that's a good question...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?
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.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 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?)
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: Are you being sarcastic in calling Orson Scott Card "great"? I respect his view; ergo if you disrespect his you must also disrespect mine.
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).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?
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.