The Christmas-Crushing Movie "The Golden Compass"

human events ^ | 11/09/2007 | L. Brent Bozell III

[AnotherUnixGeek]

Exactly. Don’t listen to anyone! How do you really know cyanide is bad for you just because some “authority” says so? Try it yourself and make your own decision!

I was talking about works of art - films, books, cartoons, among other things. Do you really think that exposure to any of these will kill you like cyanide? Will taking a look at them for yourself corrupt you somehow? Or weaken your faith? Religious people sometimes get so worked up over the creative works of others - what are they so afraid of?

[irishjuggler]

Yes, I would! Absolutely! I can’t think for myself at all. I copy everyone and everything. In fact, I’m thinking of renaming myself “militantnutcase” because it’d be such a cool name, especially if “militant” were spelled correctly.

[chuckles]

....."Is he talking about the Koran?"......

Yes he is, and he made Mohamed out to be an animal. I think every Muslim should be informed of this, especially in Sudan.

[miliantnutcase]

Nice comeback. Right out of the middle school playbook to immediately snap back with a personal attack on my forum name. FYI, if militant wasn’t taken at the time I might have used that one instead.

[irishjuggler]

Do you really think that exposure to any of these will kill you like cyanide?

No. My point it's idiotic to adopt the position that one must experience everything personally without considering the advice and recommendations of others. Apologists for the Pullman seem to have a problem with Christians pointing out the author's own anti-Christian words. No one is trying to censor these books or movies. It's about informing parents about the author's agenda, so that they can make their own decisions about what they buy for their children. If you want to embrace anti-Christian propaganda, that's your right. If I or anyone else wishes to reject this garbage and recommend that others do the same, that's our right. Why is only Christianity fair game? If this were a pro-Nazi film or an anti-Semitic film or an overtly racist film, few would dare assert that the world would be "a better place" if everyone were encouraged to see it and allowed to come to their own conclusions.

[irishjuggler]

Ah, that’s a shame. But I’m sure that, one day, you’ll find your own special place in the world where the name “militantnutcase” is available!

[miliantnutcase]

Yeah, I’m looking forward to it. Does my name offend you? =P

[denydenydeny]

The world will be a better place if people think and make decisions for themselves.

Then why do you post on an internet message board trying to influence others? Shouldn't they be allowed to form opinions without your help?

People have a right to be informed in the face of a deliberately deceptive multimillion dollar ad campaign.

[AnotherUnixGeek]

My point it's idiotic to adopt the position that one must experience everything personally without considering the advice and recommendations of others.

And my point is it's idiotic to blindly follow the the lead of others in their opinions of artistic content. The poster I originally responded to had never seen "The Last Temptation Of Christ" yet felt qualified to pass judgement on it. This is nonsense, whether it's done by Muslims or Christians or Buddhists or anyone else.

if this were a pro-Nazi film or an anti-Semitic film or an overtly racist film, few would dare assert that the world would be "a better place" if everyone were encouraged to see it and allowed to come to their own conclusions.

Never mind making the world "a better place". If you're going to render an opinion on a book or film, call it vile or racist or whatever else, you'd better have seen it or read it. Otherwise why would you think your opinion on the material in question is worth anything? If you have no first-hand experience, you're simply parroting what someone else said - someone who may not have any exposure to the material in question either. Take this far enough and you have the blind leading the blind - a lot of uninformed opinions from people who don't really know anything about the material they're objecting to. This is exactly what we see in Muslims getting worked up over cartoons and movies, with the additional Muslim ingredient of violence.

I won't be seeing the movie - I read the books and found them kind of dull. But at least I know why I don't like them. A lot of the people objecting to the movie won't.

[FrdmLvr]

"full of bullying and sneering, propaganda, basically, on behalf of a religion whose main creed seemed to be to despise and hate people unlike yourself."

But it's okay for you to hate and despise people unlike yourself, like C.S. Lewis for one.

[fatima]

Wow,I have to warn the family.They just lost 20 tickets from us.We have a lot of grandchildren.

[AnotherUnixGeek]

People have a right to be informed

I agree. The best way to be informed about a subject is to learn about it yourself. The worst way is taking the word of someone who has avoided the subject matter and doesn't know anything about it either.

in the face of a deliberately deceptive multimillion dollar ad campaign.

Now I'm curious - how do you know it's deceptive? Have you seen the actual movie yet? If yes, how does it differ from the ads and how do they deceive?

[fatima]

I am not afraid.Let me see it for free.

[BuffaloJack]

In other words, the good guys won’t be referred to a “son of Adam.”

[WKB]

Baptist ping

[chesley]

I don't recall the Pope issuing a fa-qua to have the director killed

No, but there's a common thread of condemning and denouncing works of art - books, films, cartoons, whatever - without any first-hand knowledge about them, based on what some religious authority tells them. The world will be a better place if people think and make decisions for themselves

Intelligent people can learn from the experience of others, not just their own. I've never been drunk and driving a car at the same time. I've never tried marijuana, cocaine, or heroin. I've never cheated on my wife. But I know plenty o people that have done some, or all, of them. Some got away with it. Most of them paid the price.

I can take the author's own remarks and decide if I want to contribute money to him, or not. I don't necessarily have to read his book, or see his movie, first. I won't be seeing this movie, but my 19-year old daughter plans to. I will be interested in her reactions.

[Sam's Army]

"...what are they so afraid of?"

Trolls, perhaps?

[puroresu]

It’s simply a matter of people getting tired of being verbally or “artistically” abused constantly. It gets old after a while to see your faith mocked, to see yourself and your fellow Christians accused of being violent sadists who represent a faith that is a fraud. It especially gets old when other faiths are protected from such attacks by Political Correctness.

It’s a double standard. It’s considered to be “intolerant” to mock Islam. Ron Howard or Dan Brown wouldn’t dare put out a movie or book that called Mohammed a fraud and Islam a fake religion based on violence and conspiracy. Both men are cowards and would fear a Jihad being declared against them. But even beyond that, they know that they’d be branded as “intolerant” if they mocked any faith other than Christianity. So they safely mock Christianity, a religion that isn’t protected by liberal “soft totalitarian” sensibilities, and whose practitioners don’t do anything more violent than carrying picket signs or writing columns disputing the film.

Ironic, isn’t it? An ultraviolent faith like Islam doesn’t get mocked by artists because they fear being slaughtered. Instead, they mock Christianity, and even accuse it of being murderous, because they know Christians can safely be mocked without losing one’s life, one’s freedom, or one’s invitation to a Beverly Hills cocktail party.

It just gets old after a while. It’s sickening to see these authors and directors posture and preen and brag about what “courage” it took for them to take on big, bad Christianity, when many of us know full well they wouldn’t attack Islam in such a manner for obvious reasons. They wouldn’t attack Hinduism, Buddhism, or Native American religions, either, because while it might not be life-endangering, they’d regard such as attacks as being “intolerant” under the rules of Political Correctness.

Urinate of a crucifix and you might get a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts, and anyone who objects will be called “intolerant”. Urinate on a Buddhist symbol, and you won’t get the grant because you’ll be called “intolerant” for treating a Buddhist symbol badly. Urinate on a Koran? Don’t even think about it.

[kimmie7]

Thanks for posting this. We, of course, will not be seeing it.

We have seen MAYBE 5 movies in the theatre in the past 10 years. We decided to vote with our money and the entire family saw Narnia in theatre paying full price FOUR TIMES.

Upon hearing that Prince Caspian was coming out in May, my son just did a cartwheel down the hall. LOL

[puroresu]

I blast Hollywood a lot around here, but occasionally something good comes out of there. Narnia is an example. So is The Lord of the Rings trilogy.

I don't expect every film to pay homage to Christianity, and I enjoy some films that are a little over-the-top, but I just get sick of seeing Christianity mocked and ridiculed so often. And it adds insult to injury to see the mockers donning the clothes of Martyrdom and pretending that it took courage to attack Christianity.