26 p.m.

    @Brahmabull, the one thing you are forgetting that this happened in Old Testament times when there were no righteous men to fulfil the duties within their land. It was not evident in New Testament times. What are you saying about these latter-day times? That it doesn't matter if there are worthy priesthood holders on the earth, women deserve this right and privilege. That the First Presidency and Quorum of the 12 are not worthy priesthood holders? That my Bishop is not a worthy priesthood holder? That his wife could do things better? I find that thinking sad.

    You also mention about these women having the right to voice their concerns, they already did that prior to the Priesthood Session and were told it would not be possible. So what did they do, rather than listen and be guided by the Priesthood, they protested and bought notoriety to their cause. Why is that not considered wrong or inappropriate?? Just curious.

  • Tilka PORTLAND, OR
    Oct. 7, 2013 2:29 p.m.

    Any report on how many men were turned away from the Women's conference? I wonder if any of the women in this group tried to attend at a local stake center. I guess none because no news media would be there.

    Anyone else find it ironic that the leader of the group is an attorney?

  • raybies Layton, UT
    Oct. 7, 2013 2:12 p.m.

    My wife thought it ironic the location in which the Ordain Women watched conference, stating that City Creek was the perfect place for them, observing, "I mean c'mon... All that shopping!!"

  • Woody Newbury Park, CA
    Oct. 7, 2013 1:31 p.m.

    The Church has scriptural and traditional reasons why women are not given the Priesthood at this time. As one of the speakers at conference noted the Temple ordinances provide Priesthood powers to both genders equally.

    I have more fundamental questions. Other churches ordain women and they have positions of leadership. Have more people "come unto Christ" as a result? Have these churches held to Gospel principles or has the influence of feminists changed their moral compass? If some one wants to advocate this change as "progress", then show that "progress" makes a difference in building the Kingdom.

  • Spider Rico Greeley, CO
    Oct. 7, 2013 12:32 p.m.

    @Ranch Brahm and Truthseeker
    Not surprised to see you three as the main supporters of the OW here. Same on all the articles about the LDS Church as those that constantly find fault in our doctrine and beliefs. You all cite "sexist" remarks on the comment board. Could you point some out? I bet you can find one here too.

  • Brahmabull sandy, ut
    Oct. 7, 2013 12:24 p.m.

    once free

    So anybody that has a doctrinal or procedural question has the spirit of contention?? Your comment says it all. Closed minded thinking is never the answer.

  • once free Manila, UT
    Oct. 7, 2013 12:03 p.m.

    The Savior selected MEN for his 12 Apostles. HE and THE FATHER are men. Women have children - a gift not given to men. Our purposes are distinctly different....still we are instructed to be "ONE, and if ye are not ONE ye are not MINE". Says it all to me. "Contention is not of me, but is of the devil", saith the Lord. We know the Church will have dissenters. It's been fortold for millenia. You are meeting some of them. Recognize them for "WHAT" they represent as well as WHO they are.

  • Whos Life RU Living? Ogden, UT
    Oct. 7, 2013 9:57 a.m.

    There are many posts condemning these women for their actions. I am curious about these peoples thoughts in regards to past history.

    Around 1977-78 there were many members who sided with blacks and the priesthood, would those individuals also be considered out of line?

  • gmlewis Houston, TX
    Oct. 7, 2013 9:50 a.m.

    I think the reason that men and boys have a Conference session of their own to attend is that the Priesthood Meeting encourages them in their divinely designed masculine roles. Relief Society and Young Women conferences encourage women and girls in their divinely designed feminine roles.

    In each case, the vision being presented is enhanced by being surrounded by those who share that same role.

  • Brahmabull sandy, ut
    Oct. 7, 2013 9:43 a.m.

    Ad Rem

    they have a right to voice their concerns in the church just as anybody else does. that is how the bretheren are made aware of possible problems and necessary changes in the policy of the church. Many times since the 1830's has there been changes in doctrine, policy, and practice. It has happened before, why can't it happen again?

  • Brahmabull sandy, ut
    Oct. 7, 2013 9:34 a.m.

    Mike Richards

    You, and many others on this site seem to be unaware that there is strong evidence that women held the priesthood in the early days of the church. Of course, you will probably deny it despite all the evidence to the contrary. But it seems to have happened. That is why it bothers me when people act like women holding the priesthood is such a far-out, far-fetched and ludacris idea. It happened in the past, so no it really isn't that far-fetched.

  • scwoz gambier, oh
    Oct. 7, 2013 8:32 a.m.

    I do not understand the motivation behind this at all. If you believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by this church then you understand the Prophet is the guide here on Earth speaking for Jesus Christ and there is a division of power on earth. The men hold the power to act in the office of the priesthood and the women share by going to the Temple and completing the covenants they have made. It is a simple division but one that has been clearly defined and does have any blurring of the lines just because social convention says women should be able to exercise the priesthood in the same way men do. It is a team effort and can only be properly done if the women do their part and men do their part and together they do the parts that are required of them to enter the Celestial Kingdom. Christ’s church is a church of order and the order is explained through the Prophet not by any other means. This is a male and father son bonding experience, you can’t have it, sorry.

  • hask Chino Hills, CA
    Oct. 7, 2013 1:20 a.m.

