objection to consideration of question

[Guest rigo]

If the motion "Objection to the considerastion of the question" is not debatable, how do I explain to the chair that I believe the proposed main motion is beyond the scope of our organization. Some members wanted to censure a chair from another lodge and I belived it was none of our business..

[Chris Harrison]

That may not be the proper motion to use in this circumstance. RONR p. 108 says:

A main motion that proposes action outside the scope of the organization's object as defined in the bylaws or corporate charter is out of order unless the assembly by a two-thirds vote authorizes its introduction.

So it would probably be a better approach to raise a Point of Order stating that you believe such a motion is beyond the scope of the organization. The Chair will rule and if he rules it Well Taken and there is no Appeal or the Chair's ruling is sustained (or he rules it Not Well Taken and is reversed upon Appeal) a member can move to Suspend the Rules to authorize its introduction.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

If the motion "Objection to the consideration of the question" is not debatable, how do I explain to the chair that I believe the proposed main motion is beyond the scope of our organization?

I agree with Chris.

If your GOAL is to speak at length on what and why, then use the motion Point of Order. You'll get to say what the rule is, and why the motion is a violation of the rule.

You get the added bonus of the chair's reasoning on why the Point of Order is "well taken" or "not well taken".

[Dan Honemann]

That may not be the proper motion to use in this circumstance.

There's not much doubt about it.

"An Objection to the Consideration of a Question is not used if a main motion is outside the society's objects as defined in the bylaws or constitution, or outside the announced purpose for which a mass meeting has been called; such a motion should be ruled out of order (p. 108, l. 5-8)." (RONR, 10th ed., p. 259).