Lawmakers upset by Christian film's PG rating

Waterbury Republican-American ^ | July 2, 2006 | Associated Press

[Graybeard58]

WASHINGTON -- A Christian-themed movie about a football coach's faith in God is finding an audience in Congress -- not so much for its inspirational message, but for the PG rating it received.

House Majority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo., and other lawmakers are demanding explanations after hearing complaints that the movie "Facing the Giants" was rated PG instead of G due to religious content.

The Motion Picture Association of America claims the controversy arose from a miscommunication with the filmmakers. It says religion was not the reason for the rating.

"This incident raises the disquieting possibility that the MPAA considers exposure to Christian themes more dangerous for children than exposure to gratuitous sex and violence," Blunt said in a letter to MPAA Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Dan Glickman.

After meeting with MPAA officials, Blunt and a handful of other House members said they remain concerned about the subjective native of the ratings process.

"I'm not satisfied," said Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., who attended the meeting with Blunt. "We probably will want to revisit this ratings process to have some commonality in the standards that exist for movies."

Blackburn said she wants the House Energy and Commerce Committee to hold hearings on the issue later this year.

Blunt also brought up a recent study by the Harvard School of Public Health that found that the MPAA standards on sex and violence in movies have been getting weaker.

"Mr. Blunt does continue to have questions about the process by which `Facing the Giants' was rated and what that says about ratings creep in general," spokeswoman Burson Taylor said Friday.

An MPAA spokesman did not return calls seeking comment. But in a letter to Blunt in June, the MPAA's Glickman insisted the rating for "Facing the Giants" was not based on religious content.

"Any strong or mature discussion of any subject matter results in at least a PG rating," Glickman said. "This movie had a mature discussion about pregnancy, for example. It also had other mature discussions that some parents might want to be aware of before taking their kids to see this movie."

A PG rating means parental guidance is suggested because the MPAA believes some material may not be suitable for children. A G rating means the MPAA has found the movie acceptable for all audiences.

Glickman said the movie's producers agreed with the rating and never appealed it.

The film's producers claim ratings officials changed their story after the controversy began.

"The first communication from the MPAA was that religion was a factor in the ratings," said Kris Fuhr, vice president of marketing at Provident Films, which is owned by Sony Pictures. "Since then, the MPAA has revised those factors to no longer include religion."

Fuhr says she is now satisfied with the rating and wants to move beyond the controversy to focus on marketing the film, billed as an inspirational drama about a high school football coach who relies on faith to battle fear and failure.

"He dares to challenge his players to believe God for the impossible on and off the field," the movie's Web site says.

[BenLurkin]

Our society is self-destructing. Turning against its own institutions -- purposefully ripping apart the normal instrumentalities of social cohesion.

I imagine it has happened before but even over the last five thousand years -- not very many times.

[qam1]

Our society is self-destructing. Turning against its own institutions -- purposefully ripping apart the normal instrumentalities of social cohesion. I imagine it has happened before but even over the last five thousand years -- not very many times.

It happened in 334 AD when the mighty Roman Empire changed over to Christianity, things went rapidly down hill from there

[qam1]

The Harry Potter movies were rated PG - It don't remember the Wiccans complaining

[BenLurkin]

The demise of the Republic was the beginning of the end for Rome. The glorious spread of Christianity was the beginning of future greatness for Western civilization. May I suggest you read this book . . ..

[napscoordinator]

Bump please.

[napscoordinator]

I am totally disappointed with the PG rating if it was not earned. However, to have lawmakers getting involved is a bit worrysome. Lately they have not been getting their jobs done with the exception of a pay raise and now they are getting involved in movie ratings. I would like them to get judges on the docket, a wall up, etc. Parents can take their kids to a PG movie if they feel it is ok. Kids can even get into R rated movies with an adult.

[Ebenezer]

ping

"Warning" moviegoers about the religious content of a film sounds like something out of the Soviet Union in its most liberal days.

[Aquinasfan]

"The first communication from the MPAA was that religion was a factor in the ratings,"

That's shocking and appalling. I thought the ratings were determined by focus groups. Maybe the bureaucracy overrode the decision of the lay "jury." "Hollyweird" is right.

[Aquinasfan]

The only thing these people understand is money. Don't give them yours.

True. But there's nothing wrong with rewarding the good movies. We have to be discriminating. Check reviews from reliable sources before plunking down your cash.

Our family goes to the movies about twice a year. In the last couple of years we've rewarded "Finding Nemo," "The Incredibles," "The Passion," and "The Chronicles of Narnia." It was all money well spent.

[dbehsman]

> We are living in the age of insanity.

And this is different than the last 5,000 years of recorded history, how.....?

Well, the last century was THE bloodiest century in recorded human history. There is none other comparable. All thanks to atheistic government (fascism, communism, socialism).

[jaime1959]

None of Congress' business how Hollywood rates movies.

[orionblamblam]

> the last century was THE bloodiest century in recorded human history. There is none other comparable. All thanks to ...

Advanced weapons and transportation technologies. If the Crusades, the Islamic invasions of Europe, the various intra-European wars, etc. had had chemical weapons, tanks, bombs and AK-47's, they woulda used 'em. Hel's belles, son, biowarfare has been used for as long as people have understood that "scary plague + dead bodies = danger." That's one of the ways in which the Black Death was introduced to Europe... plague corpses tossed over city walls via catapults. Killed a third of Europe. Not even WWII or the Commie pogroms pulled that off.

