Thread by @presbyterianpew

Discussing O80 on CRT AIC - motion w/consent of author to refer to next year (already several other AICs ahead of it)

Substitute motion to answer in the negative - not as pressing in current conversation

https://twitter.com/presbyterianpew/status/2069135205302931705

Should the substitute (to answer O80 in the negative) become the main? Yes. 90-34-0

Voting to answer O80 in the negative
❌O80 105-25-2

Discussing O27 - regarding SJC assuming original jurisdiction. Motion to refer back to Presbytery.

Substitute to be answered in affirmative as amended. 20% of Presbyteries (instead of 2 or 3).

In favor of main - language as written ("fails to act") is unusable. Folks may be nervous to adopt "declines to indict" but 20% bar may build good will.

Amend the amendment to change 20% to 10%. 17 Presbyteries is a lot.

For original amendment - this won't pass enough Presbyteries at 10%

Amendment to change to 10% fails 28-106-0

Amendment to change 20% to 15% fails 50-81-1

Amendment to add "finds no strong presumption of guilt or otherwise..."

Speaker moves all questions. Yes. 102-30-1 is more than 3/4

Amendment to add "strong presumption" language is adopted 75-54-1

Shall the substitute (affirmative as amended) become the main? Yes. 119-15-0

Voting to recommend O27 in the affirmative as amended

✅O27 123-10-0

Discussing O3 about dismissing charges

Affirmative as amended - adding "against the consent of prosecutor" to clarify prosecutor can decide to drop charges, requirement to interview witness whose memory is questioned

Substitute to answer in the negative - this is very cumbersome and what is proposed can best be done in an actual trial

Speech in favor - yes, best done in trail. This O would make sure the charges can be brought to trial and not dismissed

Speaking against - when would this happen? Not clear.

Should the substitute (answer O3 in the negative) become the main? Yes. 90-38-2

Voting to answer O3 in the negative

❌O3 104-25-3

Discussing 059 - allowing an option to remove from membership without the need to declare new membership

Substitute to refer back to Presbytery - may have unintended consequences, churches should continue care until new membership is in place

In favor of main motion - RE had to demit because his views changed and wanted to remove membership, had to use 38-4, would have preferred less harsh option

Against O - once the session passes motion to remove from membership, he's no longer a member in an evangelical church, language like 38-3b should be used to warn about going for a time without membership.

Against Overture - this lowers our view of church membership

Against Overture - should not create a category to "quit" church membership

Shall the substitute (to refer back to Presbytery) become the main? 114-19-0

Voting to refer O59 back to Presbytery

↩️O59 121-12-0

Breaking for dinner. Reconvening at 7:30 pm and beginning with Overture 28.

@threadreaderapp unroll, please!