|
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
|
Author
|
Topic: _The Da Vinci Code_ protest letter
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 04-10-2006 11:13 AM
More response from the Catholic Church:
http://www.jesusdecoded.com
quote:
Funding for this Web site was provided by the Catholic Communication Campaign, an activity of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops that develops media programming, public service announcements, and other resources to promote Gospel values. Donations of Catholic parishioners make possible the work of the CCC. For more information, visit our website at: www.usccb.org/ccc
http://www.jesusdecoded.com/truthbetold1.php
quote:
What do you say to a Da Vinci Code Believer?
By Amy Welborn
Just as in any religion, there are different levels of Da Vinci Code faithful:
*Those who believe every assertion made in the novel is true. These people come to my talks clutching copies of The Woman with the Alabaster Jar, one of Brown’s main sources for the novel. They stand in front of reproductions of Leonardo’s Last Supper and solemnly point out the presence of Mary Magdalene.
*Those who are startled by the claims of the novel, suspicious because they’ve never heard them before, but at the same time accepting of the possibility. These folks usually lack any background in history and suspect that there’s no way to know the truth anyway.
*Finally, there are those who really don’t care about the exact content of The Da Vinci Code, but are glad that it subverts Christianity, and so “believe” in the project in general, and heartily approve of it.
So…how to deal with them?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 04-18-2006 02:25 AM
It's amazing how people can use religion as a power tool to impose themselves on others. There are lots of things that offend me, but I don't get to tell everyone else they can't do those things. Yet, all someone has to say is, it offends my "religion," and the world is supposed to stop.
The DaVinci Code presents arguments that differ with someone religious beliefs; how does that person get to say those arguments must not be made because it offends their religious beliefs? By that reasoning, every book or movie about Christ and his divinity is an affront to those who believe the Messiah is still coming. Those books and movies or even religious art shouldn't be allowed? To Jews, a film like THE GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD is as much blasphemy to them as THE DaVINCI CODE seems to be to Christians. Maybe Christians need to take some lessons from their Jewish bretheren -- I don't think I ever heard of Jewish groups protesting the showing of OUR LADY OF FATIMA or JESUS OF NAZARETH or KING OF KINGS.
Seems to me, if a person's faith is so flimsy as to cave in because someone espouses another point-of-view or even a diametrically opposed concept then that doesn't say much for that faith to begin with. For example, is the institution of marriage so delicate and on the virge of collapse that if people of the same sex want to live as married people do, that somehow all opposite sex marriages will fall apart?
Sometime you've got to just say to some of these folk, "Hey, GET A LIFE....and be sure, I won't live yours and you don't get to live mine."
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chad Souder
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 962
From: Waterloo, IA, USA
Registered: Feb 2000
|
posted 04-19-2006 07:33 PM
quote: Bruce Hansen
These supper religious communist flakes do not have the right to tell me what to believe, or what movie (or book) I am allowed to see.
I usually have flakes for breakfast, not supper. But seriously, many people in this thread are posting with this implication that they have a right to watch this movie and that people are trying to take that right away from them. You have no right to watch a movie any more than you have a right to drive a car or eat in a restaurant. These are privileges. Rights are things guaranteed to us by our government or Creator and I don't remember reading anything in the Constitution or [insert your holy book of choice here] about movies. Consequently, people do have the right to tell you what to believe , you just also have the right to ignore them. The people opposed to this movie, whether you agree or disagree with them, seem to be protesting in a law-abiding manner, which is also their right. In other words, don't get your undies in a bunch over some people who are making noise about something for which they feel passion. It won't stop you from seeing Da Vinci and it will make them feel like they tried.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 04-20-2006 02:24 PM
quote: Chad Souder
....many people in this thread are posting with this implication that they have a right to watch this movie and that people are trying to take that right away from them.
Well, yah, that's exactly what's happening....it's what she said -- she want's the theatre to pull the picture or not book it. I am assuming she wants this to happen to EVERY theatre where I might want to see it.
quote: Chad Souder
The people opposed to this movie, whether you agree or disagree with them, seem to be protesting in a law-abiding manner, which is also their right.
Excuse me, but to my mind, there is a big difference between telling me I shouldn't see this movie for whatever reason this person has, I think she said it was for the "good of society" or some such rot, and telling the theatre not to allow it to be shown. OK, she thinks the movie will topple Christianity, that's her belief and she's welcome to it and to shout it from the rooftops for all I care. I wouldn't care if she and a horde of other like-mindeds from her organization came and handed out flyers, held up signs, whatever, to present their point of view and even try to convince me not to go into that theatre. You are right, I could ignore them as I walked gingerly past them into the theatre (I would TRY not to say anything nasty as I pasted them).
