KevinG Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 A good idea for rating movies:http://www.kids-in-mind.com/Expecially for those of us who know our tolerance for temptation when it comes to sex and nudity vs. gore and violence vs. profanity...
Rivers Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 I believe the counsel is to exercise good judgment and let the Spirit be your guide. The MPAA is a tool to help us, but not the sole determining factor.Sometimes the Spirit might prompt us to not see a PG or PG-13 movie. My personal opinion is that not seeing R-rated movies is generally a good idea, but there is no hard-and-fast rule. A website I would highly recommend is screenit.com. They tell you every possible objectionable part of every movie that comes out. Even down to the number of each swear word. It is extremely helpful. Unfortunately it is a service that you have to subscribe to. I think its only 25 dollars a year though. It used to be free.
Senator Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 That is exactly correct. And do you wish to publicly rationalize taking the world up on its offer to educate you?Absolutely! God's fingerprints are scattered all over this here world. Can you please be more explicit with this statement? What exact behavior are you condemning, and who is performing it?I'll go ahead and retract my last statement in that post. I have to remind myself that everyone is simply expressing their opinions regarding their own personal standards. It just comes off sounding preachy at times.
cinepro Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) I use the word rule because Card did quote President Ezra Taft Benson to say "Don't see R-rated movies or vulgar videos or participate in any entertainment that is immoral, suggestive, or pornographic." That is a prophet of God saying don't. I think he should have said do not, but beyond that I do not question the rule.I have a question for those who feel that President Benson's counsel to the young men applies to all LDS, of every age, and should be taken as a commandment (with 100% obedience).A few paragraphs later in that same talk, President Benson counsels thusly:Our Heavenly Father wants you to date young women who are faithful members of the Church, who encourage you to serve a full-time mission and to magnify your priesthood.Do you also feel that young men should only date faithful members of the Church with 100% exactitude? (And, presumably, that young women should only date LDS young men with no exceptions?)And this commandment also applies to the young single adults and single adults in the Church with no exceptions?I have met some LDS who had such standards for dating, but it seems to not be a common thing. But based on the statements made by some in this thread, it should be as common as LDS not seeing Rated R movies. Edited December 1, 2011 by cinepro
Nominee Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) Do you also feel that young men should only date faithful members of the Church with 100% exactitude? (And, presumably, that young women should only date LDS young men with no exceptions?)I feel that our Heavenly Father wants us to date young men or women that are faithful members of the church. I find language to be a beautiful thing... This statement tells us what Heavenly Father wants for us. Heavenly Father wants a lot of things for us but Heavenly Father gives us free agency. The prophet did not say DON'T date young men and women that are not faithful members of the church. IMO, It should not be so difficult to see that the two statements do not mean the same thing nor do they carry the same purpose.edit: I should add, in case it helps to understand my view, that I agree with my Heavenly Father and pray that my children find an eternal companion that can go to the Temple with them and be a support to one another in all the ways that being with a church member would make possible. I do not tell my children who they may like, I PRAY for them to be wise in their choices, to stay close to their Saviour and God. I teach them what I know and tell them what I want for them. Edited December 1, 2011 by Nominee
cinepro Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) The prophet did not say DON'T date young men and women that are not faithful members of the church. IMO, It should not be so difficult to see that the two statements do not mean the same thing nor do they carry the same purpose.So you're saying that if the Prophet stands in Conference and says "God wants you to do this:", it's not a commandment?But when he prefaces his remark with "We counsel you....", it is a commandment? Edited December 1, 2011 by cinepro
Nominee Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) So you're saying that if the Prophet stands in Conference and says "God wants you to do this:", it's not a commandment?Unlike your previous question with talk attached, I find it impossible to answer this question properly because there is no context. Seems like a set up to me... way to0 broad.edit:Even if I did attempt to answer this question, it would only be IMHO. Edited December 1, 2011 by Nominee
cinepro Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 Unlike your previous question with talk attached, I find it impossible to answer this question properly because there is no context. Seems like a set up to me... way to0 broad.No, he says:[God] wants you to date young women who are faithful members of the Church, who encourage you to serve a full-time mission and to magnify your priesthood.We counsel you, young men, not to pollute your minds with such degrading matter, for the mind through which this filth passes is never the same afterwards. Don’t see R-rated movies or vulgar videos or participate in any entertainment that is immoral, suggestive, or pornographic.One is "God wants you to..." and the other is "We counsel you..."I'm just curious if there is an LDS trend I'm not aware of for youth to not date anyone who isn't a faithful member of the Church that is similar to the trend of LDS thinking nobody should watch Rated R movies, and if not, why not?
Jaybear Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 In my view, that idea is totally wrong.In my view, we get to follow a prophet and keep trash out of our minds.I guess it depends on how you want to look at it.Its sounds like you completely agree with the advice/commandment to avoid R rated movies. If so, then it shouldn't matter whether the advice come from your a prophet, your mother or a friend. Good advice is good advice.Let me know what you decide to do when your are given what you perceive to be bad advice/comandment from your Prophet. BTW, your mistake to see Seven. If you feel the need to dip your toe in the cesspool again, I would suggest Pulp Fiction. Unlike Saving Private Ryan and Schindler's List, there is no redeeming social value to that movie to rationalize making an exception. Its just a great movie.
