Just how bad is it to post a link to the temple video

[Guest]

and then take it down?

If the church doesn't want links to the temple video, why doesn't it just exercise its copyright to the voice overs and the visuals in the film and have it taken down?

Why shoot the guy at the bottom of the totem pole who has already taken his link down?

The church has a lot of power, but instead of dealing with the blow back from it scrubbing the web of the temple video, which it could easily do,

it beats up on the little guy.

Should the church go after the practicing Mormons who post here, after all, there's a link to the temple video on this site?

God I hate institutional behavior.

[_Mary]

Temple content is all over wikipedia also. Perhaps it is a PR thing. People might understand excommunication for that offence, where they wouldn't understand it for writing an honest appraisal of church history. John Dehlin didn't publish his interview with Tom Philips so I guess there is a greater awareness that the church will go after people on the temple subject rather than anything else. I put it down to PR.

[_lulu]

Temple content is all over wikipedia also. Perhaps it is a PR thing. People might understand excommunication for that offence, where they wouldn't understand it for writing an honest appraisal of church history. John Dehlin didn't publish his interview with Tom Philips so I guess there is a greater awareness that the church will go after people on the temple subject rather than anything else. I put it down to PR.

So some poor shmo, who's attended church twice, is trying to work out his religious life, has a ton of bricks coming down on his, and his family's, head, because that's what suits the church's PR purposes.

Good God.

[_Mary]

So some poor shmo, who's attended church twice, is trying to work out his religious life, has a ton of bricks coming down on his, and his family's, head, because that's what suits the church's PR purposes.

Good God.

Seems that way, but I suppose the cynic would say David has brought this on himself by revealing his identity, and the even more cynical would say that he planned it. Not saying I believe that, I have no idea.

[_lulu]

So some poor shmo, who's attended church twice, is trying to work out his religious life, has a ton of bricks coming down on his, and his family's, head, because that's what suits the church's PR purposes.

Good God.

Seems that way, but I suppose the cynic would say David has brought this on himself by revealing his identity, and the even more cynical would say that he planned it. Not saying I believe that, I have no idea.

Whatever he thought he was doing, he's getting alot more crap than he deserves.

[_Mary]

Whatever he thought he was doing, he's getting a lot more s*** than he deserves.

Yeah, have you seen his blog today. War Worn. Pretty difficult when you are going against a very big, very rich corporation.

http://mormonthinkblog2012.blogspot.co.uk/

[_LDS truthseeker]

The church can make anything you do, that they don't approve of, look like you are the spawn of Satan. Trust me, I know.

[_why me]

Yeah, have you seen his blog today. War Worn. Pretty difficult when you are going against a very big, very rich corporation.

http://mormonthinkblog2012.blogspot.co.uk/

Now mary, as you know the church considers the temple ceremony sacred and private. Not to be spread by mouth or by internet. If a member posts such a video they have broken a promise. And they know it. Those are the rules. And it has nothing to do with a rich corporation. Just a policy. The church could have 7 members and the same would happen.

We all must accept the consequences if we break the rules. But posting a victim post does not really help. But it does get some sympathy from the exlds crowd and from the professional critics of the LDS church.

[_Nomomo]

Temple content is not copyrighted.

[_lulu]

Temple content is not copyrighted.

It's OK to post this on the internet

http://www.william-shakespeare.information/scr ... venice.htm

Its NOT OK to post all of this to youtube. Not even the copy you made at the movie theatre with your hidden digital camera

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379889/

See the difference?