Printable View
Go on this site..
American Christianity gone crazy
These are GENIUNE reviews of films, tv and music for right wing christians...
They are absurd and unbelievably funny.....
I suggest you all read your fave cd's review....(if you haven't already, and post your fave bit)
(Thanx to Drunkenponcho for showing it to me!)
Blink182 (I don't like them BTW)
Take of your pants and jacket
Summary/Advisory: "I really feel that we’re blessed. I’m so lucky God let us be here," guitarist Tom DeLonge told Rolling Stone. He’s got to be kidding. This divisive CD sanctions hatred, delinquency and self-destructive rebellion. Don’t let your teens be recruited by Blink-182’s hellish rhetoric
loL!
DEAR BOB: I like Metallica’s music, but my mom says it puts down our God. I just wanted to know what somebody else thought.
Jacob Long
Hinkley, Minn.
She’s right. For nearly 20 years, this hard-rocking metal band has pandered to the very worst elements of human nature. Anger. Despair. Obscenities. Violence. Perverse sexuality. And, as your mom has correctly pointed out, a dark fascination with the occult.
On Metallica’s Reload album, “Devil’s Dance” is sung from Satan’s perspective, encouraging listeners to join his side with the seductive lie, “I’ve got what you need.” Yeah, right. Now let’s focus on the band’s most recent disc, Garage Inc. It glamorizes reincarnation, witchcraft and Satanism.
Given a choice between heaven and hell, Metallica seems eager to embrace a fiery eternity separated from God (“Die Die My Darling,” “Stone Cold Crazy,” “The Prince” and “Last Caress/Green Hell”).
So here’s the big question: How does the Lord feel about people listening to messages like that? Check out the Bible. Proverbs 24:1 says, “Do not envy wicked men; do not desire their company.” I believe we desire the company of wicked men when we willfully tune in to their hateful messages. Make a break from Metallica.
ROFLMAO :D
Wheres the Q+A section, I'm missing out!!!!!
Artist: Baha Men
Album: Who Let the Dogs Out
"You All Dat," one of the disc’s many party anthems, alludes to alcohol use and features a lewd proposition between a reveler and a loose woman he just met.
"While you're down there", lol :p
Hee hee hee
The bloodhound gang get a slating from the christians! :D
wow, im amazed they managed to come out with all that crap. their interpretations of some songs and lyrics are just weird!
edit: they even manage to slate sclub 7 lol
Artist: Korn
Album: Follow the Leader
Genre: Metal/Rap
Chart Action: This vile CD entered the charts at number 1 with more than a quarter-million copies sold its first week.
Reviewed By: Bob Waliszewski
Pro-Social Content: None
Objectionable Content: Throughout "My Gift to You," lead singer Jonathan Davis fantasizes--in graphic detail--about choking his girlfriend to death while having sex with her. He contemplates suicide on "B.b.k." "All in the Family" describes a sick clan that practices deviant erotica together. Lines such as "Generation Triple X, we're all about the weed smoke and the kinky sex/. . . F--- authority!" fill a psychotic anthem featuring rapper Ice Cube ("Children of the Korn"). Four songs convey self-loathing and despair, including "Got the Life" ("God thanks me . . . Each day I feel so hollow inside"). The malicious vocalist also imagines killing his parents on "Dead Bodies Everywhere."
Summary/Advisory: Even Entertainment Weekly called this obscenity-ridden disc "incredibly perverse." Protect your kids. Impeach this Leader.
muhahahahahahaha
:D
What gets me is this website is here for a serious reason, not just for us to take the piss out of. I dont doubt it serves its purpose but these people are obviously so dense that they cannot tell something bad from something good and need the confirmation from these reviews or the Q&A session or need to go look it up in the bible. This implies they have little sence of right and wrong (i just killed someone, i think ill go and look it up in the bible about what i should do) and should probably be locked up under a mental health act for other peoples safety.
