Developing: Pakistani Plane Escorted by UK Fighter Jets — 2 Men Arrested

Listen to the Buck Sexton Show Live on TheBlaze Radio

Faith

Mormon Women Get Death Threats & Spark Gender Debate After Staging ‘Wear Pants to Church’ Campaign

Dec. 24, 2012 8:54am Billy Hallowell

Mormon Women Spark Debate With Wear Pants to Church Day

Tiffany Sanderson, a participant in the “Wear Pants to Church Day” campaign (Photo Credit: Feministmormonhousewives.tumblr.com)

It you haven’t yet heard about “Wear Pants to Church Day,” allow me to explain: It is an event that was organized by female members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to encourage women to wear slacks while they worship. But the true meaning and intention digs much deeper than that.

The controversial, one-day campaign has attracted widespread attention after being undertaken earlier this month in a more general effort to draw attention to the role of women in the Mormon faith, The New York Times recently reported.

On the surface, this may seem curious to some who are unfamiliar with the Mormon policy on garments during worship. But there is, in fact, no official church regulation barring women from wearing pants to church. However according to those behind the campaign, there is sometimes pressure for females to wear a dress to church — something that has purportedly been an unspoken rule.

After getting ready for church, the participating women were encouraged to take pictures of their outfits and post them on the “Feminist Mormon Housewives” Tumblr page. So, on Dec. 16, Mormon women across the globe did just that.

The Times has more about how the event took form – and the negative reactions that some of the women received:

“Wear Pants to Church” was the idea of Stephanie Lauritzen of Salt Lake City. She and some fellow Mormon women who belonged to a group called All Enlisted posted an events page on Facebook on Dec. 9. Within days, thousands had pledged their support, but one person threatened to shoot women who showed up in pants. Ms. Lauritzen, 26, also received threats on her own Facebook page that are being investigated by Facebook and the local authorities, she said.

The individuals behind the campaign, though, didn’t just have their sights set on pant-wearing. Their hope is that, by staging the event, a new dialogue will be launched surrounding the grander role of women in the faith. From ordination to church responsibility, these females are looking to spark a discussion — and, to a degree, many would argue that they have been monumentally successful.

Despite bringing in negative reaction from many Mormons and observers who found the event silly or offensive, they have also attracted widespread support. And, indeed, a dialogue has commenced. Take, for instance, Aimee Hickman, editor of the Exponent II, a Mormon feminist magazine, and her stance on the matter. While she was initially skeptical of the event, after seeing negative reactions and slurs waged at the women, her positon changed.

Photo Credit: Feministmormonhousewives.tumblr.com

“This made me rethink my original position,” Hickman told the Times, noting that the furor and attention surrounding the campaign has people discussing and debating gender roles in the church like never before.

San Diego State University professor and religion scholar Joanna Brooks called the protest of sorts “the largest concerted Mormon feminist effort in history.”

LDS spokesperson Eric Hawkins declined to comment about “Wear Pants to Church Day.” However, another spokesman, Scott Trotter, made it known before the event that clothing is not something that should be at the forefront of church attendance.

“Attending Church is about worship and learning to be followers of Jesus Christ,” he said, according to KSL-TV. “Generally Church members are encouraged to wear their best clothing as a sign of respect for the Savior, but we don’t counsel people beyond that.”

There’s no word yet if the campaign will continue beyond the Dec. 16 event. What do you think about it? Let us know in the comments section.

This story has been updated.

(H/T: New York Times)

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (228)

Glennda
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:54am
If this is any indication . . . The Blaze just censored the word h u s s y.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- 1776freedomofspeech
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 11:03am
  It’s probably more the U S S Y, than the H.
  
  Somepeople just can’t appreciate U S S Y. For some reason…
  
  Report this comment
- Old Truckers
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 11:46am
  Maybe the men will start wearing skirts to their church. How will the women like that?
  
  Report this comment
- rx4nv
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 12:21pm
  I knew from the beginning there had to be more to the story than just wearing pants. As a Mormon myself, I have seen many people show up to church in blue jeans, t-shirts, flip-flop sandals, men in skirts (Samoan and Tongans), shorts, women in slacks… I have never been offended by this or felt they were wrong to do it. I was glad to know that they were there to worship. We are counseled to wear our best (I think it’s because you act differently when you “dress up”, not because you are in a beauty contest or being forced to conform to a gender identity). Read the story in the scriptures of those that were asked to give tithes, the one woman who gave the least amount, actually gave the most because it was all she had. It is our attitude of worship and why we are at church that will save our souls, not whether we wore a dress or pants.
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 12:25pm
  @Glennda,
  
  Love the new look Wango-Pants-Horse. What happened?
  
  Merry Christmas.
  
  Report this comment
- brother_ed
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 2:08pm
  While visiting SLC on year, I was in my hotel room getting ready for church, when I noticed the pants my wife packed me were not my black suit pants, but HER black capris!!
  
  I had to wear my blue jeans. No one cared.
  
  I thought it would’ve been funny to wear the capris, though, and just tell everyone that that is how we dress for church in Texas!
  
  All The Lord requires is a broken heart and a contrite spirit.
  
  Rebellion is characteristic of Pride.
  
  Report this comment
- P8riot
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 4:00pm
  As many others have stated here, I am a life-long member and know that women can wear pants to church if they want.
  