    I'm an LDS woman. I think that if women are given the Priesthood, then we will take over everything in the Church. We will plan everything, give all the blessings, counsel everyone, do all the baptisms, take the lead in meetings, and so forth. In every ward I have been in, there have been more active females in the ward than actives males. I have noticed that females tend to be more diligent in their callings than many males. ("If you want to get something done, ask the Sisters" is a common refrain.)

    In addition, women with the Priesthood will have everything that men have and MORE...because men will never be able to bear children. We will be able to have jobs like men, have all the authority and callings at church like men, fight in wars like men (women can train to become as strong as many men, and modern technology and fighting methods means physical strength is less important in fighting). No amount of training or dedication or protesting in the streets will give men the "right" to bear children.

    The ability to bear children and Priesthood power are both eternally vital and complement each other.

  • JanSan Pocatello, ID
    Oct. 7, 2013 12:05 a.m.

    When men start giving birth to children - then will I stand up and say that women should have the Priesthood - but NOT UNTIL THEN!

  • Sego Lilly Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 11:42 p.m.

    Actually one of the talks could of had to do with her - the one on Home teaching. Just change it to visiting teaching and brethren to sisters. Each has to do it right and each should have heard that talk.

    While I did watch it along with my husband I personally found the talks boring except for the one on Home teaching. So Sister Kelly - stop trying to draw attention to yourself. If you truly want to hold the priesthood go home and give your husband or any male member in your family that has the title of deacon, teacher, priest, elder and so forth a hug as you will then be holding the priesthood.

  • ulvegaard Medical Lake, Washington
    Oct. 6, 2013 10:49 p.m.

    The trend of the world right now and has been for a generation or so, is for the sexes to demonstrate their complete independence from one another once and for all. It has seemed a major need for women to prove that they can support themselves and create themselves in the world without the need for men to assist them. It is unfortunate that some men have intensified this resolve through their own bigotry and self proclaimed superiority over women.

    Sheri Dew, in her last Conference talk explained how men and women need each other; that neither was complete without the gifts and abilities of the opposing gender. What see is a group of well meaning sisters who feel that unless they can have priesthood conferred upon themselves, that they cannot be independent in the gospel. But that is the whole point. The Lord stated quite eloquently in the first chapters of Genesis that neither men nor women were complete without the other. Without priesthood, men could never compliment the natural gifts of the sisters.

  • Belinda, Melbourne Australia Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Oct. 6, 2013 9:30 p.m.

    Sister Kelly obviously does not speak for the majority of LDS women of the Church. Every sister in my home ward in Australia has said that they do not want to be ordained to the priesthood. Why would we need to be ordained when we already enjoy the blessings of the Priesthood as wives, mothers, temple patrons and members of the Church? The Ordain Women group believe that by being ordained they can sit in council with the Brethren. Obviously these women have never served as a President or in a Presidency of the Relief Society, Young Women's or Primary organisations. The sisters who hold these offices sit in council with the Brethren often and work closely with them to ensure the needs of the youth, women and children of the Church are addressed.

    The crowning comment though is stated by Sr Kelly that the messages of the Priesthood meeting did not resonate with her. Yet, as I listened to these talks, my heart was touched by the words of President Monson as he admonished the brethren to reach out to those for whom they are responsible. I guess that's the difference I listened with my heart.

  • Miss Piggie Phoenix, AZ
    Oct. 6, 2013 9:20 p.m.

    @Bleed Crimson:
    "Then why on earth is she trying to get into the priesthood session in the first place? The purpose of the priesthood session is for the church leaders to give counsel to the brethren of the church, not the sisters!..."

    Oops. Much of what was discussed in Saturday's Priesthood Session dwelt on missionary work... Why weren't the ladies invited to attend, since there's a ton of lady missionaries out there who need the training/encouragement just as much as the guys do?

    Somebody needs to think this through.

  • antodav TAMPA, FL
    Oct. 6, 2013 9:10 p.m.

    The complete and utter lack of humility of these women, their belligerent and confrontational attitude, their total disrespect for the authority of the General Authorities of the Church, and their greater esteem for worldly philosophies than for the Gospel itself, are all precisely the reasons why they should not be ordained to the Priesthood. They didn't even care what was said at Priesthood session. They were only seeking to exalt themselves.

  • 1Observer Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 9:01 p.m.


    I have read and understand the 9th Article of Faith. The heavens are open and revelation does come through proper channels. I highly doubt that the opening of heaven is persuaded by protests in the streets and "likes" on social media sites. And clearly your "movement" is not a proper channel for revelation for the Church. I am sure that those leaders who made improper doctrinal changes in the early Church were well intended and believed that what they were doing was "consistent" with the doctrine. The point is, the change came from a source other than the proper revelation the Lord talks about in the 9th Article of Faith. Hence the danger of apostasy. When the Prophet speaks I will follow. Until then, I personally would not presume to counsel the Lord or His prophets.

  • Cinci Man FT MITCHELL, KY
    Oct. 6, 2013 7:45 p.m.

