Week 3 - Thurs. - Josh

4/13
Parliamentary Law
There are those who think that Roberts Rules of Order are too divisive for the churches purposes. This is a stance that I disagree with, people will always disagree - even if the decision is eventually unanimous, there will be those who have simple conceded to be done with it. There has always been disagreement in the church, since Paul and Barnabas, and growth has come from those troubles. Do not think that the spirit can only move through conformity. But for the sake of argument (and my grade) let us say that there are issues with Roberts Rules – what would I change.
• Make firm statements about what decision a yes or no vote will result in so that those who are unfamiliar with the format of parliamentary law cannot be taken as suckers.
• Remove the need for a second in order for a motion to continue to the discussion phase, consider all motions so that each person ideas gets equal representation.
• Allow for less formal wording when moving from stage to stage of parliamentary law.
• Ask for more than a simple majority on all decisions – ¾ perhaps
Problems
• Much time will be spent discussion ideas that have very little merit because they are advance without the need for a second
• The formal wording provides a contrast of demeanor so that those present understand that there is something important happening and those they should wipe the drool of their legal pad and pay attention.
• Moving to a ¾ vote will slow down any decisions from happening, motion will remain motions forever until people finally concede or the church dies form stagnation because it cannot go anywhere.