Yes. I changed it. Slip of the keys...

do you know anyone who totally adheres to the manual? I mean that don't add or take away from it at all?

This would be the reason why many conservatives in the UPC felt that the org was going downhill.

There are things in the manual that are suggested, and there are those things that are stated as mandatory.

I agree that the AS was not or could not be enforced.

But what do you say to those who have signed and have kept that pledge of affirmation? Does that pledge become invalid for the individual minister who is adhering to it because some have not? Does his/her commitment become less because someone states the origin of the commitment is a lie?

I guess my point is where does the it stop? How many posts does it take to state a majority of the ministers in the UPC own a TV, so in fact it must be the consensus for all them.

That's the beauty of the AS. It takes personal integrity to sign something and abide by your signature when no one is looking. Is that so hard to do?

Thats my point, there are those that adhere to it, but some make it to be of no value because some have not. Or they project the image that because some UPC ministers are of such low integrity, that it must be the case for all.

Exactly, this is why Res. four passed. Now the whole UPC org. seems hypocritical that TV's aren't allowed but advertising on them is.

The AS isn't worth the value it's printed on. The signature on the bottom is what is valuable. Or, then again, maybe not to some.

Are they related?

Another wise statement from the barbed wire balancing king.