  As for the “deeper” issues of “ordination to church responsibility” – that is up to Christ to decide, since it is His Church – i.e. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Thus, no amount of “discussion” will change anything. If they have an issue with Christ’s stance on such issues, the best “discussion” would be through prayer.
  
  Finally, this article fails to mention that women are held up with the highest respect in the Church. There is no ‘calling’ greater than that of Mother… a calling men can never have. I challenge these women to find any organization that holds women up in a higher regard than our Church. We teach our boys from birth to always respect and revere their mothers and wives. I’m truly sorry these women don’t understand how loved they are.
  
  Report this comment
- P8riot
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 4:12pm
  I wish the BLAZE would follow up this article with the Church’s official stance on women to avoid any confusion by those who are not familiar with our Church.
  
  Here is a transcription of a speech delivered to the men and boys of our Church a few years back…
  
  http://www.lds.org/general-conference/1999/04/our-sacred-duty-to-honor-women?lang=eng
  
  Further, the First Presidency of our Church wrote many years ago that ““Motherhood, is near to divinity. It is the highest, holiest service to be assumed by mankind. It places her who honors its holy calling and service next to the angels.”
  
  Again, I’m truly saddened that these women would belittle themselves and their roles in the Church.
  
  As daughters of God, they can accomplish much more than wearing pants to Church.
  
  Report this comment
- black9897
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 4:55pm
  Who cares? Women can wear pants..even to church.
  
  Report this comment
- FreedomPurveyor
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 5:10pm
  I don’t quite understand this story. I know lots of LDS women who wear pants to church, and nobody cares.
  
  Report this comment
- FesteAinoriba
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:16pm
  This is a little anthill pretending to be a mountain. It is and was a non-event – the only threats that were made were likely from radical feminists who were trying to make a non-issue into an issue. The women who organized this need to have their heads examined. If you want to wear a professional pantsuit to church, go ahead, NOBODY would care; but pretending like it is a big deal and organizing it as some kind of feckless protest is a dishonest attack on the church because it incorrectly declares that women wearing pantsuits to church is a violation of policy (it is not!). This is nothing more than a handful of dishonest, unstable women with a chip on their shoulder. I’m being very honest here: if there were any women who wore pantsuits to church in the last few weeks, I wouldn’t have even noticed because it is such a non-issue.
  
  Report this comment
- Dr Vel
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:23pm
  Old Truckers “Maybe the men will start wearing skirts to their church. How will the women like that?”
  
  Please do not insult old truckers with your very clear lack of knowledge. Should I cut you slack and consider you were taught by the typical bible thumpers who make Christianity a joke in the secular world? MEN WORE SKIRTS IN THE DAY THE PASSAGE REGARDING THIS SUBJECT WAS WRITTEN! The passage has absolutely nothing to do with cloths, this comes from lazy slothful study in the Word in the ancient Greek. Taking into account the street Greek Paul spoke in that day, what it was saying was “women should never take the place of a man in a sexual act”. Period. Nothing to do with clothing whatsoever. Why do you think God begins judgement with church leaders? Because they turn more souls away from Christ than the devil could ever hope to. Worse still some insist you call them ‘reverend’. Reverence no man, only God. Yet another error by these so called teachers. God will not go after some poor old lady who sat all her life in church being taught the traditions of men. She has the excuse of ignorance and merely needs to accept Christ and forgiveness. However the last place you want to be is around those who claim to know the Word and dare to teach in error. The harm they have done over time is beyond our knowing. To quote a well known great teacher, when these thumpers saw the big “GP” in the sky it meant “go plow”, not “go preach”.
  
  Report this comment
- Dr Vel
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:28pm
  cloths – clothes, and what I need tomorrow is a new keyboard!
  
  Report this comment
- NeoFan
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:46pm
  These women should repent and turn away from the voice of the adversary. And put on their big girl pants.
  
  Report this comment
- Racemosa7
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 11:52pm
  One Lord, one faith, one baptism. Christians yes, Mormonism. no! Men make denominations, God makes Christians. Saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone.
  
  Report this comment
- Uranium Wedge
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 12:16am
  She never got any death threats, she just wishes she did.
  She knows this wouldn’t be a story unless she got “death threats”.
  
  Report this comment
- idarusskie
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 4:31am
  I knew a guys that used to wear a kilt to church. He even had his young son wear one.
  
  Report this comment
- Pigpen
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 8:15am
  No, the LDS Church is waffling to the point of being UNTRUTHFUL if not downright DISHONEST. LDS Missionaries DO TEACH AS POLICY that women are to wear dresses to church and that men both young and old must wear a white shirt and tie if they wish to participate in Priesthood Ordinances. BUT **sigh** these “feminist mormons” are (like all feminists) from the privileged classes. For reasons still as yet unknown, the LDS leadership worships Harvard, Oxford, and the east coast intelligentsia, and only wealthy men are called to positions of authority. So I guess its natural that those wealthy men’s wives would want to be in authority too. In other words, the teary-eyed old men in Salt Lake City will waffle and then cave-in to the ridiculous demands of their wives and daughters. (I guess gay-marriage is next.) And then the SOBs will have the nerve to come-a-preachin’ in my non-east bench ward warning ME of the dangers of giving into evil bit by bit, degree by small degree,…
  
  Makes you wonder if there is room for one more family in Short Creek, AZ. At least THEY have the courage to “stand for something” even if that something is unpopular with the Harvard crowd!
  