I mean, they cant appreciate the music and not listen to the lyrics?! Nor can they just appreciate that people dont immediently take up everything that is thrown at them from the outside world, otherwise we'd all be heretic, demon worshiping sadists on mad killing rampages.
and also regarding christina's - stripped :-
i don't know what kind of kinky sex the reviewer has involving snoring, but i'm pretty damn sure they shouldn't be dirtying my mind with such information!Quote:
Sexual material abounds. Some is implied, such as when Aguilera complains that a guy snores in bed ("Underappreciated")...
i thought it was a joke when i saw it but to my amazement its true... there is an advert for a christian hip-hop album somewhere with a picture of a vicar with a bling chain that says 'god' round his neck its sooo funny. Glad i could be of service !
Just curious guys, but what exactly is the really funny part about all this?
If they are a correct point about the lyrcis/content, then what of it? If they're not, I didn't hear any corrections.
These are just people who are providing a review service just the same as any other. The difference is that they go beyond what the album simply sounds like, and are concerned about the messages people are hearing.
It's all well to just listen to the music, but if that's all that mattered, why bother writing lyrics?
Abuse, Violence and a number of other things they mention are awful parts of humanity and society, they're trying to do something to help prevent and clear up that stuff.
Well I should speak up…
Ok I have looked over the web site, and yes some of it is a little over the top… and funny, but there is a lot of werid and hidden stuff hidden in some of the ‘darker’ music and parents should be educated to know what’s what..
That korn song about him fantasizing over killing his bird while having sex is not something I would want my kids listening to ever… would you? I’m 24 and have lived a very different life before I became a Christian, that included a life of crime what not.. so I see both sides of the coin… but you guys should remember this is aimed at christen parents who wanna be educated…
There's a difference between educating people as to what is on the cds and what it implies and telling them its the spawn of satan on a laserdisc mate.
I'm not a christian myself, but if i had a son my age i'd have no problem with him listening to pretty much whatever he wanted to, they're songs, theres a border between fiction and reality that adults think children don't understand.
A question...what is it that influences people to be who they are and do what they do?
someone they respect, parents, friends, role models.
not corey from slipknot! :rolleyes:
You sure?
For many, their favourite singers/groups etc. are their role models.
I think it's even the case that with some (a decent number) they hold more respect for those favourites!
Music, popular culture and the media hold an ever-increasing influence of how people behave, who they are and will become. I'm not saying there aren't other influences.
But why do these individuals and groups write what they write? For a joke?
Or am I wrong about all this?
I agree parents have a big influence. But, do people dress and speak like their parents? Do you see copies of them everywhere?
i'd say kids think these people are cool, but respect? i can't say as i respect alot of them, i might think the way they dress is cool, or they're music, but it doesn't mean i respect em more than my friends and family.
I agree, and alot of people let their lives be governed by this. I said that in a down-looking sort of way, I didnt mean it like that, but personally I dont see the point.Quote:
Music, popular culture and the media hold an ever-increasing influence of how people behave, who they are and will become. I'm not saying there aren't other influences.
and I dont see the point in Celebrity hubba bubba - MTV European Music Awards came to me town a few weeks ago and all of sudden, traffic jams everywhere coz people are blocking the roads trying to get a sight of someone famous, or even get a photo/autograph - do you even know that person or do you think they give a hoot about you (other to see their film or buy their music??) - I can give respect where its due for certain celebrities, but even then I cant get worked up about it.
After typing in various stuff I listen to, I finally found a review on Rage Against the Machine - Battle against LA:
"The political causes aren't always clear, but the band's anger is unmistakable. At the church. At the rich. At governments. And settling things peacefully isn't an option. Rage Against the Machine preaches anarchy and violence, believing they can somehow solve the world's problems by throwing gasoline on the fire. Keep teens away from the self-righteous rioting in The Battle of Los Angeles."
Oh come now, RATM angry? Surely not? I mean, look at our world, what in your own gods given name makes you think there's anything to be angry about? Thank you, you've pointed it out yourself :P
Interesting way to make a point.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but what you're saying is that anarchy, violence and rioting are good and valid ways to respond to problems in the world/society?
The quote you included doesn't deny the problems, nor the need for an answer, it simply says that RATM's response isn't a good one.
