Discussion before offering amendments

[Pastor Tim]

When discussing a motion, is it permissible for the chair to say "We would like to have a period of time where we only answer questions of clarification, or hear speeches either in support of or in opposition to, the main motion.  We will entertain amendments and other motions after "x" number of minutes have passed."

Sometimes, it is not helpful if people begin amending a motion before there has been ample discussion on the merits of the motion itself.

[Hieu H. Huynh]

That is up to the assembly to decide.

[George Mervosh]

The chair cannot declare that this will  happen, but the rules could be suspended to permit it.  A 2/3 vote or unanimous consent is required.

I strongly disagree with your opinion in the last sentence but I suppose if 2/3 of those present and voting agree, it's fine.

[Tom Coronite]

8 hours ago, Pastor Tim said:

Sometimes, it is not helpful if people begin amending a motion before there has been ample discussion on the merits of the motion itself.

If someone offers an amendment, and you believe the original motion is preferable in its unamended form, you are able to assert your belief in debating the proposed amendment.

[Gary Novosielski]

8 hours ago, Pastor Tim said:

When discussing a motion, is it permissible for the chair to say "We would like to have a period of time where we only answer questions of clarification, or hear speeches either in support of or in opposition to, the main motion.  We will entertain amendments and other motions after "x" number of minutes have passed."

Sometimes, it is not helpful if people begin amending a motion before there has been ample discussion on the merits of the motion itself.

No.  

But if the chair prefaces it with 'If there is no objection...", and afterwards asks "Is there objection?", and nobody objects then Yes.  

Restrictions on the rights of the membership to enter into debate and to offer amendments can only be abridged with the permission of (2/3 of) the assembly itself.