  Qui pugnet pro nobis?
  
  Report this comment
- Pigpen
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 9:33am
  Hey, Brethren, did all that compromising win you any points with the East Coast Intellectuals? Looks like even though Romney lost the election, the “Old Grey Lady” is still hammering away at our LDS Faith! When are you old fools going to learn your lesson? Did refusing to be clear and concise about the TRUE NATURE of masculinity and femininity i.e. family/gender roles stop the LGBT crowd from burning down our Church buildings? No. Did forbidding the practice of baptism by proxy for that most privileged of all privileged classes in America stop the Left’s media machine from hammering away at our beliefs? No. Did backing away from teaching the Church’s original prohibition against miscegenation stop the Left’s assertions of Racism? No.
  
  So you have wrecked the lives of countless, young, LDS people AND their misplaced and alienated children by NOT WARNING them properly about the DANGERS of miscegenation, you have unilaterally stated that SOME PEOPLE don’t need baptism (by proxy or otherwise …but you even promised to prosecute LDS MEMBERS who attempted to do those proxy baptisms!?!), and your sons now all cry at Bambi and just adore going out to an off-broadway musical with mother on a Saturday night.
  
  Do you still want to stick to the idea that the “number one threat” to the Church is young men looking too long at the Victoria’s Secret catalog? Wake UP!
  
  Report this comment
- LDSmommy
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 9:46am
  PIGPEN: BULL!!! That is 100% BS! I have the missionaries in my home for dinner, lessons, etc. constantly. AND, we’re converts so we have taken lessons from missionaries. Never ONCE were we told that the females had to wear dresses/skirts and most certainly they never uttered anything about the ‘white shirt and tie’ to participate in priesthood! My husband and several of my sons are priests who have all given Sacrament in jeans, polos with blazers and once, one of my boys did Sacrament with his inky black dyed and WAY spiked ****, an Alice in Chains t-shirt and spiked bracelets. They DID ask him to remove his piercings, which he happily did.
  Please take you lies and obvious bias against the LDS Church elsewhere. There are too many Mormons here for you to try and fool with BS! Oh, and Merry Christmas.
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 10:52am
  1776freedomofspeech
  
  You got that right. Considering Glenda’s previous 2 names, Pantloadin & Wango. Glenda has quite the fixation. How would Freud explain that? They are stuck in one of the earliest stages of development?
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 10:56am
  Maybe Glenda/Wango/Pantloadin is telegraphing their plight as well as trying to shock.
  
  Glenda: Wizard of Oz Glenda Fairy Witch
  
  “Glenda, the Plan 9 Bunny”
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenda,_the_Plan_9_Bunny
  
  “Glen or Glenda is a 1953 exploitation film”
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glen_or_Glenda
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 10:58am
  “Who cares? Women can wear pants..even to church.”
  
  I really don’t, so long as it is modest. I’ve seen women wear dresses to church, a miniskirt. In that case pants would be better.
  
  Report this comment
- OUTLAW_WEALTH
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 11:24am
  There is no “policy” of any kind that women wear dresses to church. This is a non story attempting to be one.
  
  Maybe a few agitators out there looking to stir things up?
  
  Report this comment
- Marine 1
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 12:08pm
  Who cares!
  
  It seems to me that GOD does not care what you look like when you go to church. I see nothing wrong with women wearing pants to church. Heck, LDS missionaries and church-goers alike would wear jeans on the various reservations in the southwest to church.
  
  The men and women of the island nations in the LDS church wear their “native” clothing.
  
  Personally, I think GOD would just like us all to be praising him together regardless of our financial status or personal appearance. JESUS wore robes and sandals and told his apostles to “…carry neither purse nor script…” That is running on faith, folks – faith. He even warned folks about wearing fine clothing and fancy jewelry because those things make people “feel” and “act” better than others when they are not.
  
  Women wearing pants to church..No big deal.
  
  We need GOD in our lives and in this country now more than ever. Let’s clothe those that are naked and feed those that are hungry. Maybe then GOD will help us more.
  
  Report this comment
- Pigpen
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 2:54pm
  Sorry, LDSMOMMY, but I was a full-time missionary, we DID teach that dresses for women and white shirts and ties for men were required dress, if not, then Sunday best, but ONLY if you did ALL you could to acquire the appropriate attire. If the LDS Missionaries DON’T teach that now, it only proves my OTHER POINT that the Brethren are willing to cast off precepts in order to make the Church more palatable to those people who will just keep on hating the Church anyway. For leadership, the IMPORTANT thing is that we look good to the Brethren’s Harvard friends and that the Brethren’s snotty, feminist wives, daughters, and grand-daughters don’t ever have to act ladylike and hence suffer the “prison” that being a lady is to a spoiled, er, uh, progressive, well-educated LDS woman.
  
  Just one thing: I am part of a growing group of LDS men who have had enough of this UNEQUAL BS about women’s “liberation”. IF your GIRL is going to be coached to act like ANYTHING BUT a lady, then MY BOY is NEVER going to be coached to behave like a gentleman. IF courtly behavior is a PRISON for LDS girls, then courtly behavior MUST BE a PRISON for BOYS too! So if you pervert LDS women want to say that women “don’t need the priesthood” and that men only have it because they can’t have babies or some other BS, then NO WAY are we going to train our boys to be deferential IN ANY WAY to the girls. So hold that door open yourselves!
  