Thing is, she and her group are not trying just to pursuade me not to see the movie by presenting her arguments and explaining her belief and passion to me -- no, she is threatening the theatre owner if he "consents" to book it. In other words, she's not interested in a dialogue, she doen't want me to evaluate her viewpoint and make up my mind about it, she wants to impose her will on me by virtue of making sure it isn't available. There's a BIG difference.
What really pisses me off is that as mild as her letter sounds, there is that very-present underlying arrogance that seeks to impose it's will on everyone else, not by reason of the persuasiveness or the power of their opposing ideas, but by political power-mongering. You do what I say or you'll be sorry!
But of course, that's the basic flaw in such attempts to control the way others think -- you NEVER win your arguments by censorship. And if somehow these organizations and groups (what do they call themselves, "American Need Fatima"), do get to surpress what they don't think the rest of us can see or read by virtue of political clout, it never lasts long. Ideas will not be surpressed. One would think that even a cursory knowledge of history starting with, oh, say, Galleleo, would have made that abundantly clear to anyone with half a brain by now.
And then of course there is the even more obnoxious we-are-better-than-everyone-else arrogance which hides between the lines in her letter. Seems that it is HER organization that gets to see the film (otherwise how does she know it's an attack on Christianity) and they get to tell the rest of us that we shouldn't. Basically she is using a feigned concern for this "attack" on Chrisitanity as a means to set up a privilidged class -- the one she and her cronies belong to, and then the rest of us. Their Class gets to see movies and presumably everything else, and they get to decide for the rest of us if they attack Christianity or not and if it's safe for the rest of us to see them.
Now can you explain all that stuff about how going to the movies and eating at a restauraunt are a priviledges? We don't have a right to eat in any restaurant that we want? These are priviledges given by whom? And can whoever gives that priviledge to us, can they take it way? I always thought that's the way it worked under Sadam Insane, but not here. Maybe I am not understanding your meaning.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chad Souder
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 962
From: Waterloo, IA, USA
Registered: Feb 2000
|
posted 04-20-2006 07:21 PM
You are correct, Mike, in your interpretation of the differences of the words. There are some exceptions, of coure, such as the right to vote does not kick-in until you turn 18.
Frank - The privileges I refer to can be taken away by the proprietor of the movie house or restaurant. You know, "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone blah, blah, blah". As a theatre manager, I love my ability to deny service to people that have caused me trouble in the past. These privileges can also be stripped by the government in the sense of restraining orders or general incarceration. Only certain people have privileges (as in the privilege to see an "R" rated movie without an adult) but usually rights are things everyone has, such as what is covered in our Bill of
Rights.
The only point I was trying to make is that some people seem to get very ornery when someone threatens to get in the way of something they want. I think they feel more threatened than anything that someone would dare try such a thing, like they're having flashbacks of their parents denying them a cookie. I don't even think it has much to do with the movie itself, but rather the feeling that I should get anything I want.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene
Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 04-21-2006 01:59 PM
quote: Chad Souder
You have no right to watch a movie any more than you have a right to drive a car or eat in a restaurant. These are privileges. Rights are things guaranteed to us by our government or Creator and I don't remember reading anything in the Constitution or [insert your holy book of choice here] about movies.
quote: Chad Souder
The only point I was trying to make is that some people seem to get very ornery when someone threatens to get in the way of something they want. I think they feel more threatened than anything that someone would dare try such a thing, like they're having flashbacks of their parents denying them a cookie. I don't even think it has much to do with the movie itself, but rather the feeling that I should get anything I want.
In order to define the difference between a right and a privelidge, you also need to define and place responsibility.
At the age of 18, American citezens have the right to vote in American elections. They also have the right to apply for Pell grants, welfare, food stamps, legal aid, and so on.
They have the right to speak in a public forum, create private forums without fear of reprisal, protest in an orderly fashion, to be seen as innocent until found guilty in a court of law, and so on.
They have the right to choose what movie to see, where to see it, and when to see it, if they choose to see one.
They have the right to own a car, choose what kind of car they wish to own, and where to drive it upon public freeways. There is no restriction to drive between state to state. No papers.
They have the right to choose where to eat, when to eat, and what to eat.
All people have responsibilities. You have a responsibility to vote your conscience, to drive responsibly, to promote positive social values, to eat responsibliy, to raise children responsibly if you choose to raise children.
You have the responsibility to treat people with respect. You have the responsibility to respect that others have the same rights and responsibilities as yourself.
As for privelidges. I grew up rich. I was a child of priveledge. I am not wealthy by any financial means at this point in my life. I live the priveledge of having an Amex card that I pay off every month. I live the priveledge of owning a car. I live the priveledge of being able to pay for movies, either in theater or on DVD. These priveledges are not extended to all, as all priveledges are based upon money and social class.
Even with priveledges there are responsibilities. You have the responsibility to not be an ass about it, but you do have the right to be an ass about it.
That's pretty much about all I had to say.
Ciao
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic