Mormon Discussion’s podcast production is certainly not connected to The Mormon Church aka The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It also is most assuredly not approved or endorsed by Intellectual Reserve, Inc or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Any of the awesome content or the solid opinions expressed, implied or included in Mormon Discussion Inc’s awesome podcast lineup and production are solely those of Mormon Discussion Inc. and/or its program hosts and not those of Intellectual Reserve, Inc. or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Mormon Discussion Inc is a 501(c)(3) and is in the arena of journalistic work and is part of a free press. A free press is fundamental to a democratic society. It seeks out and circulates news, information, ideas, comment and opinion and holds those in authority to account. The press provides the platform for a multiplicity of voices to be heard. At national, regional and local level, it is the public’s watchdog, activist and guardian as well as educator, entertainer and contemporary chronicler. Under the “fair use” defense, however, another author may make limited use of the original author’s work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism.
The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner’s exclusive rights.
Subject to some general limitations discussed later in this article, the following types of uses are usually deemed fair uses:
- Criticism and commentary: for example, quoting or excerpting a work in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment. A book reviewer would be permitted to quote passages from a book in a newspaper column, for example, as part of an examination of the book.
- News reporting: such as summarizing an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report. A journalist would be permitted to quote from a political speech’s text without the politician’s permission.
- Research and scholarship: perhaps quoting a short passage in a scholarly, scientific, or technical work for illustration or clarification of the author’s observations. An art historian would be able to use an image of a painting in an academic article that analyzes the painting.
- Nonprofit educational uses: for example, when teachers photocopy limited portions of written works for classroom use. An English teacher would be permitted to copy a few pages of a book to show to the class as part of a lesson plan.
- Parody: that is, a work that ridicules another, usually well-known, work by imitating it in a comic way. A comedian could quote from a movie star’s speech in order to make fun of that star.
Yes a “brilliant ” legal brief. Too bad it will be totally wasted on, and uncomprended by, the sheeple. Mormons are brainwashed to accept anything , no matter how ridiculous, as fact if it’s presented by a leader. This talk was totally unnecessary except for Dallin’s hubris and ego. And in the future when they do change their doctrine-again- this talk will get pushed down the memory hole just like everything in the Journal of Discourses. Really facts don’t mean anything to Mormons . They just love going to church to get an echo chamber for their bigoted views.
Throughout its history, the Church has gotten it wrong about “The Gays” EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. Why should this time be any different?
Here is a link to a 2014 article about the Liahona Children’s Foundation Bill brought up. https://ldsmag.com/article-1-14590-2/
It unintentionally exposes the deep hypocrisy of the church in my opinion. More “do as we say and not as we do” type of stuff. God bless the good Christian men and women who run the foundation.
First of all, I love your podcasts!! I have listened to every one. I love your logic, your thought process, and your humor. Thanks so much for your work.
My only suggestion on this topic is that it would be good to have someone who is gay in on the conversation on gay topics. I think there are many nuances that you miss as straight men that would add value for your listeners.
One of the most glaring things from Oak’s talk is the smearing of lines between what he says and what he alleged God said. I also detest the use of “we” (not royal we) in his comments. It all connotes “stay in the boat”, and it does it in a way to persuade more on an emotional level than anything else.
Yeh, there is a move happening to enthrone the Proclamation as doctrine, circumventing the scripturally prescribed canonization formula.
Bill and RFM…you both mentioned that Oak’s intent is to NOT follow scripture, but to follow him. I remember something pushed REALLY hard by Joseph Fielding Smith years ago to the effect that if it wasn’t in the scriptures, it wasn’t of God.
Its a 180 degree TURN what is happening now!
RFM…your podcast “Making Doctrine out of Nothing at All” was priceless. I even think I am starting to like Air Supply now. 🙂
Excellent! I love it when both of you co-host a podcast and look forward to more like this in the future. As who has gone through the gay LDS “Gauntlet” (born into 7th generation ultra orthodox family, served faithfully in every position, served honorable mission, married in the temple had children, came out in late 80’s, got exed, went through counseling, eventually divorced wife etc.) nothing gave me greater satisfaction than when my adult son and I got together over Skype a few years back (my husband and I live over seas) and torched Oaks’ beloved legal brief, “A Proclamation” given to me by my parents. It was truly liberating!
Keep up the good fight gentlemen.