R-rated Movies

[Ian]

Alex said: Now surely we would hope, being that we are LDS, that anyone here would be right square with their Bishops on any question of worthiness, but I repeat again - when was that topical?

that's a good question...

Alex said to Steve: Think I'm taking this logic too far? I don't. It's where the implications of your utterance head. It's quite low.

i wouldn't call it "logic." with that mindset, it would be impossible to have any discussion about God's commandments, without one side of the debate feeling attacked. for example, steve and i disagreed about whether copyright infringement is theft. i agreed it is against the law, and thus we shouldn't do it, but i didn't think it was the same as theft. steve disagreed. i could have very easily said "how dare you! are you calling ME a THIEF!!! that's what the implication is!!" and ran home crying. but i know he was expressing his belief, and if anything i respected his zeal (yes, zeal can be good) in trying to explain his opinion and understand the truth.

i think that you are also trying to do what's right, alex. i also think that it is a sin if we watch r-rated movies. oh no, i said "sin"! who am i to know what a sin is! (note: i did not say that alex is a sinner. i have no clue what movies alex likes to watch. that doesn't even matter at all. i'm not talking about anybody's worthiness (including my own). i'm talking about movies and commandments, not your willingness to keep commandments... everyone get that?)

Alex said: Are you being sarcastic in calling Orson Scott Card "great"? I respect his view; ergo if you disrespect his you must also disrespect mine.

you've made it quite clear that you respect him very much. yes i was being sarcastic. i'm already familiar with the article. he's wrong. is that "disrespectful" of me to say?

Alex said: Also, what is the utility of unendingly hammering out a small bit of council Wink like "do not watch r-rated movies" as an apparently self-evident out and out all-cases covered no exceptions period command?, when two thousand words have been written in rebuttal to it, which have not until Lily's responses from your clan been addressed with respect?

a "small bit of councel" from a prophet means a lot more than two thousand words of unpersuasive rebuttal. we will be accountable to God for following the prophet's councel. when the prophet says something, it is no different than the Lord Himself saying it. through the prophet, the Lord has said: "do not watch r-rated movies." need He repeat Himself over and over for us to get the message? (well, actually it has been repeated over and over and over... just check lds.org).

by the way, you were very selective in responding to my post, alex. yet you complain that your long and wordy essays are not responded to with respect? if you want to write that way, fine... but don't be bothered if people have a hard time responding (it's not out of disrespect, it's just that it's tough to navigate it all).

most of your post was addressed to other people so i'll leave it for them. but let me say that i appreciate your last post steve. it's sad that people will probably be offended by it. for the truth, we need look no further than the scriptures and the words of our general authorities. all the talk about the mpaa, orson scott card, personal understandings and differences, etc., is really "looking beyond the mark." everyone who has participated in this discussion is aware that God has said "do not watch r-rated movies." we can obey or disobey.

nephi said: "i glory in plainness." we are very fortunate that God has spoken to us on this issue. any confusion that we might have had about r-rated movies has been removed by the simple, straightforward words of a prophet.

[arxpoetica]

When Edward, Ian, and Steve talk about "the Lord's will," they are, in essence arguing that their understanding of the Lord and his prophet's statements are the only correct interpretation. Any one of you could chalk this up to "a personal testimony" of what the prophet means, which kind of ends the discussion cold in its tracks, doesn't it? "I, [Ian, Steve, Edward, or whoever,] know this to be true..."

I have something further to say about all this, directed at Steve, though I think it applies to the general discussion, but I'll put it in another post. But I wanted to point out what I just said above in a benign though terse paragraph.

LOVE Y'ALL!

[arxpoetica]

Steve said, in a post that I intended to respond to awhile back, but couldn't for the sake of work...

Bottom line, I think it's just a matter of whether we listen to the will of the Lord through the prophets, or if we heed the personal feelings of a few on this discussion board.

It would be convenient for you to assert that you understand the prophet's counsel better than others on this board, based on your personal feelings of the matter. However,

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.

This is not moral relativism (Ian).

