Deadpool

[Lost Boy]

1 minute ago, unixknight said:

 

“He who takes offense when offense was not intended is a fool, yet he who takes offense when offense is intended is an even greater fool for he has succumbed to the will of his adversary.”

― Brigham Young

I'm not offended, because I choose not to give that power to the makers of Deadpool movies.  And my relationship with Christ is fine, thanks.

Exactly.  You recognize that some moron wanted to get a reaction from creating an offensive piece.  You get to choose how to react.  I am with you, this guy at the most gets a "whatever dude"  

Life is too short to let other morons control your actions.

[Vort]

31 minutes ago, unixknight said:

“He who takes offense when offense was not intended is a fool, yet he who takes offense when offense is intended is an even greater fool for he has succumbed to the will of his adversary.”

― Brigham Young

I'm not offended, because I choose not to give that power to the makers of Deadpool movies.  And my relationship with Christ is fine, thanks.

I see a large difference between taking offense and recognizing offense. The poster is patently offensive; substitute Mohammed for Jesus Christ and decide for yourself how many would die in the rioting. I need not take personal offense to recognize boorishness and rude behavior.

Consider that God takes offense. Our prophet told us that Jesus Christ is offended when we misuse the name of his Church. If God himself can and does take offense at the innocent mischaracterization of his Church, which may have been intended as insult in the first instance but certainly is rarely intended so today, then I don't see that it's necessarily some great breach of integrity if we take offense at that which is offensive.

[unixknight]

2 minutes ago, Vort said:

I see a large difference between taking offense and recognizing offense. The poster is patently offensive; substitute Mohammed for Jesus Christ and decide for yourself how many would die in the rioting. I need not take personal offense to recognize boorishness and rude behavior.

Consider that God takes offense. Our prophet told us that Jesus Christ is offended when we misuse the name of his Church. If God himself can and does take offense at the innocent mischaracterization of his Church, which may have been intended as insult in the first instance but certainly is rarely intended so today, then I don't see that it's necessarily some great breach of integrity if we take offense at that which is offensive.

Well of course one can recognize that the poster is intended to get a rise out of people.  Call it offensive, I never said it wasn't.  What I CAN do, is control my emotional response to it.  I'm not going to let some movie company control my reactions to an asinine poster advertising for an asinine character.  If they want to troll us, let them.  I'm sticking to what Brigham Young said.

If God is offended, He will deal with them.  

[The Folk Prophet]

19 minutes ago, Lost Boy said:

Yes, it is offensive.  Doesn't mean you have to be offended by it.

In my thinking finding something offensive is the definition of being offended. I agree we don't always need to act on the offense. I don't agree that not acting on offenses is the de facto correct course in these matters.

[Vort]

9 minutes ago, unixknight said:

Well of course one can recognize that the poster is intended to get a rise out of people.  Call it offensive, I never said it wasn't.  What I CAN do, is control my emotional response to it.  I'm not going to let some movie company control my reactions to an asinine poster advertising for an asinine character.  If they want to troll us, let them.  I'm sticking to what Brigham Young said.

If God is offended, He will deal with them.  

I don't disagree. But TFP's answer, to which you were responding, is still valid. People take offense because the poster is offensive. Perhaps they shouldn't take offense, but it's hardly unreasonable for them to do so. The reason they take offense is perfectly obvious. We should not act surprised that Christians (even Latter-day Saints) take offense at that which is offensive. We should turn the other cheek, but we should not be surprised that Brother Jones got irate when someone slapped him or act like it's some strange phenomenon that betokens a special lack of moral or intellectual development.

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, unixknight said:

 

“He who takes offense when offense was not intended is a fool, yet he who takes offense when offense is intended is an even greater fool for he has succumbed to the will of his adversary.”

― Brigham Young

I guess Brigham Young would have considered Spencer W Kimball a fool for asking people to not use the name of Jesus in vain in front of him. 

 This Brigham Young homespun quote strikes me as having similar value to other homespun style axioms. There may be some basic wisdom therein, but not much depth or nuance. 

[The Folk Prophet]

40 minutes ago, Vort said:

I see a large difference between taking offense and recognizing offense. The poster is patently offensive; substitute Mohammed for Jesus Christ and decide for yourself how many would die in the rioting. I need not take personal offense to recognize boorishness and rude behavior.

Consider that God takes offense. Our prophet told us that Jesus Christ is offended when we misuse the name of his Church. If God himself can and does take offense at the innocent mischaracterization of his Church, which may have been intended as insult in the first instance but certainly is rarely intended so today, then I don't see that it's necessarily some great breach of integrity if we take offense at that which is offensive.

Moreover in that we are meant to strive to be as God and Christ are, follow their example etc., it follows that we should take offense in the manner that They would and do. 

