World Conference Format and Frequency

The topic of discussion for the discussion group I attended on Saturday was the resolution "World Conference Format and Frequency." Before I went to this discussion I had decided to vote against the resolution as not being needed. That is, I had thought to keep the current format, but add more classes, maybe just reserving half a day for business. This would allow some classes every two years, while still allowing the regular conference schedule.

The discussion, however, convinced me that I was wrong. The real problem in trivia. That is, the Mission Centers (Regional organizations, for those unfamiliar with church organization) bring resolutions to conference every time, but most of these, however well intentioned, are trivia. For example, this conference has several resolutions (G4, G5, G6, G10, and G11 from Mission Centers) about homosexuality, which really are trivia. That is, so what if someone is a practicing homosexual, that person is still a person, therefore loved of God, and a person of worth, since all people are people of worth. (I had thought this reflected the fascination people in the United States has with this issue, but some of the comments made during the conference indicate these may have predated the national issue.)

In addition, this would allow a chance for the people of the church to get together without the adversarial tendency that a regular World Conference demands. That is, World Conference is so big that Roberts Rules must be followed, and Roberts Rules tend to encourage and adversarial approach. (For example, I cannot bring up a situation that is a concern without suggesting a solution, thereby alienating people who may have valid points, and better solutions than I could come up with.) The new "Educational Conferences" should allow more time for this type of activity.

Having made that decision, as the week progressed I became more convinced of the rightness of it. That is, I attended some of the Peace and Justice seminars, and several discussions. My regret is that more of these discussions could not have taken place so I could have learned more. (One session of discussions was even canceled due to the press of business.)

Less people forget, even in the new format if an issue is pressing, then it can be presented to the First Presidency, and they can present it to the conference. If you cannot convince the First Presidency of the urgency of a situation, then it is unlikely you could get a resolution passed anyway. Either that, or it is really not that pressing.

This resolution was accepted with no changes, and I voted for it.