    I see so many posters trying to equate the petition for the priesthood for women with the prayer of a prophet concerning the ordination of priesthood to all worthy males. All are forgetting the huge difference between the two. For my 60 years in the church I was taught that the blacks could not hold the priesthood in earlier days. I was taught that it was a temporary condition that we hoped we would live to see changed in our lifetime. I also taught that on my mission to the blacks in Colombia in the 1970's. There was no surprise when the revelation was given to the prophet - only gratitude and jubilation that the anticipated day had arrived.
    My father also taught that we would likely witness the day of two-piece garments. Again, it was expected. At the appointed day of the Lord, revelations were received. The petitions for gay marriage and for women holding the priesthood are not at all the same. There are no such doctrines to support men or women of the same gender married for eternity, nor for women holding the priesthood.

  • Wastintime Los Angeles, CA
    Oct. 6, 2013 7:45 p.m.

    @New Yorker

    "Faithful, attending, committed members can recognize one another among crowds of strangers by common scriptural idioms cultivated by repeatedly reading the scriptures and hearing them repeatedly quoted. "Resonate" does not appear in the standard works. I see "resonate" as a tell here."

    The word "idioms" does not appear in the standard works. I see "idioms" as a tell here.

  • Truthseeker2 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
    Oct. 6, 2013 7:44 p.m.

    Katy Kelly of Ordain Women:
    "We are... asking Church leaders to prayerfully consider the ordination of women.

    Our understanding of the gospel is that the heavens are not closed....We believe that the expansion of Priesthood keys must come from God through revelation to the First Presidency and the Twelve Apostles. The role of Church members in this process is demonstrated throughout the D&C which includes many examples of revelations received after members approached the Prophet and requested revelation. This pattern was established by Jesus Christ, "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." It is our belief in God and our faith in the Church that compel us to bold, faith-affirming action. And your whole labor shall be in Zion, with all your soul, from henceforth; yea, you shall ever open your mouth in my cause, not fearing what man can do, for I am with you. Amen; (D&C 30:11).

    Equality is not about sameness; it is about removing obstacles to access and opportunity."

  • 1aggie SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 7:08 p.m.

    "How is the "Ordain Women" movement any different than the shifting political and social winds that led to the demise of the Church in the meridian of time?"

    It seems you have not heard of our Article of Faith #9. In case not, it says in part, "we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God." Your 'closed heavens' and 'change is bad' attitude is counter to the fact that change is the only constant in this world and especially in our church. If you actually read and understand what the sisters you are condemning are actually saying (and asking for), then you will see that it is not inconsistent with our Article of Faith #9 and they are not trying to bring about the demise of our Church!

  • 1Observer Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 5:11 p.m.

    A couple of hundred years or so after the death and resurrection of Christ, the doctrines of the Church began to change to bend to the politics and common thinking of that day. Leaders and Church members let personal beliefs and the doctrines of men influence doctrinal changes and many plain and precious Gospel truths were lost. Ultimately the Gospel was taken from the earth, necessitating the Restoration heralded in with Joseph Smith in the Sacred Grove. How is the "Ordain Women" movement any different than the shifting political and social winds that led to the demise of the Church in the meridian of time?

  • New Yorker Pleasant Grove, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 4:45 p.m.

    "Resonate" is a term that sounds more New Age than L.D.S.

    Faithful, attending, committed members can recognize one another among crowds of strangers by common scriptural idioms cultivated by repeatedly reading the scriptures and hearing them repeatedly quoted. "Resonate" does not appear in the standard works.

    I see "resonate" as a tell here.

  • stnicoll mesa, AZ
    Oct. 6, 2013 4:15 p.m.

    May I say simply that conference was tremendous, uplifting, encouraging, hopeful, and truly a feeling of abundant love.so I will say to Ms Kelly or anyone who may question the value of women, self worth of women-the place of women-in the Lord's Kingdom.
    listen again to Elder Anderson's remarks, reread the family proclamation--and then proclaim your blessings from the Lord as His daughter or son. I believe conference shared and expressed the Lords thoughts and feelings and reiterated his love for these women and to all his children-for in the voice of His servants it is the same as He speaking it-for it is His words--As it is His church.

  • Needa Nap St.George, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 3:52 p.m.

    We need to feel sorry for them and pray for them. They have obviously stopped listening to Christ and are listening to the world about fairness & equality:( I am so sorry they have lost the light of Christ. I hope the few minutes of fame are worth it:( ladies you can be in the world and not of the world. Pray for forgiveness for that sad spectacle by daughters of our Heavenly Father.

  • Chesh1767 Jacksonville, FM
    Oct. 6, 2013 3:42 p.m.

    Funny - I didn't notice many empty seats, but then again there were probably just as many so-called empty seats at the General Women's meeting last weekend. I don't think the goal is to fill the conference center but to share messages. Many people coincide a vacation or long weekend trip to conference just to get into a session of conference.
    I have a feeling none of the messages of conference have resonated with her, not just the Priesthood session.
    I, however, have found something of interest & greater knowledge from all sessions. Shocking that a woman can appreciate the messages intended for the women, youth & men. I believe there is something for all in these messages regardless of age or sex.

  • @Charles not from utah, 00
    Oct. 6, 2013 3:41 p.m.

    Of course none of the messages resonated with you. You are not a male!

    Those words completely show the silliness of the Ordain Women crowd. This whole thing is an attention seeking objective.

    Members don't receive revelation for the church. The Lord tells His prophets what He wants to happen, not the other way around. For a great rebuttal to this movement go to LDSmag and read the post by Maurine Proctor. It's what I've said from the beginning.

  • sammyg Springville, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 3:19 p.m.

    Another step closer to apostasy after this weekend.

    Maybe these gals should check in with Sonia Johnson and get some pointers on how to properly handle women's right issues.

    After this failed media event I'm sure several of these ladies and their husbands will be in for the shock of their lives.

  • TA1 Alexandria, VA
    Oct. 6, 2013 3:02 p.m.

    While I don't always agree with everything in the Church, the Church is not a business in the public square. It has governing principles (which I acknowledged have changed from time to time - but not right now) - so - "Sorry Sisters - this effort is a total non-starter".

  • Nanny Los Angeles, CA
    Oct. 6, 2013 2:55 p.m.

    Even Eve thrust the forbidden fruit at Adam, saying, I wanted this, so now we both have to deal with it. It's the same pattern. I want it sister, so men -- make it happen my way. Somethings never change.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 6, 2013 2:34 p.m.

    "This group is bad news. I have been following this group for some time online. They constantly poke fun of current and past leaders of the church. This group is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Half of the group have an ax to grind."

    Hmmm, well i just visited the facebook page and there are many comments. Thus far, I have not come across an anti-Mormon comments, so suffice it to say they are few, if any. Perhaps you can provide us with an example from one of the leaders of this group which is anti-Mormon or which doesn't adhere to their stated policy to back up your claim. You did not make it clear in your 1st comment that you were talking about OTHER people posting comments on their facebook page.

    Would you also hold DN to the same standards? Does DN endorse every comment on its site? Perhaps Ordain Women should include a disclaimer on their facebook page.

    I just think we should/could have a respectful, honest,and FACTUAL debate on this topic.

  • codger Southwest Utah, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 2:11 p.m.

    Sisters: Do you not consider going to some other church where you could be "ordained" because you believe God's Priesthood is only in the LDS Church. If this is the case, then why, at the same time, do you seek to convince the Lord that His eternal plan is in error?

  • Anonyme Orem, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 2:04 p.m.

    Clovis Fan said, “Men do not have the same privileges as women in creating and nurturing children. Without the priesthood, men would have nothing.” That's not how Elder Ballard sees it. He said, “Men and women have different but equally valued roles. Just as a woman cannot conceive a child without a man, so a man cannot fully exercise the power of the priesthood to establish an eternal family without a woman. In other words, in the eternal perspective, both the procreative power and the priesthood power are shared by husband and wife.”

  • ClarkHippo Tooele, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 1:59 p.m.


    Everyone has a role to play in the LDS Church. For anyone to suggest that motherhood is the sole role women can play in the LDS Church is extremely short sighted. My wife and I don't have any children yet, but my wife has still held many responsibilities in her various church callings along with being the most important person in my life. I frankly can't imagine what I'd do without her.

    It seems to me that some people in the world are so determined to make everyone "equal" that they fail to understand that each person has unique gifts, talents and abilities. If one wanted to push equality to the extreme, they would completely eliminate individuality. Not only would everyone look the same and act the same, anything that was unique to any individual would be eliminated as being unequal.

    Is that what the true goal is?

  • Anonyme Orem, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 1:53 p.m.

    I disagree with Ordain Women, but I also disagree with commenters who attempt to conciliate women for not having the priesthood. There is no need for that, because having the priesthood does not indicate greater favor by the Lord. Clovis Fan wrote, “Sister Kelly needs to realize that women are already valued higher than men in God's eyes.” Not true. The scriptures say men and women are valued equally by God.

    Clovis Fan also said, “[Women] have the privilege of procreating and raising children.” Well, no, not every woman does, but every man can qualify for the priesthood. Comparing maternity to the priesthood is wrong. Gender influences our roles in this life, but our worth is not defined by those roles. In April of this year the Church made this statement: “The worth of a human soul is not defined by a set of duties or responsibilities. In God’s plan for His children, both women and men have the same access to the guidance of His spirit, to personal revelation, faith and repentance, to grace and the atonement of His Son, Jesus Christ, and are received equally as they approach Him in prayer.”

  • Rosebyanyothername Home Town USA, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 1:45 p.m.

    It amazes me that KK would go so far as to rebel so openly and push her opinions and lead other women away in her crusade. She oversteps herself to assume that demanding to be allowed to enter the GENERAL Priesthood session.. . along with her objective to be "ordained"? She is in the wrong church then to expect that in ours. The priesthood is conferred as already mentioned and clarified. IF it was intended for women to have the priesthood don't you think it would have begun with Joseph and Emma? Not.

    KK, you do not understand your role and position as a woman in the church. A woman is blessed so much by the virtue of her temple covenants. She is not denied those blessings and is able to received them without holding the priesthood through faithfulness to all her covenants.

    Treading in dangerous waters will only lead to more unhappiness and discontent, despair. For what? Do not be deceived. It is time to stop, turn around to be happy with those blessings already afforded you now.

    Isn't what she is doing counter to the doctrine and teachings of the Church?

  • Anonyme Orem, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 1:40 p.m.

    From Ordain Women's website:

    “We welcome those who . . . care deeply about the Church and its members and are concerned about how gender inequity affects all of us." What an ironically paternalistic statement. In essence, Ordain Women is saying “LDS women need our help. They are obviously too weak to help themselves and too weak-minded to even know they need help.” I happen to believe that most LDS women are smart, strong, and living their faith because they choose to, not because they have no other choice. They don't need anyone, least of all critics of the Church, to come rescue them.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 6, 2013 1:39 p.m.