[Guest Scott]

Quote

This does show a double standard though.

Get used to it.  Just about everyone has double standards.

Although it is less common now; LDS themed entertainment, until only a few years ago used to make fun of a lot of groups. I don't mean the Church itself did this, but entertainers, media companies, writers, playwrights, etc. that make entertainment geared towards LDS audiences.  

Quote

But it's still best to ignore it. 

Yes.

Besides, we (according to church counsel) shouldn't even go to  movies like Deadpool anyway.  

[Guest Scott]

12 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I guess Brigham Young would have considered Spencer W Kimball a fool for asking people to not use the name of Jesus in vain in front of him. 

I assume he didn't threaten to sue them or start a petition though.  There is nothing wrong with simply asking someone to not do it.  In the case of Spencer W Kimball, he simply asked them not to do it around him, but they could only comply voluntarily if they wanted to of their own free will.   Hopefully, the request made a positive impression on the people who were asked.

The same wouldn't be true of the people making Deadpool though.  

12 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

 This Brigham Young homespun quote strikes me as having similar value to other homespun style axioms. There may be some basic wisdom therein, but not much depth or nuance. 

I disagree.  That Brigham Young quote has a lot of depth in it.  In fact, it was the best quote in this thread, in my opinion.  

[The Folk Prophet]

1 minute ago, Scott said:

I assume he didn't threaten to sue them or start a petition though.

Because he wasn't a moron. 

[unixknight]

44 minutes ago, Vort said:

... we should not be surprised that Brother Jones got irate when someone slapped him or act like it's some strange phenomenon that betokens a special lack of moral or intellectual development.

I never said we should.  By the same token, to call someone's relationship with Christ into question just because they don't get worked up is out of bounds.  That was my point, and I backed it  up with a quote from a Prophet.

[unixknight]

29 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I guess Brigham Young would have considered Spencer W Kimball a fool for asking people to not use the name of Jesus in vain in front of him.

Not exactly the same thing.  Asking someone to refrain from blasphemy as an act of courtesy doesn't exactly rise to the level of having an attack of the vapours over an offensive image.

[The Folk Prophet]

7 minutes ago, unixknight said:

By the same token, to call someone's relationship with Christ into question just because they don't get worked up is out of bounds.

It all depends on what one means by "get worked up" now, doesn't it?

[Vort]

15 minutes ago, unixknight said:

Not exactly the same thing.  Asking someone to refrain from blasphemy as an act of courtesy doesn't exactly rise to the level of having an attack of the vapours over an offensive image.

Hmmm. I understand that there is a difference, but I'm not convinced it's meaningful. Do you really believe that a blasphemous poster mocking Christ is somehow less offensive to the Spirit (or less a violation of God's will and commandments) than uttering his name as a profane oath? I doubt God gets overly worked up about either thing*, but such things surely offend the Spirit. If President Kimball (or by extension, you or I) can reasonably voice objection at profaning God's sacred name, why might we be considered less reasonable when voicing objection to a patently offensive, profane poster?

*FWIW, and though I hesitate even to bring up the topic...this is how I feel when I hear people talk about how our heavenly Father has withheld our Mother's name from us because it would invite profanity of her name, which would offend her, and (we may suppose) the Father would get soooooooooo worked up over it that he might lose control and smite us. I mean, come on. If we suppose we have a heavenly Mother who is a fit consort for God himself, just as Eve was a fit helper ("an help meet") for Adam, then we must ascribe to the Mother infinite power, dominion, might, majesty, knowledge, and a perfection of every virtue from love to patience to forebearance. The mere image of such an all-powerful Being just dissolving in tears at the hurt of hearing her mortal, veiled, foolish children profaning her name is so utterly absurd as to defy analysis beyond, "You must be kidding."

Besides, if we want to profane the heavenly Mother, it's exactly as easy as profaning the Father. We don't need a personal "name" for the Mother any more than we do for the "Father"—which we do not have, if such a thing even exists. "Elohim" is a sacred term we use as a name, but it's clearly a placeholder and a title, simply a Hebrew term meaning "Gods".

Edited December 15, 2018 by Vort

[The Folk Prophet]

7 minutes ago, unixknight said:

having an attack of the vapours 

Is this what I said we should be doing?

Maybe...just maybe...you're reading things into what isn't actually being said.

[unixknight]

6 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

It all depends on what one means by "get worked up" now, doesn't it?

Well obviously it's somewhere between a murderous rage and simply shrugging one's shoulders and saying "meh."  You seem to take issue with the latter, so why don't you tell me what you feel is an appropriate level of offence that demonstrates one's closeness to Christ to your satisfaction?

