Replies

Well, given that the director/producer is building his own private church building, for the renegade sect his wacko father belongs to, which church "will not be open to the public" (a radically novel concept for a purportedly "traditionalist" catholic church), I'm pretty confident that any religiously themed film that he financed out of his own pocket is going to be on the wacko side. Just like if I heard that Martha Burk was producing and directing a film about the modern women's rights movement -- would I really need to see the film before deciding it's going to be an idiotic piece of socialist trash?

There is a huge difference. Martha Burke is a wacko, so it would be safe to assume that any movie she did would be wacko. You are saying that because Mel's dad is wakcy, that therefore Mel is wacky, which is a decidingly prejudicial and un-american way of looking at the world, especially for someone who purports to be concerned about a movie being judgemental.

You are saying that because Mel's dad is wakcy, that therefore Mel is wacky,

No, I'm saying that because Mel's dad is wacky, and cites his bizarre religious beliefs to support his wackiness, AND Mel responds to his dad's religiously-based wackiness by paying to build a "not open to the public" church for the group that dad is wacky about, that therefore Mel is wacky.

If your dad belongs to Matt Hale's World Church of the Creator, that doesn't make YOU wacky. But if you proceed to finance the building of a church or compound or whatever for the World Church of the Creator, then I have no problem writing you off as wacky too.