    I reject the notion that women's important role as mothers should automatically preclude them from any possible priesthood ordination.

    One observation:

    Women live long AFTER they have born and raised children. And many women don't have the opportunity to be mothers.

    Maybe we ought to stop explaining, or justifying current positions and leave it that Church leaders, thus far, have not received inspiration to change the status quo.

    Ranch is correct. There is rampant sexism in these comments.

  • ClarkHippo Tooele, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 1:33 p.m.

    This women's group talks a lot about equality, but if their definition of equality is based on how the world views it, then I can't help but wonder, do these women want an LDS Church where their sons are told over and over again they are worthless, that fathers have no role to play whatsoever except in simply being the person who fathers the babies?

  • VIDAR Murray, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 1:30 p.m.

    Are these women even members of the Mormon church? Who is to say. If they are members, do they go to church?
    its seems like if they were members they would have a hard time going to church.
    can you imagine having them in a sunday school lesson?

  • MoJules Florissant, MO
    Oct. 6, 2013 1:29 p.m.

    I did chuckle at SLCWatch's satire. I had not read all the comments. I know that it is easy to say, go join a church that will let women have the priesthood or embrace gay marriage. We know that the Lord is not going to let people tell him what to do and in turn, he is not going to let the Prophets do things contrary to his will. But the Lord does want people to see the errors of their ways and to soften and change their heart. I respect the church in their kind approach to these groups that harass, I would be a bit more gruff. Yet, if it were my child, I would hope that they would be treated with kindness and respect, so that one day she would return to the fold because she was treated kindly.

  • ClarkHippo Tooele, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 1:29 p.m.

    As an active LDS man, I actually do have sympathy for these women who are attempting to change LDS policy.

    While I won’t attempt to speak fully on their behalf, I imagine they see how, in various parts of the world, women are still oppressed and treated like animals. In many countries, women are still not allowed to vote or hold office, are subject to frequent violent crimes such as rape and stoning with little, if any, means of bringing their perpetrators to justice, and of course, we see how in some countries women are still victims of barbaric practices such as being burned to death if they can not pay an adequate dowry to their future husband’s family.

    On the flip side however, the western world’s view of gender roles and gender treatment has some very clear differences, and this is where I have concern.

    How many times, for example, have we in the western world heard the message from feminists groups that children don’t need fathers? How many times in TV shows, movies and in popular music, are males shown as either lazy and brainless, or as selfish womanizers?

  • BYU&UW FAN West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 1:24 p.m.

    Re: Truthseeker

    My comment is right on. I am talking within the comment sections of the facebook page. Just because something is a policy doesn't mean it is followed. I have been watching this page for a couple of months. There are plenty of anti LDS comments, and the admin does nothing about it.

  • MoJules Florissant, MO
    Oct. 6, 2013 1:19 p.m.

    Kelly kind of shot herself in the foot, she has now proven a point that she is fighting against, Priesthood sessions are not intended for the sisters. I went in and listened to some of it last night with my husband. But the messages were for the men, not for me. All my life I have asked either my father or husband what was said. I have enjoyed getting basic information, but I knew my husband would not want to watch the Relief Society session, why? Because it has nothing to do with him. Isn't it wonderful that we are members of a church where they take the time to address the women and the men individually and center their comments more to their needs.

  • Bloodhound Provo, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 1:16 p.m.

    These women need to stop trying to stir the pot. If they are so obsessed in being "ordained," perhaps they should move their membership to one of the "mainline" churches that allows female ordination. But, then again, they wouldn't be able to stir the pot and run their blogs and seek media attention trying to changed the practices of the LDS Church.

  • washcomom Beaverton, OR
    Oct. 6, 2013 12:41 p.m.

    Sometimes, SOMETIMES, men and boys need to feel comfortable in their own skin while in the midst of others so they can understand the messages said without the "all-knowing eye" of a female presence (like wives or mothers).
    Let them have their time together. It's a great male bonding time, and women don't need to be in there to feel equal. Let them be!

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 12:35 p.m.

    The sexism, it is strong in these comments.

  • Clovis Fan Clovis, CA
    Oct. 6, 2013 12:32 p.m.

    Sister Kelly needs to realize that women are already valued higher than men in God's eyes. They have the privilege of procreating and raising children with God, they are the fairer, gentler sex and because of this more women than men will be saved in the end. They already have an extremely important, highly valued role in this life and beyond without the priesthood. Men on the other hand by their nature will have a more difficult time than women overcoming the natural man. Men do not have the same privileges as women in creating and nurturing children. Without the priesthood, men would have nothing. Sister Kelly's lack of understanding of the great blessings she already has just by being a women will lead to her spiritual demise if she continues down this path....

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 6, 2013 12:28 p.m.

    "This group is bad news. I have been following this group for some time online. They constantly poke fun of current and past leaders of the church. This group is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Half of the group have an ax to grind."

    This movement is being orchestrated by enemies of the LDS Church."