  Report this comment
- black9897
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 5:19pm
  @WALKABOUT
  
  Yeah, of course. Women need to make sure it’s modest…I mean I’m there to worship not to be tempted to look at some girl who wants to dress like a slut to church.
  
  Report this comment
- Palter
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 6:58pm
  As long as she’s wearing the magic underwear!
  
  Report this comment
- LDSmommy
  Posted on December 26, 2012 at 1:07am
  PIGPEN- First you wrote that it was REQUIRED that men wore white shirt and tie to participate in the priesthood ordinances, now you write, “…required dress, if not, then Sunday best, but ONLY if you did ALL you could to acquire the appropriate attire.” Mixed messages it seems.
  Regardless, maybe you are correct about them changing it, however, there are so many members here that have never heard such a thing, so I am a bit confused.
  So, do you think the presidency is catering to the ‘feminist’ stuff, or that they should cater to it? Personally, people like ‘Glennda’, trying to make this into an issue, are bizarre. What is wrong with women being women? With men holding the priesthood? The comments ‘it’ made about women not speaking until spoken to, etc. are so funny when compared to the reality of LDS women. We KNOW we share equal, but different ‘power’ (whatever the *&$% they want to call it) with men. We EMBRACE our roles in the family and Church. I love when these non-members speak out on behalf of LDS women, lol.
  
  Report this comment
- IWISHIWASINTEXAS
  Posted on December 26, 2012 at 7:07pm
  Right on LDSMOMMA. I’m also a member of the church and find many of these comments outright hilarious! Anyone who is LDS knows that women can wear what they want, but we’re encouraged to dress our best out of respect for the lord and the ordinances we perform and receive. If these women want to change things to the point that they can obtain the priesthood, then they should take it up with our Heavenly Father. In my opinion, these women need to study the gospel a little more and instigate a little less.
  
  Report this comment
Glennda
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:28am
Sick, twisted freaks.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- 1776freedomofspeech
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 11:01am
  @Glennda
  Do you need a timeout? Get some Eggnog, relax, have a wonderful Christmas and peace to you!
  
  Report this comment
- QuincySmith
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 12:24pm
  glenda;
  
  You or the other ‘women’? Duet: 22:5 “The woman shall not awear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.”
  
  Report this comment
- BeckFan73
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 2:59pm
  Quincy, et al …
  the really great thing about God is that he sent his son, Jesus, to do away with the Law (old testaments rules) and its ability to keep us seperated from each other. So, in today’s New Testament world, we no longer have to worry about being presentable to worship Christ. How many of us can recall being utterly sick, looking like we’d just been hit by a truck and calling out to him? That’s prayer, but that’s also worship. God doesn’t look the other way and ignore us because of what we’re wearing in those instances … why would he on Sunday?
  
  Report this comment
- Chuck Stein
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 3:12pm
  @ Glennda
  “Sick, twisted freaks.”
  Wow, mighty harsh words for some women who are making a big deal about “violating” a NON-EXISTENT “policy.”
  As Wally Cleaver used to say, they are just being “goofy.”
  
  Report this comment
- brian8793
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 5:47pm
  We’re Jesus Freaks!
  
  Report this comment
- bluegrandma52
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:40pm
  Beckfan “we no longer have to worry about being presentable to worship Christ.” You are so wrong. Would you be allowed in the presence of any high authority on this earth in beach attire? How much more then to appear before the Lord of Heaven and Earth in anything less than the best you can afford? It shows respect and honor for the majesty and dignity of our Heavenly Father and His beloved Son. Different cultures view “proper attire” in their own unique ways, but whatever is considered “dress attire” for that culture is appropriate. American culture has traditionally viewed modest and well-made dresses for women and conservative suits for men as appropriate Sunday (or Friday or Saturday) attire. Since the LDS Church believes strongly in honoring and reverencing our Father, it has encouraged its members to wear modest attire that is the best they can afford. Whether that is silk and cashmere or cotton and polyester means nothing to the Lord. Our whole focus as members of Christ’s Church is to become like Him; the Church is simply a scaffolding that helps us accomplish that. It’s our relationship with our Savior that’s important, and the love and respect we bear for Him that should inform everything we do, including how we act and dress.
  
  Report this comment
- QuincySmith
  Posted on December 26, 2012 at 12:25am
  beckfan;
  
  From your comment am I to believe that you find NO value in the Old Testament? If you answer no, where do you find support for your mind-boggling comment?
  
  Report this comment
DollyRR
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:23am
I’m not a Mormon, but it seems to me that the issue isn’t the “wearing of pants” but implanting “feminist” in the church. They want a “grander role” and wearing pants to church is just the first step. Since some have started describing themselves as “Mormon Feminists”, have they started to separate themselves from the Church or trying to start a new one.

Moreover, since we know double talk, being a feminist is anything but feminine.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- blarman
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:45am
  Amen. Feminists are anything but feminine. Most of the LDS women I know looked at this and just thought it was stupid. It isn’t like the clergy in the Mormon church get paid, and every Relief Society President or Young Womens’ President or Primary President (organizations to lead the Women, young women 12-18, and children 0-12 respectively) I know doesn’t go around asking to be put to work for an extra 40 hrs a week (on top of their day jobs and – again – for no pay) as Bishop.
  
