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.
Bill, you referenced a guy named “Pasco Wellington”. Did I get the name right? I tried to find the name and came up short.
Fake Facebook profile. Once he was caught it was deleted.
Well, I learned that Mormonism is nothing close to Scientology although perhaps the Mormonism of the past was more similar that present day.
The church is quite different to what we complain about it in podcasts. In the podcast we deal with the extreme cases. Daily church experience tends to reside on the mellow non controversial side.
Although, I admit that living under the TBM paradigm can be stressful, but I find that most active members never really are or were TBM’s to begin with. Those of us who were, can be quite traumatized or bless by the Mormonism paradigm depending to the degree in which you fitted the mold.
Mormonism is changing though, it wants to become mainstream Christian, which I find less appealing. Christian churches are not doing any better, I’m not sure why we look up to them for answers at times.
Interesting podcast. I found the corrolaries to be a bit of a reach. Like comparing a Koala and a Kodiac.
Bill, I very much enjoy the discussion that you are helping to bring forward. So please don’t be offended by my following question.
I first found your podcast by listening to a Mormon stories interview that you did and found it very interesting. In that interview, you spoke several times of your podcast that specifically called out Jeffrey Holland for self/church/narrative serving lies.
Also in the podcast, you were asked a question about tithing (I’m sure you recall…gross, net or surplus). Your response was straightforward that you believe the law of tithing was a requirement to pay 10% of your surplus. And as we all know, that is very different than gross. That was the understanding and belief that lead you to sit across from your bishop for years and claim a full tithe.
In this podcast, in an effort to support the narrative of the significant the financial contribution was that Mormons make to their church, you state unequivocally that tithing is 10% of their gross income.
My question: how is that any different at all from what Jeffrey Holland did?
Thanks and appreciate your time,
Rich
because I think the Church hopes it members interpret tithing as 10% gross and they certainly teach it in a way that leads a member to think that. hence I see myself as being honest to mormonism