Granted, Steve, we don't know each other very well, so you don't have much to go on, but I believe that I follow the prophet's counsel according to the best dictates of my conscience. You have pointed the finger at me, saying that what I have said about following Pres. Benson contradicts itself. It may seem that way, but I see it very differently. Both statements (I don't think I need to repeat them, since you seem to have memorized them!) are still true according to the dictates of my conscience. My contradiction seems to have really pushed your buttons. But I stand by it. Just as you stand by your and Edward's injunction that this issue is "black and white." I am comfortable that you have a different opinion. You, Edward, Ian, and perhaps others seem really threatened by my opinion.

Steve also said:

When we're personally invested in habits or practices that go contrary to the counsel of our Heavenly Father, it's hard to accept a prophet's words at face value. We look for loopholes, exceptions, and excuses.

The implication of this statement is that I go against the will of the Lord. This is your statement. What else could you have possibly meant?

It saddens me that you (and others) feel compelled to censure me for my approach to this issue. But since you have done so (perhaps unwittingly), let me be forceful in that manner which stops conversation cold in its tracks, as I pointed out above...

I testify that I am in the right with God on this particular issue.

My mode of saying this is a joke, I hope you realize this. But I'm just trying to point out what you are essentially doing: asserting that you are right and that I am wrong. Of course, that's been the argument from the beginning. But it just turned ugly and unpleasant. I don't blame you or any one person in particular. It's kind of been a group effort.

Granted, I'm not perfect, but who is?! I feel no need to censure you for having differing opinions. I'm glad! And this is now to everyone...I don't like it when my cousins and cousin-in-laws bear down forcefully telling me what is right and wrong without trying to understand me or let me breathe. There is something offensive to God taking place here.

Truth is truth. D&C 93:23-42.

[John]

My dear family,
I wish I had access to an emoticon of Mr. Smiley waving an olive branch.

For many years, we all have known that our opinions differ regarding the viewing of certain film entertainments that have received an "R" rating. As for myself, in all this time, despite my awareness of these differences, I have never felt any diminution of affection for any of you due to this difference of opinion.

Please accept my warm regard.

I now defer to my post of a new thread ... "cybercom" - and invite your responses

[Steve]

Robert: When Edward, Ian, and Steve talk about "the Lord's will," they are, in essence arguing that their understanding of the Lord and his prophet's statements are the only correct interpretation.

Robert, I am not quite sure how to respond to this. If "Don't see R-rated movies" is up to interpretation, then other such statements, such as "Don't view pornography," "Don't use illegal drugs," and "Don't steal" must necessarily be considered as open to personal interpretation. And they're not. Read the quotes from general authorities that I posted in my first response to the issue. How are we "interpreting" these things at all? The English language does not support a clearer directive than "Don't see R-rated movies." Tell me how you would rephrase that to eliminate misinterpretation. It's impossible! The Lord does not get any clearer--it's the exact phrase He would inscribe on stone tablets in this day and age if President Hinckley were instructed to make them.

It would be convenient for you to assert that you understand the prophet's counsel better than others on this board, based on your personal feelings of the matter.

What do personal feelings have to do with listening to the prophet's words? The only personal feeling involved is my own personal conviction and testimony that the prophet has been called of God to say what He would say and teach what He would teach.

Let's say as a parent, I repeatedly tell my child, "Don't watch R-rated films." If my child did it anyway, it certainly would not be because of an interpretation problem. The child would simply be disobeying my instruction. "Don't hit your sister" doesn't mean "It's ok to hit some sisters sometimes." "Don't go out in the street" doesn't mean "Go out in the street sometimes." As a Heavenly Parent, what more could God say about this to make it any clearer? Disobedience is disobedience.

"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."

I think that you are misusing this quote; I don't think it was intended to say "In the Church of Jesus Christ, to each his own."

Granted, Steve, we don't know each other very well, so you don't have much to go on

Actually, Robert, doesn't that expressly prove that I'm NOT saying these things as a personal attack? I'm responding objectively to you according to the words of the prophets because of exactly that: I don't know you very well. I am only responding to your comments. So I have no past history to go on, no special familiarity with your habits, or anything. So I'm obviously not making a personal attack. I'm simply expounding pre-stated doctrine as declared by the servants of the Lord. Take it or leave it.