As for influencing people, it seems from your response that you've been sold on their idea. I expect that the reason many people don't go as far as the ideas suggest is because their comfortable enough in their lives right now, they don't need or want to kick p a fuss. But, if strong discontent came, I wonder...?
Ive certainly inferred that without knowing, but in a way, I guess I dont object to the acts above - and here's the hypocritical/self-conflicting part - as long as no one's hurt :p I dont/wouldnt take part in them myself, but I do not condone their actions if I can agree with even partial what they believe in - in such situations, its more extremists that will take defying action and Im not an extremist.Quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but what you're saying is that anarchy, violence and rioting are good and valid ways to respond to problems in the world/society?
I dont live my life by their political beliefs (some are a bit extreme) or by actions inferred. I simply admire the way they get their message across (putting on a gig to make Wall Street close down early, I reckon that takes balls), and to increase awareness of certain issues that go on in the world - whether or not other people think it's good or not. Yeah I like the music, and yes I am angry about a shedload in the world, but I dont feel the need to go marching and burn flags and smash windows of globalised stores. (and Im not comfortable at all in my life).Quote:
As for influencing people, it seems from your response that you've been sold on their idea.
Ah, but that's the message they're sending, and that's the thing that the site is critical of. You might not consider yourself an extremist, or someone who would take the message too far, but that doesn't validate the message, nor does it mean there are those who wouldn't.
I pose again the question...what makes us who we are?
We are, to an extent, products of that which we take in. The people on the site recognise that, and they argue that someone should be careful to not take in that which is corrupting or harmful. Even potentially so.
What are they doing that really offends, what are they costing you?
my right to decide, i reserve the right to decide what is and what isn't appropriate for me and in the future my kids, i don't wanna be told about it by a website full of people with they're heads stuck up they're asses tbh
Yeah - but it's only art isn't it. I understand what you're getting at - the whole nature / nuture argument - but I believe that if you're that easily led / that detached from reality then something, somewhere will 'lead you astray' anyway.Quote:
Originally posted by Galant
I pose again the question...what makes us who we are?
We are, to an extent, products of that which we take in. The people on the site recognise that, and they argue that someone should be careful to not take in that which is corrupting or harmful. Even potentially so.
Also - a few things that may make you question the value of the site - from the review of Bend It Like Beckham:
Which set alarms bells ringing - did they pay any attention to the film? No checking facts or even listening to the dialogue... So I think that seems like propaganda - pretending Christianity is the only valid spiritual path.Quote:
Jess' family pray to what appears to be an Indian diety and revere a large portrait prominently displayed in their living room.
And then this:
And this:Quote:
Beckham's most positive theme (finding one's niche and pursuing goals with gusto) introduces its highest hurdle: homosexuality.
And then this rant at the end of the review for In & Out:Quote:
But Bend It Like Beckham's embrace of homosexual ideals—particularly as they apply to teens—should make families wary.
Outright bigotry! And more religous propaganda - from the review of Ali:Quote:
This is also a growing problem within the church. The youth mail received at Focus on the Family indicates that more and more Christian teens are embracing gay ideology, excusing homosexuality among their peers and even practicing it themselves. Parents and youth leaders must lovingly set teens straight. Point out God's views on homosexuality (Lev. 18:22, 20:13, Rom 1:24-27). Discuss "love" from a biblical perspective. If necessary, seek Christian counseling. It's essential that teens recognize the devastating social and personal consequences of the gay lifestyle.
When Ellen DeGeneres accepted her Emmy Award on September 14, the lesbian comedienne told gay teens, "There's nothing wrong with you. Don't ever let anybody make you feel ashamed of who you are." If godly adults don't intervene, children will be left to heed these voices of popular culture.
So Galant - do you support them?Quote:
Discuss how in Ali's life, the strict legalism of Islam (particularly that practiced by the Nation of Islam) did not have the power to transform him and led to the casual dismissal of his first wife because she wouldn't dress a certain way—a good contrast to the grace and true spiritual power offered by Christ.
Okay, first things first.
