Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
DC we don’t agree on a lot of things, but generally I respect your intellectual honesty. The above however is just off the charts wrong. I cannot believe you said that.
We have seen in America people running ads in New York blasting Christianity and there has been some comment but NO serious outrage and absolutely no rioting.
HBO had an episode of some stupid show where a picture of Jesus was urinated on. NO riots.
The American government paid an artist who put a crucifix in a jug of elephant pee and there were no riots.
You know full well that there is zero danger of Christians rioting and killing people.
Good grief, more than a decade ago there was a movie about Jesus where he had sex with someone and no one got killed over that and that was a major offense to Christians.
Please don’t make these very dishonest comparisons. It is beneath you.
Lets not forget Bill Maher's film Religilous mocking those who actually believe in Jesus. No rioting, killing, burning of buildings, etc....
Muslim extremists have to be the most idiotic brainwashed species on earth!
This film's only purpose was to inflame and incite radical factions on both sides of the fence. It was not designed to educate, inform or entertain. It's only function was to create a firestorm of hate and negativity, which it successfully did and the right wing radicals are exploiting that fact to the maximum. Predictably, the individual responsible for it has crawled back under the rock he crawled out from.
It is up to the rest of us to clean up the mess and set things right.
Freaking spineless coward, as is anybody who supports this kind of inflamitory crap.
This film's only purpose was to inflame and incite radical factions on both sides of the fence. It was not designed to educate, inform or entertain. It's only function was to create a firestorm of hate and negativity. Predictably, the individual responsible for it has crawled back under the rock he crawled out from.
It is up to the rest of us to clean up the mess and set things right.
Freaking spineless coward, as is anybody who supports this kind of inflamitory crap.
Maher did the same thing with Religulous. Did you have the same things to say about him? I seriously doubt it.
Location: In a Galaxy far, far away called Germany
4,301 posts, read 4,418,554 times
Reputation: 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx
This film's only purpose was to inflame and incite radical factions on both sides of the fence. It was not designed to educate, inform or entertain. It's only function was to create a firestorm of hate and negativity. Predictably, the individual responsible for it has crawled back under the rock he crawled out from.
It is up to the rest of us to clean up the mess and set things right.
Freaking spineless coward, as is anybody who supports this kind of inflamitory crap.
I don't support this crap. But I don't see it as an excuse for murder either. If all religions acted this way, then we would be in real trouble. All religions need to stop with all the anti-other-religion crap.
Of course he enjoys the rights of freedom of speech. He also has blood on his hands as a result of spreading hate-speech.
To Add/
Bet he also enjoys the fact that one of his sons/daughters isnt over in the middle east dealing with the accountability part of his actions.Youd think a man of God would at least respect another religions sacred books even though he doesnt agree with them.bet he also likes that tax free status his little church enjoys.
Did he portray Jesus Christ as a sodomizer and pediphile? There are degrees, you know.
Even if he did, Christians/Catholics would not react like the extremists animals in the middle east. Mahers message in the movie is worse! He basically stated that millions upon millions of devoted people believe in a fairytail man that doesnt exists.
The DaVinchi Code (sp?) depicted christ as someone who slept with prostitutes and attacked the church for suppressing it. Honestly, it was a great movie, and I enjoyed it. But it was no less an attack on Catholocism than this was an attack on Islam. Worldwide, even in countries with different cultures...just how many people were slaughtered when the movie came out?
Did liberals attack the writer, producer or actors involved? Did the US government ask theaters to supress showing of the movie? WHy not?
Da Vinci Code is a fictional work, and I don't think questioning Jesus' past is somehow anti-Christian. Most of Jesus' life is a complete mystery. Sure, Conservatives get offended because they are literalists, and to them the thought of Jesus ever being married is considered blasphemy.
And I think you're ignoring the fact that most Christians are liberal, and most of Christianity is dominate in the Western World, where you can't get away with religious violence as easily. Don't think for one second a large chunk of American Fundamentalists wouldn't attack gays or women who have abortions if they thought they could get away with it. We have plenty of "Christian" pastors calling for Nazi style camps for gays, and many Fundamentalists support Uganda's kill the gays bill.
Islam as it stands right now is quite destructive and dangerous. It's dominate in an uneducated, poor section of the world's population, and has not had its enlightenment yet.
Islam today is what Christianity was in the Middle Ages.
The DaVinchi Code (sp?) depicted christ as someone who slept with prostitutes and attacked the church for suppressing it. Honestly, it was a great movie, and I enjoyed it. But it was no less an attack on Catholocism than this was an attack on Islam. Worldwide, even in countries with different cultures...just how many people were slaughtered when the movie came out?
Did liberals attack the writer, producer or actors involved? Did the US government ask theaters to supress showing of the movie? WHy not?
The Da Vinci Code depicted Christ as a man who married Mary Magdalene and had a child with her. Not as someone who slept with prostitutes. And Brown's book and the subsequent movie was marketed as fiction. There is a long history of accusations against the Catholic Church for conspiracies and cover-ups, which is not entirely unfounded, since we know that the Catholic Church can be quite secretive and has involved itself in less creditable activities. I really don't think you can compare the two. One is an attack on an entire religion, the other is not so much an attack on the Catholic Church as it is a regurgitation of a quagmire of different conspiracy theories that have been posited over the years about the Catholic Church.
And worldwide, it garnered a great deal of protest. Nuns kneeling outside theaters, some countries put extra security outside theaters showing the movie because they feared violence. But neither the movie nor the book claimed that Christ was an evildoer.
This movie about Mohammed does do that. It's an attack on an entire religion.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Christians don't constantly ridicule people they disagree with, or spread lies about them.