My contradiction seems to have really pushed your buttons. But I stand by it.

Why would you stand by a contradiction?

Just as you stand by your and Edward's injunction that this issue is "black and white."

Thankfully, it is. The Lord has been as clear on this issue as He has ever been in recorded history.

You, Edward, Ian, and perhaps others seem really threatened by my opinion.

You misunderstand my intentions. I am not threatened at all by your opinion. You are the one who is most threatened by your opinion, because in the end, you're the only one to be held accountable for it. And that's what I'm worried about. I write all of this because I care. It's not a question of who in this discussion is right or wrong. It's a question of what is right or wrong. And when you don't listen to counsel of the prophets, you're in the wrong. ("It follows, therefore, that those who profess to accept the gospel and who at the same time criticize and refuse to follow the counsel of the prophet are assuming an indefensible position.")

Steve: "When we're personally invested in habits or practices that go contrary to the counsel of our Heavenly Father, it's hard to accept a prophet's words at face value. We look for loopholes, exceptions, and excuses."
Robert: The implication of this statement is that I go against the will of the Lord. This is your statement. What else could you have possibly meant?

Robert, I don't mean to sound offensive. But in reality, if someone (you, me, anybody) goes contrary to the counsel of our Heavenly Father's prophets, then of course they're going contrary to the will of the Lord. There's nothing really offensive in that statement. If you don't follow the prophet's counsel, you are going against the will of the Lord. That's not just possibly what I mean to say--it's exactly what I mean to say.

But I'm just trying to point out what you are essentially doing: asserting that you are right and that I am wrong.

No, I'm asserting that President Benson and the other prophets are right. If you disagree, then yes, you are wrong.

Granted, I'm not perfect, but who is?!

Nobody but the Savior. Completely agree.

I don't like it when my cousins and cousin-in-laws bear down forcefully telling me what is right and wrong without trying to understand me or let me breathe. There is something offensive to God taking place here.

Ok, please breathe. If you need a little while away from the discussion to think about things, I fully understand. Look, I think it's important to understand one another, but that doesn't mean I have to sympathize with beliefs that go contrary to the prophets' counsel. I'm not in a position to apologize for the stance of the prophets...if you have issue with the difficult counsel they declare, then that is between you and their Boss. I don't know what you want me to tell you. Do you just want to hear someone agree with your opinions? Are you hoping I'll suddenly cave and say, "Actually, hey, maybe you're right. Maybe the prophet's words are just optional advice left open to your interpretation."

As a young man with a firm testimony that the prophets speak exactly what God would have them say, I can't do that. I know that the Lord speaks to us through His prophets. I know that when He tells me to do something, I better do it. I also know that when He tells me not to do something, I better not. And if I am doing it, I better stop.

It's hard. It's hard to imagine what it would be like to go all my life doing one thing, only to come to the realization that the prophet has been saying all along "Don't do that." I can't imagine how that must feel. But I can imagine how it will feel to listen. When I make mistakes and then turn things around, gosh, how sweet it is.

At any rate, you've still got a large family that loves you (getting larger with each marriage), and tons of people who, like you, are all trying to be a little better each day. That sure is a blessing for all of us.

[Ian]

i'll chime in as well:

Robert said: You, Edward, Ian, and perhaps others seem really threatened by my opinion.

am i running away? if anything, my personal belief on this matter has become somewhat stronger from reading your comments. so far, yours are arguments that i have heard before. i know many people who share your opinion.... so this is nothing new or threatening. i disagree with you, but i like reading what you guys have to say. either it will persuade me to reconsider my opinion, or it will strengthen the belief that i already have.

Robert said: ...I believe that I follow the prophet's counsel according to the best dictates of my conscience.

that's great but we already know that. does this have anything to do with the Lord's statement: "do not watch r-rated movies?" (you guys hate it when i bring up that little statement, it seems. sorry for restating it).

Robert said:
I testify that I am in the right with God on this particular issue.