Regarding my, what makes us what we are question, I still leave it with you. It can be said that some people are more easily lead than others, but then, what makes you who you are? Where do you get your opinions, or better yet, why do you dress the way you do? Why is it that you think some things are cool, or others aren't? Why do you find somethings are enjoyable, and others things you wouldn't be caught dead doing? Compare yourself to others. Now, in all honesty, are you influenced by anything, and what are you influenced by? Do you choose what to be influenced by?
Now, as to whether I support them or not, I can't say that I do. I have not been to the site, I've formed my points purely from what has been posted here. I try to think about things from as many points of view that I can, and then try to come to a conclusion as to which are valid, which are not, and what is preferable.
I'm well aware of the idea that there are many spiritual paths etc, but what makes the idea that there is only one two path any more offensive than that which says there are many? It's really a very simple idea which is based on the idea that if you declare somethings to be true, then that logically and necessarily excludes some others things from being true.
Or is it that you believe it possible for anything and everything to be true regardless?
They believe that Jesus is the only way to salvation - so what? Nothing new there, and I think it makes more sense to say something like that than to say that all or many religions which disagree fundamentally are all telling the truth.
??
And as for their views on homosexuality, you call it bigotry. Just for the sake of this discussion, I'd like to define what we mean by that term. So if you could post a simple definition I'd appreciate it - just so we're talking about the same thing.
The Christians on that site place limits on what they believe is good/beneficial/proper sexuality. Simply put, they decide to call some forms/expressions of sexuality good, and others bad.
The good expression I expect would be sex between a male and a female in a marriage relationship. They would see it as a necessary part of the marriage relationship, and the ultimate expression of unity between the two. The pinnacle of what God intended for human relationships.
Bad expressions would include pre-marital and extra-marital sex, incest, paedophilia, necrophilia, bestiality, polygamy, and as you've brought up, homosexuality.
Now, whilst it may seem clear to many that there's nothing wrong with homosexuality, you must at least understand that the argument for homosexuality flies against thousands of years of human society, and they would also make an argument based upon the 'nature' of the sexuality. Whether or not it is natural and the effects of such a relationship.
Overall, I do not know these people, and I do know that there are a lot of overly harsh 'Christians' and bigots. Of the bigots and 'extremists' I would say that they may be people who take the name of Christian but do not live the life or know God. As such it is tough to deal with but ultimately neither Christianity nor God can be judged by them. They may be well meaning yet misguided people, not thinking things through, and taking a stupid attitude. I cannot defend the actions, words or beliefs of every person who claims the name of Christ. Nor would I want to, there are many fakes and abusers in this world.
I do know that there are Christians who whilst believing homosexuality to be wrong, and a perversion (literally 'twisting') or what is normal and best, still only seek the best for all human beings, who seek to treat them with love and compassion. For every person suffers in some way, everyone has been hurt, every person has problems and things that need correcting. They would just as soon condemn a deceiving or abusing lifestyle as a homosexual one. They believe that there is better way to live life, one that brings greater peace, security, contentment and joy. And those who stand true are those who are not aggressive or insulting, yet compassionate desiring the best for people. It has been said that God loves you just the way you are, but He also loves you too much to leave you that way.
I know that might sound insulting or offensive, but no-one is saying they are perfect (if they are, they're wrong and need correcting), they are in fact saying that they, and other are imperfect, and that there is a way to get past problems and trials and addictions. To be free and happy.
Okay, I've said enough for this post. Hope I got my point across.
I'll try and address your points here though I'm trying to avoid getting into a purely philosophical debate as to what makes us who we are - all I'll say is I believe it's a mix of nature and nuture - I believe we are naturally - genetically - desposed to certain behaviours but that just becuase it's 'in your character' your don't have to act on it - and that your awareness of the social norms, your own knowledge and experience can govern your actions - can change your character - despite of any 'natural' reaction. (If you want to discuss this in particular any further then please start a new thread - I'll be happy to join in)
Basically my original point was that anyone who is overly influenced by lyrics, violence in the media, etc would probably never be a 'well-rounded' person and those that take extreme actions and blame art / the media for their actions or the actions of others are at best looking for an excuse and at worse playing politics... That this 'secondary censorship' - based upon the recommendations of the site - isn't much more than scare mongering and propaganda on their part.
