Conference Run Down

Lots of coverage of General Conference for you to take a look at.

The Associated Press had two articles:

The first highlighted many positives of the event but mentioned the reduced attendance numbers while leaving out that the Church limited attendance because of parking concerns.

But perhaps more problematically it mentioned Elder Neil Andersen’s remarks about being peacemakers, and talked about a Salt Lake Tribune op-ed he mentioned as a “dart,” but failed to mention that he only mentioned this in the context of the peacemaking efforts of Amos Brown in responding to that. And while the piece links to the first critical op-ed, it doesn’t mention or link to Reverend Brown’s response.

The second AP article follows the most popular pattern of conference coverage, focusing singularly on LGBT+ or other issues that can be politicized in their piece titled, “Mormon Leader Reaffirms Faith’s Stance on Same-Sex Marriage.

On the news front, you can find the list of the newly called leaders including the new Primary and Relief Society General Presidencies at the Church Newsroom. The blog LDS Church Growth has a great conversation about the list of 17 newly announced temples.

If you want some great quotes to remember and share, Meridian has you covered:

General Conference Memes to Share with Your Friends

 

There are a number of great recaps to check out.

Ours here at Public Square Magazine has our writers and editors identifying what themes stuck out to them.

The Millennial Star talks about how President Nelson’s remarks touched them.

While Junior Ganymede looks at stories of people not being where they were supposed to be and having it all work out anyway.

If you’re more interested in the light side, This Week in Mormons has a fun and informative look at the ties worn during conference:

April 2022 General Conference Tie Tracker

On the detractor side Jana Riess questions, “It’s General Conference time. Remind me why we do this?” She largely complains that the Church hasn’t been as aggressive in making changes in line with what she’s published in the past. But to answer her question. We do this because me and millions like me believe that the Church is led by prophets, and that the words they choose to emphasize our of urgent importance and can help us better access and understand the divine.

On Key

You Might Also Like

Should we Side with the Satanists?

One of the big religious freedom wins of the last generation has been for religious individuals to have access to the same resources in the public square. Including a case resolved today. Of course, this makes many people unhappy. Rather than engaging the issues on their merits, they often resort to parody and ridicule. Pastafarians, those who claim to worship the flying spaghetti monster, have made a few claims, but their purpose seems to mostly be rhetorical ridicule. The Satanic Temple, on the other hand, is a group created specifically to try to undermine religious freedom claims by making their own offensive claims. These groups are not Satanists in any meaningful sense of the word. The Satanic Temple has recently sued to have an afterschool club at a Pennsylvania elementary school. In my opinion, there are two positions to reasonably take in response. 1) Rely on the Supreme Court’s position that religious accommodations can only be made for sincere religious beliefs. 2) Support them in their religious freedom. I am inclined to take the second. If the club’s purpose is to support rational inquiry, there is no reason they can’t use less offensive symbols. But while that’s obviously not their purpose, subjecting religious beliefs to a judge to decide if it’s sincere or not feels much more problematic over the long term. The reality is that those with sincere religious beliefs will outlast those who are trolling. So open the doors for all faiths, including the trolls, and eventually, they will fall away. But that’s just my first instinct. What do you think?

Finding Post-Roe Unity

The big news today, of course, is the draft of a Supreme Court opinion that would overturn the case Roe v. Wade which first created a right to abortion in US law. An important caveat about this leak is that even if the ruling comes out precisely as is, it would not outlaw abortion in the United States. Rather the decision would return to legislatures. Roe v. Wade created a massive wound in our nation because it didn’t allow for finding the kind of compromise that we could live with as a nation together. And it has resulted in some pro-lifers seeking legal approaches that could have catastrophic long-term consequences for all civil rights, such as Texas’ new abortion law. This decision opens the door for compromises that would avoid these extreme legal approaches. Many of us pray that if this ruling comes out legislatures in D.C. and around the country see it as an opportunity to build a more durable consensus. Currently, the United States has some of the most permissive abortion laws in the western world, despite its citizens being much more conservative on the issue. As opposed to the President who stated he believes the opinion is “radical,” this could prove to be an opportunity to end our radical abortion laws and find a moderate approach in line with other similar countries. It might be tempting for those on both sides of the issue to double down on their positions in light of a ruling like this.  Legislatures, however, have the opportunity now to build a compromise that can help heal this divisive issue.

To What Source They May Look

A viral article about Latter-day Saint female influencers and abortion advanced a claim that stretches the truth while raising important questions about the status we continue to give the influencer class.

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!