This week’s news in Mormon land was this odd talk by Ballard:
Here is a very good illustrated version of it. In essence, it’s important to have women’s input in council meetings — but not too much! Which naturally leads to the question how much is too much? And why are women consigned to an “auxiliary”? Why the second-class role instead of equality?
Meanwhile, the atheist movement has its own problems with institutionalized sexism — which I personally posted a righteous rant about. Will our movement succeed in plucking the beam out of its own eye? Time will tell!! (Then we can all go back to star gazing and other fun stuff atheists like to do.)
The other fun bit of news was that the talks in General Conference may be given in languages other than English to get some international flavor. (As Holly noted, they have to do something to make them seem new — see this week’s Old Testament lesson for some good discussion of the useful information provided by these “prophets”.) The best part will be Packer’s talk! š
The Tapir Times discussed how we know things, and Seth Payne analysed apologetics. Colby Townsend posted an interesting analysis of the authorship of Isaiah, and intriguingly concludes that it’s not a problem believers of the text of the Book of Mormon that Nephi was quoting texts that hadn’t been written yet. Related: What were the golden plates for again? Danny Saunders discussed coercion and other moral issues with polygamy.
In church watch, there were some objections to the Ezra Taft Benson lesson manual. The CoJCoL-dS fits some better than others. And why church and work don’t mix. (Also guns and schools.)
And folks, here is the best concise chunk of advice for couples who are newly leaving the CoJCoL-dS — go have a look! Meanwhile, I’ll be at the local Denkfest. Happy reading!!
Let us know how Denkfest goes!
It was great!!
Sunday’s topic was ethics, especially with respect to science and technology. It covered various topics such as animal testing, but the topic that got people really riled up was the guy who was talking about technological ways to engineer people to be more virtuous. This led to a heated discussion (panel + audience) over how/whether this was different from eugenics. The lady from the BBC also made the excellent point that it can be hard to choose virtues to optimize since, for example, increasing inclination to cooperate isn’t what ended slavery, etc.
I unfortunately missed the end because I had to leave at the official ending time since I’d already planned to meet my husband and a colleague for drinks after.