  Report this comment
- Glennda
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:46am
  Yes . . . implanting. Yes, yes . . . grander role. What’s next, speaking before being spoken to?
  
  Report this comment
- Bot
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 12:32pm
  “Feminists” are not feminine. Just recall the happiness of the feminine women you know, compared with the happiness of the “feminists”. Why would any woman, especially one in the Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) want to discard her femininity? How many “feminists” are in the Bible or the Book of Mormon?
  
  Report this comment
- Twobyfour
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:08pm
  Just talked with a friend, both he and his wife are mormons. They were puzzled, they never heard of any anti-pants policies. The only requirement they both agreed as amatter of policy is that people wear something, if possible modest.
  
  Then his wife suggested there may be some “vagenda” behind this. I swear, she said that!.
  
  Report this comment
hugo65hsv
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:17am
Feminist have always ranted equal rights with men.. However in practice this turns out to be additional rights, protections and benefits for women at a cost to men… They want all the good and non of the bad, hard work, responsibility and yes even death that comes with equality with men.. I call BS on anything feminist do or say they are phony and phony in there cause.. Men that support them in there efforts are idiots..

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Kupo
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 1:02pm
  Absolutely right. You know, you might want to check out this fellow I know’s YouTube channel. Conservative, libertarian, and staunchly anti-feminist. He is truly a gentleman and a scholar.
  
  Chapin’s Inferno: A Wandering Cauldron of Politically Incorrect Commentary
  http://www.youtube.com/user/pinegrove33
  
  Report this comment
- RagstoRiches
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 11:51pm
  That is extremely close minded. As a professionally successful woman, I think I’m able to find near equality without having to trample on the toes of my male counterparts. To say that men suffer because of females who are trying to pursue equality is silly. To be clear, I recognize that there some angry feminists out there who are offensive and insensitive to the needs of men as well. There will be a slim amount of inequity that is natural due to the fact that some women choose by themselves to remove themselves from the workforce to tend to children. There is great beauty in this choice. However, to justify inequity by saying it hurts men is a meager masochistic attempt to cling to what you have.
  
  Report this comment
corridor5
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:07am
Read the original NY Times article. It’s more even-handed than The Blaze’s summary. Seems that The Blaze focused more on the negative aspects.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- kaydeebeau
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 11:27am
  And what exactly are the positive points?
  
  I have always had the same opportunities as any man – however – there are many things that do to biology – and “evolution” I am not capable of doing that men can do.
  
  Here is a news flash – men and women are DIFFERENT – by design – I might add.
  
  “Feminsts are anti-women and anti- men. and a rather miserable group – once again (as always) Rush is right…
  
  Report this comment
Susie
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:52am
As a female member of the LDS church, I have noticed that for various reasons certain ladies in my branch wear pants to church. I have never known anyone to complain, or in fact say anything about it. I have, on occasion, found it necessary to do so myself. I prefer not to, as I like to look and feel my best to worship God and I feel that way, when I am in a well fitting dress or skirt.
What concerns me, is that wearing pants to church does not seem to be the real issue with these woman, but rather, WHO, wears the pants.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- vpeva1
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:57am
  Well said!
  
  Report this comment
- riseandshine
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:17am
  Yes…well said, Susie.
  
  Report this comment
- Glennda
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:48am
  “I have, on occasion, found it necessary to (wear pants) myself. ”
  
  Brazen *****.
  
  Report this comment
dissentnow
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:46am
Wearing pants to church…….oh the humanity!
Sharia, anyone?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- 1776freedomofspeech
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:59am
  No thanks, I gotta drive…….
  
  Report this comment
- SeekerEmerald
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:34am
  I’ve never heard anyone complain about this in the LDS church, or even bring it up before. I DO recall listening to one preacher on Shortwave radio saying that women wearing pants was an abomination to God. (Not an LDS guy, he actually never claimed a denomination, so I guess he was independent…)
  He said women should never ever wear pants. I don’t recall ever hearing him quote a verse or section of scriptures that he relied on for this “teaching” though.
  I think you should dress well for church, for me that is a dark suit, white shirt, tie. For work I may have any of a number of colored suits and colored shirts, or may be dressing down with a collared golf shirt and khakis, or some such, but I don’t get colorful like that at regular Sunday meetings.
  
  For women, dressing up means a dress. How many actresses go to red carpet events in pants? Not very many at all.
  
  Pants day is a little silly, but they can do whatever they like. I don’t think that’s one of the things that God will hold them to account for. If I didn’t have a suit, and could not get one, I’d still go to church, and the membership would understand. Dress up, or do you best to get close to dressing up, but in the end it’s between you and God.
  
  Report this comment
- JWBooth
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 11:05am
  Really? …think God gives a flip about women wearing pants?
  
  Report this comment
Rac80
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:46am
This “movement” is just silly! I live in Indiana and in the winter we have plenty of gals wear slacks to church- it’s too cold in a skirt! Also the “religion” scholar from SDSU must beYOUNG- in the late 70′s & early 80′s there was a very large “mormon feminist movement” centered around the ERA – (AKA Equal Rights Amendment) and a lot of pressure was put on the church to ordain women then. these “Experts” need to do a bt of research before they open their mouths.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
lapitup
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:40am
Why do people have to belong to a group to feel like they belong? Not only that but who really cares? There are so many other issues facing us why on earth would this even be in the news or even news worthy? If women have to ware pants to church to show who wares the pants in the family, then I am glad I am single. I am so tired of the spoiled rotten kids and daddy’s little girls. Take a lesson and grow up spoiled rotten kids. Don’t even get me started on the “Y” generation.