Nominee Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 No, he says:One is "God wants you to..." and the other is "We counsel you..."I'm just curious if there is an LDS trend I'm not aware of for youth to not date anyone who isn't a faithful member of the Church that is similar to the trend of LDS thinking nobody should watch Rated R movies, and if not, why not?Hmmm. I don't think you're "just curious" but still I cannot tell you whether or not there is any trend. I do not keep up with trends as well as some may think I should. But as far as this specific talk goes, I do not read the words "We counsel you" and the words "Don't see R-rated movies" in the same sentence. What he counsels us on and what he says don't do are not the same.
cinepro Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 Hmmm. I don't think you're "just curious" but still I cannot tell you whether or not there is any trend. I do not keep up with trends as well as some may think I should. But as far as this specific talk goes, I do not read the words "We counsel you" and the words "Don't see R-rated movies" in the same sentence. What he counsels us on and what he says don't do are not the same.It seems to make more sense that the sentences following "We counsel you..." in the same paragraph would also be part of that "counsel". It would be odd to specify something as "counsel", and then in the next sentence shift to "God-given commandment" with no indicator that you were doing so. But that's just how I read it.
mfbukowski Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) Let me know what you decide to do when your are given what you perceive to be bad advice/comandment from your Prophet.If I prayed about it and decided it was bad advice, I would not do it. My conscience and personal revelation always comes first. If that was not true, I would not have found the church in the first place.I have converted once, I would do it again if the spirit prompted me to do so.But at this point I can't imagine that happening. Edited December 1, 2011 by mfbukowski
Nominee Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 It seems to make more sense that the sentences following "We counsel you..." in the same paragraph would also be part of that "counsel". It would be odd to specify something as "counsel", and then in the next sentence shift to "God-given commandment" with no indicator that you were doing so. But that's just how I read it.It is syntax. Or grammar. It may be odd to specify something as "counsel" and then in the next sentence shift to "God-given commandment" with no indicator that you were doing so. But that isn't what I said and it is not what I see happening here. I see the counsel and the don't to be two individuals that are related by the paragraph.The construction of the sentences say so.
cinepro Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) The issue is obedience for its own sake. No I am not saying "blind obedience"- I am saying "obedience for its own sake".There is much to be learned from obedience in small matters when we have covenanted to do so. I don't know about others, but I have covenanted to obey the prophet and develop my own testimony of each principle by doing so. My wife and I are film buffs to some extent, but we have decided not to go to R rated movies for no "better" reason than the prophet has asked us not to. And it is such a small thing, I am certain that our lives have been blessed for that obedience.I think the problem isn't some people being obedient, and some other people being disobedient.The problem is that some people think God wants them to not do something, so they they don't do it, and some other people think God doesn't not want them to do something, so they don't automatically not do it.We can discuss the different reasons for thinking God wants us to not do something, but that isn't the same as discussing obedience, and that doesn't make one person more "obedient" than another. It just means that different people have different standards for judging whether or not God does or doesn't want them to do something.I suppose there may be LDS who firmly believe that God doesn't want them to watch any Rated R movies and they choose to do so anyway, but that doesn't seem to be the case for the majority of R-movie watching LDS I've known. They honestly don't seem to believe God judges movies based on their MPAA rating. Edited December 1, 2011 by cinepro
Log Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) Absolutely! God's fingerprints are scattered all over this here world.It appears he rather disagrees, in context. And verse 27, in this context ... well. Let them who have ears to hear, hear. Edited December 1, 2011 by Log
Senator Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 It appears he rather disagrees, in context. And verse 27, in this context ... well. Let them who have ears to hear, hear.Yes, context if key.Am I to take it you are anti-education outside of a spiritual venue?
KevinG Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 When it comes to consequences the difference between counsel and commandment is ultimately very slim."When obedience ceases to be an irritant and becomes our quest, in that moment God will endow us with power." - President Ezra Taft Benson
cinepro Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) When it comes to consequences the difference between counsel and commandment is ultimately very slim."When obedience ceases to be an irritant and becomes our quest, in that moment God will endow us with power." - President Ezra Taft BensonIt seems President Eyring would agree with you: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 either consider it 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.I'm pretty sure he was just expressing his fallible personal opinion though. Edited December 1, 2011 by cinepro
KevinG Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 Don't confuse obedience to God with obedience to men. That is a trap of a different kind. There is the third alternative of prayerfully considering counsel and receiving confirmation from the Holy Ghost. I (and brother Brigham) find this to be the safest course.Counsel can come from parents, Bishops, Presidents or directly from the Holy Ghost.
Cobalt-70 Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 I use the word rule because Card did quote President Ezra Taft Benson to say "Don't see R-rated movies or vulgar videos or participate in any entertainment that is immoral, suggestive, or pornographic." That is a prophet of God saying don't.But who did he say it to? If you were among his intended audience, then you ought to pay attention. But there is a reason that the MPAA rates movies on the basis of the maturity, rather than the morality of the viewer.
Cobalt-70 Posted December 1, 2011 Posted December 1, 2011 On the other hand, if you know before what is in the movie, why bother to see it?There will always be surprises. That's why you have to do your research before going to see the movie. Some movies are trashy and soul-draining, and not always because they are crass. In my view, a poignant, violent morality play like Unforgiven, or a film about human worth and love in the face of seedy urban decay like Midnight Cowboy, is far more edifying than insipid PG-rated trash like Howard the Duck, which truly destroys the soul.
KevinG Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 I argue that the Housewives of New Jersay destroys the soul but my daughters won't follow my counsel.
Nominee Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 But who did he say it to? If you were among his intended audience, then you ought to pay attention. But there is a reason that the MPAA rates movies on the basis of the maturity, rather than the morality of the viewer.Read post #116
altersteve Posted December 2, 2011 Author Posted December 2, 2011 (edited) I disagree in watching TV altogether and DO NOT let my kids watch TV or movies either. It's all evil. Mormons shouldn't watch TV IMO.Then I guess no one who doesn't have a radio or access to the internet can listen to the prophets and apostles during General Conference. Edited December 2, 2011 by altersteve
Log Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 But who did he say it to?It doesn't matter, in this context.
Recommended Posts