    From the group's website:

    "What’s your Ordain Women profile policy?
    We do not solicit, nor do we support, diatribes against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Rather, we encourage thoughtful submissions on what the ordination of women would mean personally and/or for the institutional Church. We welcome those who are faithful Mormons, those who might return to the LDS Church but for gender inequality, or those who care deeply about the Church and its members and are concerned about how gender inequity affects all of us."

  • idablu Idaho Falls, ID
    Oct. 6, 2013 12:28 p.m.

    While Ms Kelly claims to be active in her ward, based on their website, I would venture that MOST in this group are not active or not even members of the Church. She states it is nice to be in the presence of the Prophet and Apostles yet her actions and behavior deny them. She has founded an apostate group that publicly and actively riles against the doctrines of the Church. Is this not grounds for excommunication? Tough and sticky situation for her Priesthood leaders.

  • 1aggie SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 12:25 p.m.

    @Uncle Rico

    "This movement is being orchestrated by enemies of the LDS Church."

    Uncle Rico, please back that comment up. You obviously have information that we do not. Let's hear it. Who specifically are the enemies you are accusing and what orchestration is occurring?

  • AZDZRTFOX Hucahuca City, AZ
    Oct. 6, 2013 12:25 p.m.

    We see from most of the posts here that Kelly's comments of non-resonance of the spoken messages to her, is a direct reflection of how this movement is not of the Lord, but of the Great Agitator himself.

    Her cause is divisive and contentious. Therefore, she, and I'm sure most of her group, was left spiritually empty because the Holy Ghost cannot dwell where their is contention. Another reason why the Bretheren handled this situation in the manner it should have been, through the direction of the Lord.

  • Uncle Rico Sandy, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 11:37 a.m.

    @ Ad Rem

    After reading the article, then reading your comment I wonder
    what do you believe in? Your little rant belittles the religious and so again I ask what do you stand for?
    Always easier to tear down then create isn't it?

  • J Turner Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 11:35 a.m.

    There is a way for this group to have a priesthood conferred and still be in the Mormon tradition if that's what they desire. The Community of Christ(Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ)has given their priesthood office to women years ago.

  • Uncle Rico Sandy, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 11:33 a.m.

    This movement is being orchestrated by enemies of the LDS Church.

  • SLCWatch Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 11:30 a.m.

    While were at it I want to join the NRA (National Rifle Association) and push them to support a ban on guns. I want to join Al Qaeda and start a pro-American and Pro-Israel chapter. I want to join Amnesty International and push for a violent, kidnapping and torture group to attack those who don't share our views. I want to join PETA and host the annual BBQ and small animal sacrifices. I want to join Green Peace and move them to invest more in oil companies, Japanese Whaling and help cut down all those unsightly trees. I want to Join the International Rescue Coalition and change their policy on refugees so we can send all those fleeing oppression back where they came from. I also want to join the Optimists club and help them admit there just isn't any point in going on.

    Oh, and for those who don't understand satire...It's a joke.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Oct. 6, 2013 10:35 a.m.

    Those of us who have a spiritual witness from tHe Holy Spirit that Joseph Smith received a vision of the Father and of the Son would never give counsel to The Lord on what His doctrine should include nor would we tell Him that he somehow forgot to extend priesthood responsibility to the women of His church. If Christ is the head of this church, then why shouldn't we allow Him to direct His church His way? I would think that if a "priesthood leader" decided that Christ's doctrine was somehow faulty, that that "priesthood holder" would forfeit that authority to act in Christ's name.

    We probably all have questions about points of doctrine, but no one whom I know who has received a testimony via the Holy Spirit, would deny that testimony in an effort to seize "control" of the church from Christ - who directs His church.

  • Dr. Thom Long Beach, CA
    Oct. 6, 2013 10:31 a.m.

    There are plenty of great religions that have women functioning in the role of the priesthood as they see it relates to their religious organization and philosophical beliefs. Just join one of those churches and religion instead of try to change the one you belong to by petition or demonstration

    It's a religion, not a social or political cause, which is why it is a theocracy not a democracy.

  • LittleStream Carson City, NV
    Oct. 6, 2013 10:13 a.m.

    This is so sad in a time that we all need to stand together. These women can and do teach Sunday School, primary, Seminary and Institute. These women are asked to give talks in their ward on Sunday. These women can stand and bear their testimony monthly. These women can help with Family History, Indexing and temple attendance. Why do they want the priesthood? Because they can't have it! I'm tired at the end of the week doing the services I'm asked to do. Yet I do them gladly! I feel great comfort that our priesthood holders are there to bolster me up, give me blessings should I need them. After seeing the bishops schedule for the whole ward, I would not want his job. To me a shepherd takes 24/7. And you must at all times be worthy to give a blessing. I would so much rather see these women protest about unequal pay or medical care for all women and children. Look for something worthy to do. Remember Who You Are!

  • Garcalf Glenwood springs , CO
    Oct. 6, 2013 10:10 a.m.

    I've taken girls to the young woman's conference in the spring at least a half dozen times. Guess what? They didn't let me in because I'm male. Why ? Because it is a meeting for young females. I went to a place with the other males and watched the meeting on tv. We were all ok letting the young woman having their time together.

  • baddog Cedar Rapids, IA
    Oct. 6, 2013 9:51 a.m.

    @mainly me, @the deuce, @ arizona1, @reader:

    All your comments are spot on. We see the adversary hyping the same sex attraction issue with the Church, then he adds a second front with a small handful (out of 15 million) wowmn and their male supporters.