As for the bigotry portrayed by that site I mean that the people behind that site are bigots in the literal sense - that I simply think their views are wrong - and against what I perceive to be the accepted norms - that they are either literally blind to any views and lifestyles other than their own or have their own political reasons for publicly presenting that image. I suspect in this case that it is both - to answer your points in order (religious / spiritual paths and then sexuality):
The references to other religous beliefs seem highly disdainful to me - of little or no tolerance which - in my admitedly limited knowledged of the new testament is just not 'the point'... They do of course have the right to believe and express that their way is the true way but their statements about Bend It Like Beckham and Ali are basically propaganda - they might as well throw "infidel" in there - in particular "some Indian deity" nearly made me laugh - from my sketchy memory of the film and 30 seconds with google I'm pretty sure it's a picture of Guru Nanak and that the family were Sikhs. If i was actually publishing a comment in relation to it I'd make sure I knew what I talking about - and I'm sure they'd take objection to Jesus being described as "some American deity".
My personal view of a person's sexuality is basically "whatever floats your boat" - if you aren't hurting anyone and everyone involved is happy then it's your own personal business - there are things I know of that I instinctively know aren't for me and there are some things that I find downright ridiculous but if you aren't hurting anyone then what does it matter? That's where I draw the line and so I'd say that incest, paedophilia, necrophilia, and bestiality are basically 110% wrong, that extra-marital sex is definitely wrong (it still causes pain after all) though in no way to the same way as incest, etc and that pre-marital sex and polygamy are a choice - albeit choices very much dictated by your culture and your sense of the social norm. I don't believe that homo / hetero sexuality is a choice but is a part of the natural variation - and I find it dissappointing that people believe otherwise - for me - and I hope for most people - it's like calling a particular hair colour wrong.
As for your final point - and the only one that I have issue with you about - homosexuality goes against 1000s of years of society? Which society are we talking about here? I'll admit that I don't know much about it but I am aware that in other times and societies (in Roman times for example) homosexuality was not seen as a problem but simply as a 'preference' - and that now the mainstream view is adjusting back towards that point... (I know that there are much more modern references but I can't quote one) I feel like you're saying the equivalent of "racism is understandable as we've had years of slavery, etc" - it's still wrong and there's still no good reason to show sympathy towards it.
It is a good question - only which the people who know themselves can answer truly. Im still not sure who I am, and Im trying to figure this out. Though I think "where do you get your opinions is a bit vague. Your opinions are other people's opinions in a agree/disagree form. You read something, you can be in horror or total agreement. You hear something, the same. Your opinion are always there, they just need to be uncovered. All I can think of is that my peers / mates have influenced me most. But I have always had my own opinions and I will do what I want regardless of what others may think of me - and I dont want anyone to think that following someone just for the sake of it is a good idea - you make your own informed decisions and only then can you be true to what you do and think.Quote:
Regarding my, what makes us what we are question, I still leave it with you. It can be said that some people are more easily lead than others, but then, what makes you who you are? Where do you get your opinions, or better yet, why do you dress the way you do? Why is it that you think some things are cool, or others aren't? Why do you find somethings are enjoyable, and others things you wouldn't be caught dead doing? Compare yourself to others. Now, in all honesty, are you influenced by anything, and what are you influenced by? Do you choose what to be influenced by?
Thats about being open-minded. And (hope this isnt a bringing in a new argument) if I were to be honest, men are almost incapable of being truly open-minded (this is a subjective feeling tho with what Ive encountered personally). In general, women are most open-minded about stuff (except when it comes to who they're going out with) and being reasonable with argumentative issues. They manage to see both sides of the argument whereas us men do not see such a big a picture. Ive not met everyone but this is just what my life experience has taught me.Quote:
I'm well aware of the idea that there are many spiritual paths etc, but what makes the idea that there is only one two path any more offensive than that which says there are many? It's really a very simple idea which is based on the idea that if you declare somethings to be true, then that logically and necessarily excludes some others things from being true.