My mode of saying this is a joke, I hope you realize this. But I'm just trying to point out what you are essentially doing: asserting that you are right and that I am wrong.

would you like us to stop expressing our beliefs, then? does it sound too preachy to say that i believe in something? only when you disagree, i suppose.

everybody here has the right to express their opinion. and anyone is entitled to say "i believe that i am right and you are wrong." i can say it, and you can say it. that's what debates are all about! otherwise, there would be no debate. would you rather i say "we're both wrong," or "we're both right" or "i don't want to say what i think, because to do so would be to assert that i am right?" shall we never debate then? we have different beliefs. that's ok!

the Lord has said (here's that phrase again) "do not watch r-rated movies." i believe that that statement speaks for itself. some of you have said "well, that's just your personal interpretation." is there an alternative interpretation that somebody would like to offer? steve is right, there is no way in the english language to say it clearer than that.

like dad, i don't think any less of people for disagreeing with me. i'm glad that you guys are willing to discuss these things. it's always fun for me.

[Ian]

btw i think this exerpt from a 1998 ensign article is relevant to this discussion:

Preparing to go to the temple involves the obvious steps of living the commandments, fasting, and praying. Beyond the obvious, I recommend the following steps. I suggest you:

1. Carefully and honestly evaluate your level of obedience to God’s commandments. To do that, find some place to be alone. I suggest you take a piece of paper and write down every commandment you have been counseled to live. Arrange those commandments in descending order with the hardest for you to live on the top. Then figuratively look yourself in the eye and do an inventory on how you are doing on each of those items. I hope you will not stop that self-interview until you have committed yourself to full and total obedience. Then go out and be obedient.

All too often, we get ourselves enmeshed in the process of trying to understand why God gave us a particular commandment. We want to rationalize. I don’t know where that is more evident than in watching movies. Young people know they should not watch R- or X-rated movies, and yet time after time I hear them say, “Well it’s only rated R because it’s violent.” What difference does it make why it is rated R? The fact is, a prophet of God has said not to go to R-rated movies (see, for example, Ezra Taft Benson, “To the ‘Youth of the Noble Birthright,’ ” Ensign, May 1986, 45). That ought to be good enough.

There is no substitute for obedience.

Obedience has been described as the first law of heaven, and the longer I live, the more convinced of that I become. I never cease to thrill at the story of Helaman and his stripling warriors told in the Book of Mormon. Even though 2,060 of the young men “fought most desperately” (Alma 57:19) in battle, not one lost his life. What everyone may not know is that they qualified for this mighty miracle by their obedience. Their leader, Helaman, says of them: “They did obey and observe to perform every word of command with exactness” (Alma 57:21; emphasis added).

- Elder Cree-L Kofford

[Ian]

this one is helpful, too:

“Teaming Up for Youth,” Ensign, Jan. 2002, 7

(The Ensign spoke with Elder Cecil O. Samuelson Jr., executive director of the Priesthood Department, about the changes made in the re-released For the Strength of Youth).

Q: How much does the new For the Strength of Youth deal with real-life issues and situations?

A: It is a doctrinal document, but it is also very practical. It is hoped that youth will not only want to learn what the standards are but will want to apply the sensible ideas given to help them keep the standards. It is not intended that these ideas be unduly prescriptive, but youth should carefully consider how to apply the doctrine. For example, under “Dress and Appearance” we say, “Someday you will receive your endowment in the temple. Your dress and behavior should help you prepare for that sacred time.” It is hoped that by making this suggestion youth will be guided and strengthened as they decide what clothing to purchase and wear.

As another example, under “Entertainment and the Media” there is no specific mention of any rating system. This is not to be interpreted that the Church approves of R-rated or any other inappropriate movies. It is simply a recognition that there is increasingly great risk in tying ourselves to any rating system. Those that have been historically safe to use are not so anymore. Rating systems are constantly in a state of flux. Second, the rating system used in the United States does not apply to all parts of the world. As an international church, our people need to be taught principles they can apply no matter where they live.

There has been a general coarsening of media standards throughout the world. In my home there are many shows on television that we simply do not watch. In writing the new section on media, it was decided to give the youth something that allows them to make the judgments for themselves.

(emphasis added)

[arxpoetica]

...It is not intended that these ideas be unduly prescriptive, but youth should carefully consider how to apply the doctrine...

...This is not to be interpreted that the Church approves of R-rated or any other inappropriate movies. It is simply a recognition that there is increasingly great risk in tying ourselves to any rating system...

