Stripling Fathers

I've heard someone say before that so much attention is drawn to the mothers of the stripling warriors because their fathers were no longer alive; however, this is not true. There are a few mentions of their fathers, in fact. And in one of those mentionings, at least, we can learn something from them. Or at least I did, and maybe just a lesson for me. At times I am stronger at this than others, but I generally try not only to think about if something is right or wrong for me, but what I am condoning or propagating by my participation in.

I have met people who have the belief that something that is not good for you, might not necessarily be bad for everyone, depending on your weaknesses--using such examples as movies and music. And I have had a very hard time with this. Under the definition of "good," as being something that brings you unto Christ (Moroni 7), if something doesn't bring me unto Christ, how could it bring someone else? Well, as far as music and movies are concerned, I'm not sure yet to have an answer for that. I still believe that a large number of people excuse much more than they ought and they propagate by condoning much of the ill that we find in these media (see Standing for Something by Gordon B Hinckley, first chapter I believe).

However, I was surprised to see an interesting example in the Book of Mormon where the fathers of the stripling warriors condoned their going to war by helping them with a great number of provisions. And yet, they could not go to war themselves lest they break the covenant they had made when they buried their weapons of war deep in the earth. I suppose, since their weapons were buried, that the provisions they brought were food, which any good parent would want to do for their sons regardless of their life choices. But when you add this to the fact that their mothers encouraged them by teaching them to have faith, and that if they had faith God would deliver them, that they were very supportive of their sons who went to defend the Nephites, their gracious hosts and protectors. So, here is at least one situation where one's weakness is another's strength and it is good to condone the other's choice. But of course, they weren't encouraging blood-thirstiness, only defense, which does add a little different light on the subject. Any thoughts?