    One can conjecture these proponents see other religions have allowed female clergy and think they should have the same opportunity.

    The priesthood for women and same sex marriage approval are two rails of the same track heading nowhere within the LDS Church.

    Comparing all worthy males eligible to receive the priesthood and allowing women to hold the priesthood are doctrinally eons apart.

  • Justmythoughts Provo, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 9:47 a.m.

    Good grief... I think someone likes the attention they are getting.

  • MLBROWN1830 West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 9:37 a.m.

    Miss Kelly said that while listening to the Priesthood meeting, nothing resonated with her. All she wanted to do was get her 3 minutes of fame. I'm sad for her and her little followers. If she is not happy then she needs to branch off on her own; trust me NO ONE is going to stop her from leaving. As with any other activist (who wants to shout and make noise)Miss Kelly accomplished nothing. I hope she moves on and out of the way of those of us who did appreciate the beautiful messages our brothers, sons, husbands and father's were receiving.

  • TOO Sanpete, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 9:30 a.m.

    If were the stake president of these women I would call them into my office. They are walking a fine line between passion and apostasy. This type of garbage is what gives the church a bad rap. They don't care about getting the priesthood. They are so far into this that all they care about now is the amount of publicity they get for their misguided campaign.

  • BYU&UW FAN West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 9:15 a.m.

    This group is bad news. I have been following this group for some time online. They constantly poke fun of current and past leaders of the church. This group is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Half of the group have an ax to grind.

  • jedro Idaho Falls, ID
    Oct. 6, 2013 8:44 a.m.

    "When asked about the meeting she said none of the messages resonated with her.

    "Those messages are not directed to me," she said, but added that it is always nice to be in the presence of the prophet and those in the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles."

    I think that she answered her own questions about why she was not let in to the Priesthood Session

  • bw00ds Tucson, AZ
    Oct. 6, 2013 8:43 a.m.

    "When asked about the meeting she said none of the messages resonated with her."

    Right. That's the point, sister. It is a meeting with messages for MEN. So what was your point of all this brouhaha? Ridiculous.

  • The Dixie Kid Saint George, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 8:39 a.m.

    They look pretty pathetic out there.

  • Cinci Man FT MITCHELL, KY
    Oct. 6, 2013 8:31 a.m.

    All sessions of Conference were wonderful, including the Women's Meeting and the Men's Meeting. The General Authorities, both men and women, are leaders of faith and inspiration. This small group of women deserve our prayers and hopes that one day, they will understand and enjoy what God has for them. May we all seek such understanding! May we gain peace from that search! On an earlier post to another article, someone said this:
    "What is it that a woman would be seeking through priesthood ordination that she does not already have but a TITLE which has nothing to do with how God sees her, but with how the world sees her." The goal was to have recognition and to Council the Brethren. I rejoice in the gospel and am humbled by the existence of such good men and women who lead the Church under the direction of the Savior. One day, may we all be in tune, rather than in conflict.

  • AZDZRTFOX Hucahuca City, AZ
    Oct. 6, 2013 8:24 a.m.

    "When asked about the meeting she (Kelly) said none of the messages resonated with her."

    This one sentence says a lot about Kelly's attitude and the contention that dwells within her.

    And perhaps this is why the Priesthood session is for priesthood holders. If the messages don't resonate with you because they are not completely directed at you, then why persist in your divisive (but peaceful) protest. Sure, everyone wants to see the General Authorities in person, but there is Relief Society general session, and four other conference sessions for you to attend to see them. Most members never get the opportunity to see the GAs in person. So be thankful that you have, Sister Kelly.

  • lledwards38 Canandaigua, NY
    Oct. 6, 2013 7:55 a.m.

    Kate Kelly demanded entrance to the Conference session for the priesthood session; when she was refused she watched it on a computer. Then she stated, "None of it resonated to me."

    Of course it didn't!!! The session was directed to the men of the Church. Where was she last week when the messages were directed to the women? She could have requested and received tickets for that event and been in the presence of the First Presidency at that time.

    She needs to be reminded that her band of 150 women do NOT represent the views of the rest of us.

  • From Ted's Head Orem, UT
    Oct. 6, 2013 7:51 a.m.

    Sophistry. These women would have us believe that they worship Christ and recognize the authority of the priesthood as found in the Restored Gospel, yet must not believe the Prophet and Apostles are chosen of God to lead his kingdom here on earth, ergo they need to be told what the Lord intends in relation to the role of women. We can see from their website that they believe that God is both male and female, a doctrine that is not taught by the LDS Church and what likely is at the root of their disagreement with an all-male priesthood.

    Like wolves in sheep's clothing they claim to be part of the flock and yet use the media to foist themselves into the limelight in a divisive staged protest that mocks the practices of the LDS Church by including prayers and songs in order to seem to follow the good shepherd. Did Kelly even listen to the talks before she proclaimed that there was nothing in them that could benefit her? She is now famous and enjoying her 15 minutes and should she continue will likely leave or be excommunicated from the LDS Church. Sad story.

  • RG Buena Vista, VA
    Oct. 6, 2013 7:50 a.m.

    "When asked about the meeting she said none of the messages resonated with her."