Fair play to you mate, you make a good argument even though I dont agree with you 100%, you make some good points. ;)Quote:
Hope I got my point across.
Talking about S Club 7: "Families should use discretion." :eek:
Yeah, they, er, will rot your mind and stuff.
Guys like I said before… this is a Christian web site for Christian parents, I don’t know what all the fuss is about… some things on the site I agree with.. and some I don’t like S Club 7 for example… although I can’t stand them, I would have no probs with anyone else listening to them, but I do find some stuff hidden in certain music to be worrying, and if you guys studied the bible you would probably see why certain Christians would indeed want to protect there children from things…
And if you don’t study the bible or believe in Christianity…. then why read and slag off the web site? Far easier to condemn something you don’t understand than to put the effort in to have a clear view point on the subject I think..
I dont think they are "slagging off" the site. Comments are made on the views being a little extreeme, and the reviewer looking for points that are not ( imho) really there.
I've studied the bible before and found it to be one of the most sefl contradicting books ever. You can find a verse to prove any point you want ( often from both sides of the arguement )
I'd like to think that the majority of Christians have a slightly more open minded view of the world than that site would have you believe , especially in regards to other religions. Fundamentalism never did anyone any good :)
Example : - take a film that revells in its mundane incontent and banailty such as.....Spiceworld.
I'd say "dont see this , its a crap film and the acting is miserable"
they say
They make no reference to the positive aspects of "girl power" for example. Imo they make far too much reference to "the morally discerning viewer" who it would appear should lock themselves up in their Montana basement with a shotgun and a tin foil hat, lest anything attempts to corrupt them so can shoot it :)Quote:
However, from the opening credits, the Girls' come-hither looks and immodest attire push the bounds of acceptability. Add a handful of mild profanities, sexual references and astrological banter, and this film crosses the line. Boys will ogle them. Girls will emulate them. A little too piquant for young fans.
look , they even managed to say bad things about ET!!!!
http://www.pluggedinonline.com/movie...s/a0000293.cfm
Im sorry but that is just way to OTT! Its a haloween costume. Any 3 year old can see that and not just some violent act of hate! That is ridiculous!Quote:
Several costumes are a bit gruesome, such as Michael’s fake "knife-through-the-head."
Remember, don't feed trolls! (Disclaimer: the pronoun "you" is used in a general way here, not meaning any individual person, and nor do I mean to attack anyone. Just stating my [somewhat extremist ;)] views.)
More than merely "stating their views on what they they consider extremist" the message that is coming across here is Christian bashing. (Note the copious quoting of reviews that you consider laughable?)
Bash a black, a woman, a minority group, you're a bigot. Bash a Christian, call them bigots; who is the real bigot here?
While we're on it, why don't we look up, say, Wiccan sites, and remark about how stupid their nature worship is? Or maybe comment on how backward, say, Islam is, in how it degrades women. All of these remarks and views are taken from the viewpoint that you are right and they are wrong, and that cannot be justified.
I looked up Nine Inch Nails, my favourite band, on that site, and I tend to agree with what they say. It is warranted, albeit in a ( perhaps overly) cautious way. No one's forcing you to do what they suggest on the site, no one's even forcing you to read it.
Very frankly, if you're gonna kick up a storm every time you come across views you don't like or agree with or consider extremist, you should get off the internet.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!Quote:
Originally posted by Matt
they even manage to slate sclub 7 lol
Not SClub! :( But they rule!
:D ;)
sorry eldren But the first 4 words in your post make absolutely no scence (neither does my spelling but hey). Where the hell you get trolls from????
eldren - get down of that high horse of your for a start.
I've been discussing the site with Christian friends of mine who found the views equally laughable.
I feel the site should carry a disclaimer along the lines that the Radio times has to carry - "other reviews are available, there are our own (extreemist) views"
I would hardy refer to my actions as kicking up a storm in any sence of the word.