Have you ever heard the saying “Sponge”? Mormons are nicknamed this because that is exactly what they are. Because when groups like this do stupid things like this Mormons are the first in line.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- vpeva1
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:54am
  I’ve never heard this nickname and I’m glad to say I’ve been a practicing Mormon all my life BUT back to the topic at hand, I agree, this is a non story. There are so many other IMPORTANT things happening in the world that we should be focusing on.
  
  Report this comment
- ZeroXP
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:42am
  Unfortunately this isn’t about women wearing ppants to church. Its about equsl rights. That t women deserve to hold the priesthood. As some one said earlier its who wears thr pants. Basically people who have accepted a religion that believes inn direct revelation from God and saying that they know better than him. It’s a very dangerous notion that deals directly with their faith. Remember 2nd NephI 21 and 22. Granted I agree we do have many other things that we do need to prepare for. Its just disheartening to hear about these stories that affect us here that we dont expect.
  
  Remember to keep the faith. Godspeed brothers and sisters
  
  Report this comment
- Kupo
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 1:07pm
  ZeroXP
  
  “Basically people who have accepted a religion that believes inn direct revelation from God and saying that they know better than him.”
  
  These are two contradictory claims. If someone believes that they are being led through direct revelation from God then that is the exact opposite of saying that they know better than him. Now, whether or not you want to believe that the revelation is legitimate is up to you – I don’t really care. However, Mormons do NOT believe that they know better than God.
  
  Report this comment
SpankDaMonkey
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:39am
.
Well I can’t wait for their TaTa’s for Jesus campaign…..

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- 1776freedomofspeech
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:43am
  Wet T-shirts abound!
  
  Report this comment
TeresaJ
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:38am
I hate feminism. This has nothing to do with “rights,” it’s just rebellion.

It’s beyond rediculous and un-Christian to be aking death threats though. If they had just ignored them, there’s a chance it would have just died out.

Wearing your best to church is just respect for God. In the end, of course He doesn’t care what you are wearing, but it’s still good to bring a respectful and humble attitude. I have worn jeans to church before, not because I was trying to make some statement, but because I didn’t have a dress or slacks.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- 1776freedomofspeech
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:50am
  @TERESA
  You are correct. I think so anyway. Have a great Christmas, Merry Christmas to you!
  
  Report this comment
- TeresaJ
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:01am
  @1776
  
  Merry Christmas to you! ^^
  
  Report this comment
Cavallo
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:38am
Have lesbian sex in a pew day. “But there is, in fact, no official church regulation barring women from having lesbian sex in the pews.”

They need to start their own denomination. There is in fact several break-offs from the LDS. FLDS is one, as well as the Reorganized Church of Latter Day Saints (Mormon-lite as a theological friend called them). What exactly is the point of tradition and religious practice if it changes as the wind blows? Religious by definition means (at least in major part) adherence to ritual. I find many of the traditions of Mormonism to be weird and silly. Being they don’t force their religion on me or want to blow up my children like some religions, if they want to hold a tradition of a certain kind of clothes at their rituals on their holy day, feel free.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- AGreyGhost
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:24am
  Actually, it was Brigham Young that broke away from the original church and ran to Utah with 3/4′s of the membership. Most of those 3/4 were the Golden Geese of the congregation. Young was a lustful, greedy powerful manipulating man who ruled those people with an iron hand even going so far as proclaiming that a punishment of Blood Atonement was necessary and called for should any of his congregation ever had the idea of changing their minds of what they were doing was right. Polygamy was never a tenet of the original church. After Young ran to the West, what was left of the church reorganized to put the pieces back together, thus, the name The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (RLDS). Unfortunately, now in this day and age of “every one must receive a trophy” and the touchy feel good admonitions of the powers that continue to grow in power, the RLDS has now changed their name to the Church of Christ or something like that and have even gone so far as to have a sculpture dedicated to the UN on their World Head Quarters church property at the Auditorium in Independence MO, causing yet another major split in the remaining congregation. The lesson is, NO ONE is exempt from the trickery, or the treason of the Devil. Baptist, Methodist, and on on until even those who govern us in the body politic, arm in arm dancing and singing the Yellow Brick Road, believing that before to long, the Emerald City will appear soon on the horizon.
  
  Report this comment
- SuttonShimai
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:43am
  Wow, Ghost. You need to learn a little history.
  
  Report this comment
- READRIGHTHERE
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 11:02am
  Corrections! The RLDS now call themselves the Community of Christ. They remained when Brigham and the saints headed west because of a belief that the next prophet of the church should be Joseph Smith’s son not the Lead Apostle (Brigham Young.) As regards polygamy not being practiced until Brigham left, this is simply incorrect. Joseph Smith practiced polygamy before being martyred. The Mob had hoped his death would destroy the faith, when it was apparent that it didn’t, the saints were then threatened with violence, death, and the destruction of property (a scenario that played itself out only too recently in their history), thereby encouraging their exodus west.
  
  Report this comment
- grimmjsb
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 7:53pm
  Ghost i think the current sate of the Community of Christ Church should be evidence enough of the fallacy of your words. The RLDS have given up so much over the years it really is sad.
  
