Maybe they should also eat some dog s*!t to warn us away from it, too.
I think FOTF should be saluted for having the guts to sit through that trash so they could comment on it knowledgeably. Maybe by some slight chance there’s something redeeming in it. I can’t imagine what, but unless someone of like mind reviewed it, I’d have to find that out for myself, at great risk to $10, two hours, and my soul.
Meh, it’s what is inside a person that corrupts them, not external things.
I don’t care one way or the other that they reviewed the movie.
But I don’t need their review, nor is it necessary to watch it myself, to know that it is not proper food for my soul.
And, sadly, that’s true for about 90% or more of what comes out of the teevee and movie industry.
I let Dave Barry watch it for me. His review, though necessarily crude, is extremely funny, and spot on.
I believe in Christian liberty and often disagree with the well-intentioned legalists all-too-common in Evangelical circles. That said, there’s no Christian imperative to roll around in the world’s rot simply so you can warn others they shouldn’t do the same.
It’s a tough call. Paul said idols are nothing, and the meat sold that had been offered to idols was therefore open to those who understood it was just meat. At the same time he warned about the weak consciences of those who’d just converted from idol worship, that they not be injured by freedom that wasn’t yet understood.
It’s a huge tension between knowledge and conscience. FoF has for years recognized the value of knowing the enemy. Years ago Dobson recommended looking at porn to know how dehumanizing it is. (No, I don’t have the link or remember the source, but I’m certain of the memory.)
Porn is so readily available on the internet that it’s almost of zero value to warn about a porn piece like 50 shades by reviewing it.
My guess is that it’s more helpful to carefully write another article on WHY porn is destructive.
Soooo..... FOTF decides to write a review on a movie that they personally saw with their own eyes - and.....not base their opinion on what others are saying? What am I missing here? When a leftist reporter denigrates a book or movie from the right and admits to not even reading/watching it before their review, how many of us scream “bias”? For me, when I read the words: “here’s my opinion but I did not read/see it” I almost always stop reading at that point. Because, it then truly is gossip....
So far, the Christians I know that have seen it have said the anti-hype is just that. They had not read the book and assumed it was probably more provocative, but found the movie overall to be a fairly descent love story.
If you cannot trust someone to walk through the lion’s den, then what point was there in trusting them inthe first place?
It’s sort of difficult to honestly review a movie without seeing it. That’s what the MSM does. 50 Shades sounds disgusting, but I wouldn’t know and I’ve no intention of checking for myself. I like the fact that someone checked out the movie whose beliefs mirror mine.
Snow & ice DID come & school is, yay!, cancelled. I replied, but it was eaten. I love all kinds of books: great literature, biographies, Jacqueline Suzanne (sp?) Lawrence Sanders (He was an amazing writer, a great writer.)& I enjoyed all 50 Shades books. They are certainly not Shakespeare, but the point of the trilogy is all about true love, commitment and redemption. If it is not your cup of tea, don’t read them.
I do get very nervous when grown people want or feel the need to keep other grown people away from anything. It is called censorship. As a liberal who now has many conservative views on certain issues I just do NOT understand any “conservative” who would justify censorship or want to keep someone from finding out on their own if something appeals to them or not. We are grown ups. End of story. (if for some reason my other post shows up, I apologize for the duplicate.)
I suspect that people have forgotten about FOTF founder Dr. James Dobson was on Attorney General C. Everett Koop's Commission on Pornography during the Reagan Administration.
I was listening to the Catholic radio station last night and their concern was the affect this film would have on children when it is released and easily accessible.
They had nothing good to say about it at all.
I’m sorry, but this isn’t porn. There are plenty of movies out there with more nudity than this one. It may deal with subject matter that these people don’t agree with, but this ain’t porn.
That’s not much different than the progressives who rant about “Faux” News, Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, etc. but have never and will never watch or listen to them. You can comment on anything you want, but your comment loses validity if you are simply repeating what someone else told you, which may or may not be true.
The unsaved world is watching folks. The fact that people who identify as Christian bought these books and went out in droves to see the movie is not lost on them. They see it very hypocritical as they themselves view it as “soft porn”.
A related thread on the Christian film “Old Fashioned” and PluggedIn’s review of it:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3258515/posts
I actually got in an argument with a woman who was reading the book in public, talking about how it was liberating.
I finally closed the argument by bringing up how you undo all the Superbowl ads saying violence against women is bad if you then sit through a movie that says violence against women is OK if he’s rich, handsome and pressures her into a contract agreeing to the violence. AKA, violence against women is bad if she agrees to it - like a domestic abuse victim who puts up with it because she loves him. And “50 Shades of Gray” has more than just hitting his girlfriend, which was just denounced on the Superbowl PSAs.