At 13, I read Ender’s Game and was absolutely obsessed. Read a ton of other OSC books at that age and it took me decades to rid myself of all the veiled mormon morality in his books.
As an adult, I never had one hesitation about disavowing him. I re-read the Ender saga a few years back to see how it held up (it didn’t hold a candle to my teen-self’s impression), but I had no problem not paying for new copies of anything that would pay OSC.
I haven’t read a lot of Sanderson, but I’ve read enough to sense that this difference is in true personal disposition.
Sanderson’s drive seems to be more of wonder, curiosity and adventure, and the stories delve into morality and justice as a source of plot tension.
In contrast, I think OSC has always been more of a black-and-white thinker. I think his best stories have been ones where he is exploring a moral struggle or thought experiment. But at the end of the story, you can pull out what OSC has concluded morally about those characters - who is good, who is bad (and always has been), and maybe who is a necessary evil.
All of OSC’s stories are about categorizing people, behaviors and decisions into ‘should/should not’ buckets. And I’ve just never gotten that sense from Sanderson’s books.