I am not belittling any religions, creeds shapes or forms as a whole , simply those within any group who take their own views too seriously.
oh and while your at it, call me a bigot again and I'll break your legs ;)
this was a joke for those who have had a sence of humor bypass
Colonel Ames: As in, a troll, flamebait. Was intended to impart that you shouldn't take my post too seriously/be overly sensitive about to it.
Moby-Dick: I don't have a horse. ;) I am, however, a Christian, and, as I said, I feel the reviews are warranted, as it is intended for those who are very cautious about such things. I think the disclaimer idea is stupid. If something like that were enforced, you'd have to provide a disclaimer every time you presented a view or opinion that conflicts with someone else's. Storm was the wrong word, but I think you know what I mean. Belittling the group for the actions of a few within that group? That's stereotyping. That's like saying, because a black steals my car, all blacks are thieves. Bigotry again, no? *hides his legs*
Within the "Christian" faith, there are many many different views and creeds and principles. I follow a more relaxed form than most (For one, I don't preach to people, and I hate it when other Christians do that - share with those that ask, but don't make a nuisance of yourself), I don't attend Church on Sunday's, etc. Compared to, say, the Methodists (Yes, yes, stereotyping that group, I know), I'm a heretic. :) If you really have to belittle a group, try to make the group as specific as possible rather than just labelling the entirey ("Convicted black robbers are thieves", rather than just "blacks are thieves").
Absit invidia.
I'm not belittling Christians at all - I was a methodist for 6 years, my other half is a baptist and the rest of my family is good old C of E. The disclaimer idea was a little on the tongue in cheek side - parhaps I'm crediting parents with less common sence than nessesary to know if a film is suitable for thier offspring.
In the UK the film rating system is on the whole fairly good at doing this for them. The Certificate PG or Parental Guidance is the only "grey"certificate where It is up to the parents to choose if they'd like to see the film. (there is now a new 12a certificate but lets not complicate matters ) I'd like to think that most people would be capable of using common sence when it comes to what is suitable for their children's entertainment.
I'm going to bring in another Sterotype as a Hypothesis. The site is US based. The Us aren't capable as a whole ( I realise it does have its free thinkers , but I'm sorry to say they are the exception that prooves the rule ) of making trheir minds up, so they have to be told what to think.
If I was looking for a movie classification site I'd personally look for somethign that does not attempt to read hidden meanings into items that just are not there , such as the british board of film classification. http://www.bbfc.co.uk/
I realise that having faith is a 24 hour occupation, but does that mean that every thing you see hear or think must have a spiritual significance ?
another example is the review for brother bear - rated as a "U" film, it caonts no profanity, sexual content or real violence.
however our friends at pluggedin seem to take a vaste dislike to it on religious grounds.
http://www.pluggedinonline.com/movie...s/a0001547.cfm
what happened to Entertainment ?Quote:
Brother Bear is no Lion King or Monsters Inc. It’s more like Jungle Book 2—easily forgotten and bearly worth the time. But with the MPAA granting it a G rating, a lot of families are going to assume all is well in the brotherhood. It's not. Although there are several praiseworthy messages (the moose brothers' reconciliation and the sacrificial death of Kenai’s brother among them), families wanting a peek will be forced to wade through rivers of spiritual muck. Believe me, it's not worth it.
Fair enough. Though some of the other posts others made in this thread seem to do so. Was what I was refering to.Quote:
Originally posted by Moby-Dick
I'm not belittling Christians at all - I was a methodist for 6 years, my other half is a baptist and the rest of my family is good old C of E. The disclaimer idea was a little on the tongue in cheek side - parhaps I'm crediting parents with less common sence than nessesary to know if a film is suitable for thier offspring.
I wouldn't rely on that rating system. I remember Titanic was rated PG10. I watched it with my father (He's the kind of person who'd follow those extremist reviews) on my 11th birthday or something, and it was full of nudity. :( Also, a comment a friend of mine made, these days, you get more nudity in a film rated 13 than in films rated 16 or 18, which seems to be, strangely, true.Quote:
In the UK the film rating system is on the whole fairly good at doing this for them. The Certificate PG or Parental Guidance is the only "grey"certificate where It is up to the parents to choose if they'd like to see the film. (there is now a new 12a certificate but lets not complicate matters ) I'd like to think that most people would be capable of using common sence when it comes to what is suitable for their children's entertainment.