  Report this comment
kindling
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:38am
Where I live there are families visiting our branch all the time because we are near a national park. Many times they come in the clothing they wear while camping and we don’t care, we just want them to come and be with us. We are pretty rural and some regulars wear everyday cloths and some women wear pants all the time. I was raised to think of it like this, you are going into the house of Jesus so you wear what you would want Him to see you in. That is usually considered your best. If your best are rags then so be it. We will be judged by what is in our hearts not on our bodies. If these women have an agenda of changing the principals of the church, then I do have an issue and I believe that may be why they get negative feedback, not to do with wearing pants. Only Jesus can do that, and don’t get me started on how the church has been changed from its inception.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- nursenifty
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:54am
  You are exactly right on Kindling. Bravo!
  
  Report this comment
- Zeb
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 12:15pm
  Isn’t it interesting that when you present your self in fervent pryer on bended knees, to the source of all righteousness, You may well receive the guidance and be blessed with that eternal presents of the holy spirit. Just maybe for Feminists within the body of the church the guidance of long pants may be a call to a little more of that fervent pryer on bended knees with keeping ones modesty. I am sure that it is not that church members should take the NY TIMES as a source doctrinal expression. If your really in doubt ask HER, SHE might surprise you or HE may not..
  
  Report this comment
- TheCalmOne
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 6:50pm
  I thought Jesus could see you wherever you are.
  
  Report this comment
DrDoom
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:33am
Honestly, no one in the LDS community could care less if these women wear pants to church outside of a few wack jobs every religion seems to have. The church does not have a dress code and the social pressure to wear a dress is no different than what I have seen at many Protestant churches. This is the biggest non-story for Mormons outside of Salt Lake I have ever seen.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- gramma b
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:47am
  I’m a Mormon woman who has been around long enough to know that, every 20 years or so a bunch of stupid malcontent attention-seeking broads start something like this, thinking they are very original. If they don’t like the Mormon church, they should go somewhere else, where they have women pastors, or something. They can sit around and swap stories about how downtrodden they were as Mormons, and worship Gaia or Asheroth, or something.
  
  Mormon women are not downtrodden. I am an attorney, who works with other Mormon women attorneys. The Church helps develop leadership in women as well as men. The Church’s law school gave me a scholarship. But, if these women don’t believe the leadership of the Church is running the Church right, then they are pretty much rejecting the concept of the Church, and really should go somewhere else.
  
  Report this comment
- Glennda
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 10:53am
  GRAMMA B . . . Thank God the Mormon Church still has the capacity to develop bitter, angry old broads like you who come to realize as they near the end of their lives that they’ve subjugated themselves not to God but to man. There’s still time. Repent and turn to Jesus.
  
  Report this comment
- riseandshine
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 11:02am
  @Glennda…………YOU are the bitter angry one here.
  
  Report this comment
- Glennda
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 11:45am
  RISEANDSINE . . . I’m busy trying to save souls here. What’s bitter about that?
  
  Report this comment
- anenigma2u
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 12:06pm
  @GLENNDA – Saving souls is a worthy pursuit. Please start with your own.
  
  Report this comment
- Glennda
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 12:18pm
  If you knew anything about God, you’d know you can’t save yourself. Lesson #1 complete. Repent, heathen.
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 12:29pm
  @riseandshine
  
  It’s just Wango hiding under a woman’s name… LOL
  
  Report this comment
- riseandshine
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 1:01pm
  @Monk….I think Rightwinghater..or whatever his/her name is…is Trollmonger.
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 1:56pm
  Hi Riseandshine,
  
  Absolutely…..
  
  Report this comment
- Glennda
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 4:11pm
  Just one wrong guess after another with you guys. That’s why we don’t like such scatterbrains having guns.
  
  Report this comment
- grimmjsb
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 8:00pm
  @Glennda I can’t decide if your a troll or really believe what you are saying, as far as
  “saving” souls, that is the saviors job, the only thing i see you doing is attempting to sow the seeds of anger and contention, which are the tools of the devil. Merry Christmas
  
  Report this comment
jcldwl
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:29am
Pretty much another Blaze pointless article. What interest do the Mormons have in our opinion. Is the Blaze going to show our opinions to the leaders of the Mormons in hopes of changing their minds? Pointless just pointless.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:32am
  there are a lot of mormons who visit this site
  
  Report this comment
- 1776freedomofspeech
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:35am
  Smug aren’t we.
  
  Report this comment
- Polarized America
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:36am
  .
  .speak for yourself ..i’ve been waiting all year for a story like this ..geeees
  
  Report this comment
- girtbarhooker
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:57am
  There are a lot of Mormons who visit this site, and I would be willing to bet not a one of us do care what anyone else thinks about it. Not only that, as a Mormon it is an incredible non-story.
  
  Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:24am
this article was informative, but would have never surfaced during the Mitt Romney campaign

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Eastinfection
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:31am
  Not sure SOY.
  They did the “Magic Underwear” story in the middle of the campaign.
  
  Merry Christmas BTW!
  
  Report this comment
- 1776freedomofspeech
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:33am
  I think she is milfy, do you agree?
  
  Report this comment
- Eastinfection
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:38am
  lol 1776…
  
  Maybe after some Eggnog.
  
