Bravo to the reader. I thought it was a very good, concise response to some of the writer's responses that I disagreed with and thought were not representative of the Church's stance on downloading music. Additionally, I thought all the writers missed the crux issue of whether or not pirating music is even civil disobedience. The reader did a great job of pointing that out.
The issue of whether or not the Church condones civil disobedience is an incredibly interesting topic to me. I would be very interested in seeing the reader's full paper. Obviously there are some privacy issues in just giving me a name - but.... if the reader frequents this board or if an editor could contact werf on my behalf, I would be greatly appreciative.
That aside, I'd like to hear what other people think about this topic. Under what circumstances, if any, should members of the Church engage in civil disobedience? Are there any laws which have occurred in US history where a member of the Church should have engaged in civil disobedience? What about Nazi Germany - would members be justified then? What about China's one-child policy - would member be justified in protesting that by civil disobedience or outright refusal to obey? Since this is an enthralling topic to me, I'd love to hear any responses.
#51767 - Church's Stance on Civil Disobedience
Moderator: Marduk
-
vorpal blade
- Posts: 1750
- Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:08 pm
- Location: New Jersey
Re: #51767 - Church's Stance on Civil Disobedience
I agree that the reader did an excellent job in his comment.
I think that in general the Church instructs us in principles, while the Holy Ghost instructs us in practices. This is not to say that all commandments are relative, and we are free to do what we want and claim we are the exception to the rule. But it is hard to give specific answers to problems that might depend on particular circumstances.
In regard to Nazi Germany I don't think it is clear as to which, if any, laws a person at that time and in that place was morally obligated to disobey. I can't see myself operating a gas chamber, but I can imagine allowing myself to serve in the military. Each decision would have to be made after prayerful thought, and relying on the Holy Ghost. One thing I'd like to point out is that sometimes there is no good answer after we have consistently ignored the promptings of the Spirit. Perhaps people were urged by the Spirit to fight the rise of Nazism, and then felt the urge to immigrate to America. Suppose they felt such urges, but it was too inconvenient for them, or too hard, or they kept procrastinating until it was too late. If you knew you should have left Germany before things got really bad, but you ignored those promptings, how can you expect to find a satisfactory answer to following moral dilemmas? As another example, once you've decided to risk sex before marriage, and you get pregnant, you may find no good options left to you.
I don't know what I would do if I was born in China and forced to follow the one-child policy. I believe the children of Israel rejected a similar policy when they were slaves in Egypt, and Moses was born. I'd seek divine guidance.
In our Church history the courts ruled that a man could not cohabitate with more than one woman. This made it illegal for a man to practice polygamy. At first the Church practiced a form of civil disobedience until the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Federal law. Some of my ancestors answered the demands of the law by moving to Mexico. Others evaded the marshals. I don't know if there was a single right thing to do, except refrain from entering into any new polygamous relationships, but even then they were disobeying the law if they continued to provide for their wives. Again, I'd say pray for guidance.
I think that in general the Church instructs us in principles, while the Holy Ghost instructs us in practices. This is not to say that all commandments are relative, and we are free to do what we want and claim we are the exception to the rule. But it is hard to give specific answers to problems that might depend on particular circumstances.
In regard to Nazi Germany I don't think it is clear as to which, if any, laws a person at that time and in that place was morally obligated to disobey. I can't see myself operating a gas chamber, but I can imagine allowing myself to serve in the military. Each decision would have to be made after prayerful thought, and relying on the Holy Ghost. One thing I'd like to point out is that sometimes there is no good answer after we have consistently ignored the promptings of the Spirit. Perhaps people were urged by the Spirit to fight the rise of Nazism, and then felt the urge to immigrate to America. Suppose they felt such urges, but it was too inconvenient for them, or too hard, or they kept procrastinating until it was too late. If you knew you should have left Germany before things got really bad, but you ignored those promptings, how can you expect to find a satisfactory answer to following moral dilemmas? As another example, once you've decided to risk sex before marriage, and you get pregnant, you may find no good options left to you.
I don't know what I would do if I was born in China and forced to follow the one-child policy. I believe the children of Israel rejected a similar policy when they were slaves in Egypt, and Moses was born. I'd seek divine guidance.
In our Church history the courts ruled that a man could not cohabitate with more than one woman. This made it illegal for a man to practice polygamy. At first the Church practiced a form of civil disobedience until the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Federal law. Some of my ancestors answered the demands of the law by moving to Mexico. Others evaded the marshals. I don't know if there was a single right thing to do, except refrain from entering into any new polygamous relationships, but even then they were disobeying the law if they continued to provide for their wives. Again, I'd say pray for guidance.
-
Waldorf and Sauron
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 3:37 pm
I have to apologize for talking past the readers. I couldn't understand WHY everybody thought the whole question was about music piracy specifically when I thought it was about copyright law in general, like these kinds of ridiculous restrictions. It was only after reading toni's question for the umpteenth time, where he asks "Is there a moral difference between, say, Henry David Thoreau's civil disobedience or Gandhi's or Martin Luther King Jr.'s peaceful protests, and downloading free music?" that I realized I had been parsing the "say" part wrong; I had read it as downloading music as just an example of the greater issue of copyright disobedience, whereas all the readers and commenters had seen that as the entire issue in itself.
I hope that explains where my answers were coming from, especially my continued insistence "We're not talking just about downloading free music" and "We have NEVER advocated simply downloading or copying any music you want and keeping it." My comments were NOT meant as justification for stealing music, but rather a tirade against the current state of copyright law IN GENERAL. That I missed the point of the question is my bad.
Thanks,
Sauron
I hope that explains where my answers were coming from, especially my continued insistence "We're not talking just about downloading free music" and "We have NEVER advocated simply downloading or copying any music you want and keeping it." My comments were NOT meant as justification for stealing music, but rather a tirade against the current state of copyright law IN GENERAL. That I missed the point of the question is my bad.
Thanks,
Sauron
i thought the commenter was pretty far out there when claiming that civil disobedience is only acceptable if keeping the law would force someone to break a commandment. one of the most important events leading up to the restoration of the church, the american revolution, started as civil disobedience against something (excessive taxation) that didn't force the breaking of any commandments that i know of (despite what some right wingers might proclaim in fast and testimony meeting).
-
Fredjikrang
- Never Coming Back?
- Posts: 2031
- Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:59 am
- Location: Provo, UT
- Contact:
True, but I think that as Americans, we tend to think of it that way, since unless it is forcing you to break a commandment, it is probably a lot better to work through the appropriate legal channels instead of resorting to civil disobedience.
[img]http://fredjikrang.petfish.net/Fence-banner.png[/img]
I'm with Bismark on this one which is also why I was hoping to be able to read that reader's paper (I enjoy seeing arguments for the other side). For instance, I think the civil disobedience that occurred during the civil rights movement would be justified and not condemned by the Church. I think that so long as it is true civil disobedience - that is to say, non-violent and with the purpose of bringing about a change in the legal structure - there are many instances where civil disobedience would not result in any action by the Church and would be morally justified before the Lord.