...In writing the new section on media, it was decided to give the youth something that allows them to make the judgments for themselves.

(emphasis added)

Incidentally, I have never heard the Church approve the R rating, so I agree with what Elder Samuelson said, just probably not your take on it. In fact, it would boggle my mind if the Church were to endorse the R rating. It would seem totally out of line with what the Church stands for. Yet I believe there are exceptions to most commandments in the Church. Not all. Most. (For example, I think adultery is always wrong. But it is not always wrong to kill.) Still, this is for the youth, isn't it? Surely if it's important for the youth to make decisions for themselves, adults should be more responsible in making decisions. That's why I don't tie myself "to any rating system" (emphasis added). I use the spirit as my guide.

[arxpoetica]

And since it's now acceptable to use lengthy quotes from General Authorities:

Elder Oaks, "The Dedication of a Lifetime," CES Fireside for Young Adults, May 1, 2005.

The explanation I gave that man is the same explanation I give to you if you feel you are an exception to what I have said. As a General Authority, it is my responsibility to preach general principles. When I do, I don't try to define all the exceptions. There are exceptions to some rules. For example, we believe the commandment is not violated by killing pursuant to a lawful order in an armed conflict. But don't ask me to give an opinion on your exception. I only teach the general rules. Whether an exception applies to you is your responsibility. You must work that out individually between you and the Lord. [Not me and Ian, or me and Steve, or me and whomever.]

The Prophet Joseph Smith taught this same thing in another way. When he was asked how he governed such a diverse group of Saints, he said, "I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves" (in John Taylor, "The Organization of the Church," Millennial Star, Nov. 15, 1851, 339). In what I have just said, I am simply teaching correct principles and inviting each one of you to act upon these principles by governing yourself.

[John]

I cannot for the life of me find anything in my immediate family's life that would warrant US claiming to be an exception to the continually repeated injunction from the prophets not to watch movies that have been rated "R". The choices and decisions made by other beloved family, friends, is beyond the purview of my stewardship, and I bear them no ill will, no disdain, and no ill regard. Although we share with them, in part, a common legacy, their circumstances, background, life experience, opinion is different than what you and I and your mother have had. Every marriage is a blending of two paradigms. How grateful I am for Tuly's influence.

I speak only to my children, when I say that it is my belief that if you choose to disregard this counsel as your mother has taught you, you will "reap dissappointment by and by."

[Ian]

wow, talk about selective reasoning robert. guys, the general authorities have talked about r-rated movies, believe it or not. yet you choose to refer to an excerpt from elder oaks about exceptions to rules? as if the rules might not apply to you? without addressing the words of the prophet and many other general authorities about r-rated movies? did you not read the wonderful instruction from elder kofford?

i cannot believe that some of us are an exception to the rule about r-rated movies. but how can i possibly know that?... well i can't help but be reminded of times on my mission when we would ask someone to pray about the things we taught them, and they would come back and say that God had told them that our message were untrue. you can call me judgmental, disrespectful, or whatever, but i knew that they were wrong.

some of you are trying so hard to bring your personal lives and experiences into the equation, that you fail to address the simple, instructive words of our general authorities about r-rated movies. i agree that the spirit is our guide, but guys, the general authorities and the spirit are all on the same page! they don't butt heads with each other. we can be safe by simply following the words of the Lord's servants.

you say that you've never heard the church approve of the r rating? then why do they bring it up so often?

here's another one from elder bruce hafen:

Can you see why the Brethren tell us to stay away from X- and R-rated movies? Can you see why they plead with us to avoid drugs, alcohol, vulgar music, and the other products of the carnal environment that now surrounds us almost as water surrounds the fish of the sea? These aren’t trivial things. If the H-bomb symbolizes our age, we are playing now not just with fire, but with nuclear power. The prince of darkness has dragged out the heavy artillery.

and again, from elder h. burke peterson:

Now, brethren of the priesthood, there should not be any X- or R-rated movies that we participate in viewing or talking about.... Once in a while we should stop and ask ourselves, “In whose army are we fighting? Whose battle lines are we defending?”

and from elder joe j. christensen:

It also would be very beneficial if we resolve not to watch even one movie, video, or television show of R-rated quality or worse—from now on. I assure you that much of our future happiness and success depends on that choice.