  Report this comment
- 1776freedomofspeech
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:41am
  Gotta get my Eggnog Goggles on!
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:55am
  She said, hey SOY, take a walk on the wild side
  said, hey BOY, take a walk on the wild side
  
  and the Gary Johnson girls go…
  
  Doo, do, doo, do, doo, do, doo, do, doo…
  
  Little SOY never once gave it away
  everybody had to pay and pay
  
  A hustle here and a hustle there
  Gary Johnson is the place where they said
  Hey SOY, take a walk on the wild side
  They said hey BOY, take a walk on the wild side.
  
  And the Gary Johnson girls go…
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 11:13am
  nice christmas jingle
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 11:25am
  A little Lou Reed for you lover of Dylan and the testosterone lowering SOY.
  
  Report this comment
- TheCalmOne
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 6:43pm
  She is hot.
  
  Report this comment
Grandpa
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:24am
There’s so much controversey outside the Church thatI’m offended by the intrusion into my sacred sanctuary of peace. I will pray that the rebellious find a different form of worship that better suits them. From official LDS canon: We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Kupo
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:21am
As a Mormon this story makes me sick to my stomach. Not about the whole pants thing – I don’t really care if women want to wear skirts or slacks – but at the idea of a Mormon feminist. I had hoped that we were relatively immune to such nonsense.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Eastinfection
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:35am
  I agree that labeling oneself a “feminist” is as ridiculous as calling yourself a “masculinist”…
  
  But wearing slacks to church is hardly radical.
  
  I’d say wearing no pants to church would be a little more extreme.
  
  Report this comment
- Polarized America
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:47am
  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,”"MORMON WOMEN GET DEATH THREATS”",,,,,,,,,,,,,,
  
  you have failed to see the truly disturbing point of the story “” KUPO “”
  
  or are you the one makings those threats hummmmmmmm
  
  Report this comment
- Kupo
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 12:59pm
  No….it’s just that I consider the threats too ludicrous to be taken seriously.
  
  Report this comment
- P8riot
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 3:51pm
  Hate to say it, but I truly doubt that anyone really made a death threat towards any women that would wear pants to church… sounds more like the author of the blog creating a username and posting such nonsense to get her story published.
  
  Report this comment
- truthnstuff
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 4:23pm
  I don’t think this has anything to do with pants. As a once evangelical/zealous, main stream, protestant christian, we were told to watch out for those Mormons, they are a CULT. As a compliant follower I went along with the line. Even then I/many of us, agreed that the Mormons (mostly) were people of high morality and decency. That they were living the “christian” life better than us “real” christians.
  
  While, no longer a christian, I still believe in the Bible, just not the NT, what I think is at play here is the standard feminist attack on the family and feminism. If they can take out the Mormons and destroy the family, and morality, they will have won a great battle. What better way than to use a red herring to go after the real prize. First pants, then priests, then gays as priests etc..
  
  Report this comment
TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:21am
And one woman from the LDS was asked about her pants she said…

“Shush, not too loud. I have to whisper…. when I wear my pants my drawers underneath magically disappear. I’m a commando so to speak.”

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Eastinfection
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:17am
Mormon women are discouraged from wearing slacks to church?
Seriously?

What’s next?

“Drive a horseless carriage to Church” day?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:23am
  “dont worry, mormonism is just a mainstream christian religion”
  
  Report this comment
- 1776freedomofspeech
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:28am
  All these wild notions…..flying machines and such…..foolishness, I say, foolishness…
  
  Report this comment
- riseandshine
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:50am
  “dont worry, mormonism is just a mainstream christian religion”
  
  I’m so thankful that isn’t the case.
  
  Report this comment
snappietx
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:16am
I would rather see a woman in pants then a skin tight up the legs where no man needs to see outfits. Why are they so worried about women wearing SLACKS, LADIES SLACKS not jeans , Not Men’s pants just a lady like slacks.The world is NOT coming to an end it is begining to see a different view . Those long dress’s are totally uncomfortable and HOT in HOT weather. This is 2013.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
SFfam
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:12am
The woman in the picture needs to quit worrying about what to wear to church and sweep her floor. Feminists being feminists!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- As I See It
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:17am
  Funny, I didn’t notice the floor – I was thinking she needed to fix the weather-stripping on the door and put the towel away.
  
  Report this comment
- Polarized America
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:21am
  .
  it’s Winter ..that’s a towel at the bottom of the door to keep out the draft.
  
  …………….speaking of drafts ………………./;-)
  
  Report this comment
- 1776freedomofspeech
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:39am
  @Polarized America
  
  Apparently these ‘smart” city folk don’t know about cold air leaking into the house under the front door.
  
  These notionally smart alecky city folketty folks commenting makes for good humor!
  
  Report this comment
As I See It
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:10am
I’m thinking that since I’m not of the Mormon faith I really have no opinion one way or the other…this is their business, not mine.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- girtbarhooker
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:49am
  Thank you!
  
  Report this comment
- SaturdaysWarrior76
  Posted on December 25, 2012 at 4:23pm
  yes! Thank you!
  
  Report this comment
Tri-ox
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:09am
So, instead of just doing their own thing, and celebrating their personality and individual style choice, these women started an online campaign to stir up controversy and agitate their fellow LDS members? Troubling.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:26am
  maybe they feel like transparency is the only way to get past the ‘unwritten rule”
  
  Report this comment
1776freedomofspeech
Posted on December 24, 2012 at 9:02am
What is the world coming to? Now the mormon women are wearing pants to church! It is the end times! Get a helmet!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.