    All of the messages in the priesthood session were very inspiring, and resonated with me. May I suggest that if they did not resonate with her, that tells us more about her than it does about the messages?

  • Mom25 Minot, ND
    Oct. 6, 2013 7:35 a.m.

    I am not even remotely interested in having the priesthood! The last thing I need as a busy woman & mother is to be shackled with that responsibility. I already have enough on my plate & don't need to deal with having the priesthood. Honestly quit focusing on what you don't have and focus on the things you do.

  • Its Common Knowledge Houston, TX
    Oct. 6, 2013 6:16 a.m.

    When asked about the meeting she said none of the messages resonated with her.

    "Those messages are not directed to me,"

    Of course they didn't resonate with you... It was intended to instruct the Priesthood. No where in these articles has there been any mention of whether these sisters attended the General Relief Society sessions last week. My guess is that they had other interests and concerns that kept them away. I believe the messages at the Relief Society meeting would have resonated with them if they had the proper spirit with them.

  • John Adams Palmetto Bay, FL
    Oct. 6, 2013 5:31 a.m.

    "When asked about the meeting [Kelly] said none of the messages resonated with her.

    "'Those messages are not directed to me,' she said..."

    That ought to be an indication of something, Sister Kelly, wouldn't you agree?

  • Northwest Coug Pasco, WA
    Oct. 6, 2013 2:09 a.m.

    Kate Kelly is defeating her group's goals by saying the Priesthood messages didn't resonate with her.

    But there were quite a few empty seats in the Conference Center. Let 'em in if they aren't taking any seats from men and boys wanting to attend.

    They'll stop coming since the messages "don't resonate with them."

  • Ad Rem Falls Church, VA
    Oct. 6, 2013 1:34 a.m.

    It's always funny to watch religious people - they disagree with the theology of the church of which they are a member, and so they try to "change" it via protest or democratic action. If they don't believe in the doctrines of the church, why are you a member?

  • Barnes Washington, DC
    Oct. 6, 2013 12:17 a.m.

    Could have watched it on BYU TV from home and saved themselves the trip downtown :)

  • Arizona1 Tucson, AZ
    Oct. 6, 2013 12:03 a.m.

    After reading an article in USATODAY, I think Ruth Todd's suggestion that most view the movement as "divisive" is spot on. The author's article suggested that the debate about the role of women in the "Mormon church" "raged" on with today's actions. If a national news outlet uses those terms to describe this event, then I think it is safe to say that today's actions were perceived in a more divisive rather than unifying manner. The article also gave a number of people a national forum to spew lies about the Church.

    As indicated in my earlier comment, unless these are the intended results/goals of this group of women, I would suggest they resort to methods that do not appear so confrontational and attention-seeking.

  • Bleed Crimson Sandy, Utah
    Oct. 5, 2013 11:55 p.m.

    Kelly said "Those messages are not directed to me"

    Then why on earth is she trying to get into the priesthood session in the first place? The purpose of the priesthood session is for the church leaders to give counsel to the brethren of the church, not the sisters! The sisters had their meeting last weekend to receive counsel from church leaders that is directed to them.

    Even if they were admitted, they would still complain that the message wasn't directed for them. This would create a chain reaction!

    She goes on to say "that it is always nice to be in the presence of the prophet and those in the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles"

    If she's sincere about wanting to be in the presence of the prophet and the twelve apostles. Maybe she should get a ticket to one of the other four general sessions. But the problem is that it's not good enough for these women.

    I'm sad to see them make these choices. It's not the prophets decision on who gets the priesthood, it's God's decision! He gave men and women different roles in this life for a reason.

  • Reader Sandy, UT
    Oct. 5, 2013 11:40 p.m.

    These women need to get the terminology correct. No one is "ordained" to the priesthood. The priesthood is conferred. Men are then ordained to certain offices in the priesthood. Their website also contains a fair amount of false doctrine.

  • Arizona1 Tucson, AZ
    Oct. 5, 2013 11:32 p.m.

    I think the Church has handled the requests as well as it possibly could. I've worked with feminists in academia for years, and though I still disagree with a number of their viewpoints and methods, I at least respect their sincerity.

    On the surface, the orchestrated, public methods used to garner media attention do appear to be an attempt to shame the Church as a misogynist organization that has not kept up with a changing society. Certainly that must not have been the intended result by many of these women and the men supporting them, but I think that is exactly the divisive perception that Ruth Todd was referring to. Unfortunately, there are a number of people with different causes, who rather than engaging Church leaders in a productive, personal dialogue to better understand each other's views, seek to publicly force the Church to change to fit their social views.

  • The Deuce Livermore, CA
    Oct. 5, 2013 11:13 p.m.

    I am not of the LDS faith, however, it seems to me that these women were able to view the talks given at the LDS Priesthood session as you could find them on the BYU TV channel. I asked a Mormon friend about this as they subscribe to this channel. It is only my opinion, but if you want to be ordained to the Priesthood, you need to be asking the person who's priesthood it is. It is my experience with members of this church that they take these types of questions to God. I would say go to the source and ask him/her.

  • Mainly Me Werribee, 00
    Oct. 5, 2013 11:08 p.m.

    These women don't understand their roles as women. They share God's procreative power, but that isn't enough. They've been taken in by the world, which creates a divide between women and their true role. If these women keep this up, they are endangering their membership in the church.