[Steve]

Robert, I really wish you would address my previous posts.

I just have a few specific questions that, after all this time, still haven't been answered by the other side of this discussion.

Elder H. Burke Peterson said that "movies that are R-rated...are produced by satanic influences."

1) If R-rated movies are produced by satanic influences, why would it ever be a good idea to watch them?

2) You say that you use the spirit as your guide. Why do you believe that the Spirit is suggesting that you're ok in doing something that is contrary to the counsel of the prophets?

3) Let's briefly turn our attention from the "For the Strength of Youth pamphlet" and consider the direct addresses given in General Conference. What is the difference between "Don't watch R-rated movies" given by the Prophet and President of the church over the pulpit to all the members of the church, and "Don't view pornography" given by the Prophet and President of the church over the pulpit to all the members of the church?

4) If you were God, how would you word a commandment so that even small, select groups of individuals knew you meant for everyone, including them not to do something? (And so that it would be consistent with the commandments given from the Garden of Eden to the present day).

5) You claim to have been positively influenced by R-rated films that you've seen. As Lily Mott asked, what about the inevitable negative influences also present in the film? If the positive ones have changed lives (as Alex claimed), how is it that the negative ones had absolutely no effect?

6) How do you know the difference between a "good, righteous" R-rated film to which the prophet's counsel doesn't apply, and a "bad, evil" R-rated film to which it does before you see it?

7) You speak of "exceptions to most commandments of the church." Can you name most of them and give an example of when the exception is ok?

[Ian]

well guys it looks like some people aren't interested in participating in this discussion anymore. but for anyone who has a spare moment, i really think that these words from elder eyring are on point:

Looking for the path to safety in the counsel of prophets makes sense to those with strong faith. When a prophet speaks, those with little faith may think that they hear only a wise man giving good advice. Then if his counsel seems comfortable and reasonable, squaring with what they want to do, they take it. If it does not, they consider it either faulty advice or they see their circumstances as justifying their being an exception to the counsel. Those without faith may think that they hear only men seeking to exert influence for some selfish motive. They may mock and deride, as did a man named Korihor, with these words recorded in the Book of Mormon:

“And thus ye lead away this people after the foolish traditions of your fathers, and according to your own desires; and ye keep them down, even as it were in bondage, that ye may glut yourselves with the labors of their hands, that they durst not look up with boldness, and that they durst not enjoy their rights and privileges” (Alma 30:27).

Korihor was arguing, as men and women have falsely argued from the beginning of time, that to take counsel from the servants of God is to surrender God-given rights of independence. But the argument is false because it misrepresents reality. When we reject the counsel which comes from God, we do not choose to be independent of outside influence. We choose another influence. We reject the protection of a perfectly loving, all-powerful, all-knowing Father in Heaven, whose whole purpose, as that of His Beloved Son, is to give us eternal life, to give us all that He has, and to bring us home again in families to the arms of His love. In rejecting His counsel, we choose the influence of another power, whose purpose is to make us miserable and whose motive is hatred. We have moral agency as a gift of God. Rather than the right to choose to be free of influence, it is the inalienable right to submit ourselves to whichever of those powers we choose.

Another fallacy is to believe that the choice to accept or not accept the counsel of prophets is no more than deciding whether to accept good advice and gain its benefits or to stay where we are. But the choice not to take prophetic counsel changes the very ground upon which we stand. It becomes more dangerous. The failure to take prophetic counsel lessens our power to take inspired counsel in the future. The best time to have decided to help Noah build the ark was the first time he asked. Each time he asked after that, each failure to respond would have lessened sensitivity to the Spirit. And so each time his request would have seemed more foolish, until the rain came. And then it was too late.

Every time in my life when I have chosen to delay following inspired counsel or decided that I was an exception, I came to know that I had put myself in harm’s way. Every time that I have listened to the counsel of prophets, felt it confirmed in prayer, and then followed it, I have found that I moved toward safety...

[Tuly]

Wow! and to think I'm related to Korihor. sorry.