Were you to ask my father, he'd say yes. :/Quote:
I realise that having faith is a 24 hour occupation, but does that mean that every thing you see hear or think must have a spiritual significance ?
Agreed. But when entertainment seeks to re-educate, it crosses the line, I believe. On the whole, though, I agree with what you have to say.Quote:
what happened to Entertainment ?
I can't comment on the SA film rating system , but Titanic was rated 12 in the UK and has no more nudity than Page 3 of the sun.Quote:
I wouldn't rely on that rating system. I remember Titanic was rated PG10. I watched it with my father (He's the kind of person who'd follow those extremist reviews) on my 11th birthday or something, and it was full of nudity. Also, a comment a friend of mine made, these days, you get more nudity in a film rated 13 than in films rated 16 or 18, which seems to be, strangely, true.
I'd avoid taking your dad to the cinema these days then, I coudn't find a single film currently out that He'd like ;)
how much Entrtainment in your opion seeks to re-indoctrinate ? Just because you see somethign that is of a different belife to you , does that mean you should do it as well?
eg. ( and I admit its not the best example ) if you walk past a mosque, will you convert to Islam ?
they said this about System of a Down's Toxicity album :
thats an amazing album, and just because it gives off a couple of messages that the bible doesn't agree with, it makes them bad musicians? Bullsh*t!!Quote:
For the most part, Toxicity peddles guitar-pounding lyrical obscurity and head-scratching streams of consciousness. Yet there’s an ebb and flow of anger running through this disc. What’s biting sarcasm? What’s meant to be taken at face value? Hard to tell, and not worth the effort
that site is stupid, i'll let my kids listen to whatever they want. music is a main part of my life, and if they want it to be in theirs, then so be it.
Well thats one view I believe in :)
I personely think that you shouldn't sheild your kids from other views and beliefs - you'll just end up with someone who will rebel as a teenager, or have a mid life crisis....
Newspapers and magazines here don't rely on nudity for sales - thus, they have none. :PQuote:
Originally posted by Moby-Dick
I can't comment on the SA film rating system , but Titanic was rated 12 in the UK and has no more nudity than Page 3 of the sun.
Indeed. :eek:Quote:
I'd avoid taking your dad to the cinema these days then, I coudn't find a single film currently out that He'd like ;)
Not a clue, and of course not. I'm thinking of the impresionable here, young children, etc.Quote:
how much Entrtainment in your opion seeks to re-indoctrinate ? Just because you see somethign that is of a different belife to you , does that mean you should do it as well?
Rythmic: That's a very dangerous way to raise children. Without protecting them from bad influences, you might well wind up with a child that shoplifts by the age of 12, having been exposed to the belief that stealing is perfetly fine (I personally know some people who believe this).
Punky: Did they actually say SOAD were bad musicians? No. They said that it would be better to avoid that album. That's all.
Wow...a lot has been said.
Looking at some reviews I would say that they are little too critical of some things...that E.T. thing for example. But I think they might (rightly or wrongly) be trying to make sure they include everything someone might consider objectionable, and then those who care have been notified, those who don't can disregard it. That is, tell everyone everything and then let them make their mind up.
I think though, that their exact views aren't the main point here. What is, is that they see value in giving serious consideration to the things that take up a person's time and input into their life. They see the messages of entertainment as important, if not more, that the way they are presented.
Message matters to these people, and I suppose it's fair to ask, if a person has taken the time to present/include a message, one should pay attention to it. What's more valuable the envelope or the letter? They believe that movie makers/musicians have an influence on people, and if you have the choice, they think it sensible/wise to choose what is good. A lot of times you can't divide the message from the vehicle.
They are happy to sacrifice the enjoyment that a piece of music might bring, to avoid having to listen to a message that they dislike, or disgusts/offends them. They're then giving others who care the same chance.
Relitively uninteresting fact and completely pointless:
Monty Python's Life of Brian was banned in Jersey for a while on religious grounds or something.