3 minutes ago, Vort said:

Hmmm. Do you really believe that a blasphemous poster mocking Christ is somehow less offensive to the Spirit (or less a violation of God's will and commandments) than uttering his name as a profane oath? I doubt God gets overly worked up about either thing*, but such things surely offend the Spirit. If President Kimball (or by extension, you or I) can reasonably voice objection at profaning God's sacred name, why might we be considered less reasonable when voicing objection to a patently offensive, profane poster?

Never said that either.  Voice all the objection you wan't.  I don't think it's a wise idea to draw a ton of attention to it, nor do I think it wise to give the makers of the poster power to affect my emotional state, but hey, if you feel it's the right move knock yourself out.

I just don't understand why you guys seem so invested in getting me to be as outraged as you appear to be over it.  That poster is just one of about a billion other anti-Christian trolling to come out of Hollywood every year.  Shall we launch a protest over each one?

 

[unixknight]

4 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Is this what I said we should be doing?

Maybe...just maybe...you're reading things into what isn't actually being said.

That's called hyperbole. 

In any case, I'm feeling the same way, bro.  I keep repeating "that isn't what I said" and it's getting a bit old.

[Guest MormonGator]

12 minutes ago, unixknight said:

Well obviously it's somewhere between a murderous rage

I think some people are more sympathetic to the Islamic response of protesting-and what the heck, let's throw in murderous violence-when their religion is mocked. 

Edited December 15, 2018 by MormonGator

[The Folk Prophet]

18 minutes ago, unixknight said:

Well obviously it's somewhere between a murderous rage and simply shrugging one's shoulders and saying "meh."  You seem to take issue with the latter, so why don't you tell me what you feel is an appropriate level of offence that demonstrates one's closeness to Christ to your satisfaction?

Let me try and explain it another way.

Do you have anyone you love in this life? Wife? Children? Parents?

How would you feel if something happened to them that was exceedingly cruel and mocking? Would you feel "meh". Whatever. Taking offense is a fool's errand. Or would it upset you on some level?

If someone were to cruelly mock my wife or children I would be upset. I would hope any man would feel the same.

How much more do I love my God and Savior? How much more should I?

Seeing Him mocked is hurtful.

I claim that if someone feels absolutely nothing in similar regard for someone they supposedly love dearly who is cruelly mocked, maybe there's something wrong there. It is offensive. It offends me. It should offend anyone who has taken His name upon them.

As to what should be done, I have little advice. What I do believe, sadly, is that a great many people who do, supposedly, dearly love their Lord and Savior will go and see this movie, dumping more coin into the coffers of those who profane him so cruelly, essentially saying, "Thank you sir! May I have another?!"

Edited December 15, 2018 by The Folk Prophet

[The Folk Prophet]

12 minutes ago, unixknight said:

That's called hyperbole. 

Sorry. You've lost me. I have no idea what you're getting at. I think you're reading something more into what I said than I actually said and I'm making efforts to clarify and you think it's hyperbole? Or are you saying you used hyperbole?

14 minutes ago, unixknight said:

In any case, I'm feeling the same way, bro.  I keep repeating "that isn't what I said" and it's getting a bit old.

You seem to be conflating the conversation you're having with Vort with the one you're having with me.

[Backroads]

9 hours ago, MormonGator said:

This does show a double standard though. Would Marvel have done something that shows Deadpool poking fun at a gay pride parade? Maybe a famous picture of a feminist protest? No way. You can only make fun of Christians. 

But it's still best to ignore it. 

According to Husband, Deadpool has made fun of and will make fun of everyone and everyone.

Marvel marketing on the other hand isn't so judicious...

I am not offended by the poster because I don't want to put forth the effort. I said my piece elsewhere I did find it offensive and left it at that.

[Guest MormonGator]

Just now, Backroads said:

According to Husband, Deadpool has made fun of and will make fun of everyone and everyone.

As a comic book fan for over thirty years (and not just the movies, the actual comics) husband is correct. 

[Backroads]

4 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

As a comic book fan for over thirty years (and not just the movies, the actual comics) husband is correct. 

Husband only reads a select few, Deadpool included. I just know random obscure tidbits I gleaned from my older cousin during childhood.

[Guest MormonGator]

2 minutes ago, Backroads said:

Husband only reads a select few, Deadpool included. I just know random obscure tidbits I gleaned from my older cousin during childhood.

Next time you are in Florida, let me know. My latest place of worship is my local comic book store. 😉

[Vort]

27 minutes ago, unixknight said:

I just don't understand why you guys seem so invested in getting me to be as outraged as you appear to be over it.

I am genuinely confused as to what you think I said or did to indicate I was outraged or that I am trying to convert you to my holy jihad. I was simply discussing the point that was raised.