[dbehsman]

> the last century was THE bloodiest century in recorded human history. There is none other comparable. All thanks to ...
Advanced weapons and transportation technologies.

Interesting way of looking at it, but I think your incorrect. It was murderous atheistic ideology that drove the twentieth century butcheries.

If the Crusades, the Islamic invasions of Europe, the various intra-European wars, etc. had had chemical weapons, tanks, bombs and AK-47's, they woulda used 'em.

I'm not willing to concede that point. It is certainly possible that they would have tried them or even used them, but we'll never know for certain, because those options were not available to the crusaders. If I recall correctly, the goal of the crusades was to retake the holy lands. It was not to wipe out the Muslims. As far as I know, there was no official concentration camps set up for Muslims or even Christians. I'm not saying it was a picnic by any means, but I don't think the comparisons can be fairly made.

Hel's belles, son, biowarfare has been used for as long as people have understood that "scary plague + dead bodies = danger." That's one of the ways in which the Black Death was introduced to Europe... plague corpses tossed over city walls via catapults. Killed a third of Europe.

From my understanding of the numbers, roughly 20 to 25 million people were wiped out during the Black Death. Terrible numbers to be sure but, the influenza epidemic of 1918 wiped out between an estimated 20 to 40 million worldwide.

Not even WWII or the Commie pogroms pulled that off.

Yes they did, and far worse. The last I heard (I'm not sure if this includes the numbers from the Holocaust) WWII killed over 52 million people. The Communists in the last century murdered well over 100 million people (this was not in war, this was in death camps/persecutions/forced labor, etc.). In sheer numbers alone, the twentieth century was the bloodiest century in recorded human history. Thanks to the atheistic governments of the fascists and communists, the science of murder was practiced to a very efficient level.

[orionblamblam]

> It was murderous atheistic ideology that drove the twentieth century butcheries.


No, it was murderous theologies that drove the murders. The Nazis worshipped the Volk, the Aryan superman intelligently designed by God. The Commies worshipped the State, which was granted all the powers and myths normally associated with gods.

> If I recall correctly, the goal of the crusades was to retake the holy lands. It was not to wipe out the Muslims. As far as I know, there was no official concentration camps set up for Muslims or even Christians.

True. Concentration camps are a fairly new phenomenon (invented by the Brits for the Boer War, I *think*). prior to that, the armies simply raped all the women, killed all the men and children and burned the crops and poisone dthe wells. JUst as deadly, but more up-front about it.

> roughly 20 to 25 million people were wiped out during the Black Death. Terrible numbers to be sure but, the influenza epidemic of 1918 wiped out between an estimated 20 to 40 million worldwide.

Yep. This means that the Black Death was substantially worse than the flu... because the BD killed 1/3 to 1/2 of everybody in Europe, while the flu was, what, a percent or so?

> The last I heard (I'm not sure if this includes the numbers from the Holocaust) WWII killed over 52 million people. The Communists in the last century murdered well over 100 million people

WWII-era Europe, Russia, China, Japan and US, main combattants, had a population somewhere north of 2 billion, I believe. Thus 52M out of ~2B is "only" 3 percent or so. The 100M killed by the Commies is 100M out of probably 2B people (considering that that's the population of Russia, China, Cambodia and a few others over many decades), so that's still "only" 5%.

Bad numbers, to be sure... but wiping out 1/3 to 1/2 of everybody involved is *far* worse. Then you get things like smallpox in the New World (note: I don't buy the "it was intentional" bullcrap... the Europeans simply had diseases the Injuns didn't), and the death rates were so high that some peoples just plain disappeared.

[dbehsman]

> It was murderous atheistic ideology that drove the twentieth century butcheries.
No, it was murderous theologies that drove the murders. The Nazis worshipped the Volk, the Aryan superman intelligently designed by God. The Commies worshipped the State, which was granted all the powers and myths normally associated with gods.

Spoken like a true liberal. The Nazi's and the Communist's did not believe in God. They also were all Darwinists. As a matter of fact, the early Darwinists were using Darwin's theory to justify racism and eugenics. If I recall correctly, the Nazi's sent biologists down to India in the 1930's to try to trace the roots of the Germanic people.

Yep. This means that the Black Death was substantially worse than the flu... because the BD killed 1/3 to 1/2 of everybody in Europe, while the flu was, what, a percent or so?

I think I should have been a bit more specific in my earlier post. The twentieth century was the most MURDEROUS century in all of recorded human history. There, does that work better for you now? In the posting that you replied to, I noted that in SHEER NUMBERS ALONE, the twentieth century was the bloodiest.

WWII-era Europe, Russia, China, Japan and US, main combattants, had a population somewhere north of 2 billion, I believe. Thus 52M out of ~2B is "only" 3 percent or so. The 100M killed by the Commies is 100M out of probably 2B people (considering that that's the population of Russia, China, Cambodia and a few others over many decades), so that's still "only" 5%.

We are talking about millions of human beings that were intentionally murdered by atheistic, darwinistic, socialist killing machines. And you want to try to equivocate this ghastly fact by reducing it all down to mere percentages. This is what apologists for communism do.

Then you get things like smallpox in the New World (note: I don't buy the "it was intentional" bullcrap... the Europeans simply had diseases the Injuns didn't), and the death rates were so high that some peoples just plain disappeared.

First of all, you are now talking about a different century, not the same one that the black death occurred in. Secondly, I think it's a little degrading to refer to the Indians as "Injuns". Please don't bring the DU sensibilities over here.