quote:They're still deaths aren't they? I don't think I'm following you, what is it about death through war that makes it better than death in a concentration camp? It seems to me that if someone dies it is a very bad thing, I don't care if it was on the battelfield, in their homes due to starvation, or in a concentration camp. I suppose if you were trying to judge the culprits of the death then it matters... but to me death is death no matter where it is.
Wow, really? You don't see any difference in these different ways of dying?
How about this: Would you rather die peacefully in your sleep, or would you rather be gang-raped and beaten to death in a prison shower stall by a group of pissed-off inmates?
And, given that you'd probably choose the former over the latter, how can you say that "a death is a death no matter where it is"? Everyone has to die. Many deaths are tragic. Some are more tragic than others.
And, in my opinion, it would be far worse to be stripped naked and forced to watch my children and husband die trapped in a room full of poison gas than it would be to die surrounded by my friends, fully armed, with a helmet on my head, defending my country. Both ways would lead to an early and tragic death, yes, but one would leave me with my dignity, my hope for my cause, and my family alive and safe.
posted
Of course if given a choice you would choose the least painful death, but its still a very discrete amount of time. The fact that your dying, in my mind, far outweighs any considerations of how.
I talked to my mother last night. She brought the subject of this movie up. She was trying to get the conversation to turn to certian directions I'm sure, because she brought up a specific Bible study group later, and mentioned a family where they all go to a Bible study that covers the same topics even though they are in different parts of the country "so they have things to talk about on the phone."
Anyway I said yes, I know some Jewish people who are very concerned about the movie. Anyway she sputtered and quoted Dobson, saying how the previewers say it is true to the Biblical accounts etc. and that some Jewish leaders said it was ok. I said well, not all rabbis approved it, and many of the ordinary Jewish people are concerned about the history of Passion plays sparking Pogroms etc. like it used to. And she sputtered and said, we're in the 21st century! (Aren't we in the 22nd now?..I didn't bother bringing it up) But I said yes and look at all the bad things that have happened to Jews in the past 100 years.
Anyway, if my mother, who really should know better, is in denial that Bad Things Can Happen Today. Then I am scared, very scared, for the world in general. Because while she is anything but anti-semitic, it is EXACTLY attitudes like that which allow anti-semitism and a whole bunch of other nasty things to creep into a community unawares.
posted
It's not just physical pain. I think everyone wants to die in a way that is honorable, that preserves their dignity, that gives them a feeling that their death is not meaningless. War heroes get that in spades. Victims of genocide do not. Their deaths are, by definition, meaningless.
Posts: 2220 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dear, your mother is correct, we are in the 21st century. We won't reach the 22nd for another 96 years.
I know you're frustrated with your Mom, but I'm also one of these people who believe that this is much ado about nothing that's happened yet. Gibson and many prominent Christian leaders have said they don't want blame to fall on the Jewish people as a whole, and I live in the heart of the Bible belt and the only reaction I see around me is Christians becoming angry and upset - because of the assumption that they would ever be violent toward their Jewish neighbors!
Quite frankly, it's getting to me. I find a little insulting that people would think that, after seeing a movie, I and the people who share my beliefs would look at each other and say "So, you ready to go beat up some Jews?"
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Except that it's happened. Over and over again.
It's not like Jews are starting to rally together to round up Christians before they start anything. They're just expressing concern. They're worried, and judging by several thousand years of recorded history, I think they have every right to be.
Posts: 2220 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ayelar, I think you are trying to frame the debate in a manner that makes everyone you are arguing against the insensitive bad guy, but to do that, you have to ignore all the rational arguments and the other genocides that have occurred.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Historically such concerns are valid. But I can see why seeking the right to grant pre-approval to a film that is designed to be a representation of the central events of someone's faith would trigger a defensive reaction.
My thoughts are wait and see...if nothing happens because of the film, good. If something does happen, then it is imperative that such actions be condemned vocally and loudly by all Christians.
Something to the effect that "Using an accurate portrayal of the sacrifice of our Lord as justification for violating every commandment He gave us is blasphemy."
posted
Look, I don't think anyone here is saying that Christians are inevitably going to be so overcome by their hatred that they'll start lighting torches and amassing a mob. Especially not anyone here. Of course not.
However, there do seem to be a lot of people who are implying that Jews are wrong to be worried about this, or that they're worrying over nothing. And history has clearly and repeatedly shown that this is not the case. Even if this turns out to be nothing, they have every right to be concerned, and what's silly is telling them they don't.
Posts: 2220 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok, if you wish to call the US a "Christian nation" that is fine. I don't think pogroms will be happening here either and I truly hope we don't see a spike in the low-level anti-semitic violence that does exist here.
But, what happens when the movie is shown in Europe and the former USSR to lesser educated people who are looking for something to blame their economic recession on?
I'm saying the way I've seen them expressed by a lot of people has been way too intrusive. If people aren't concerned about the film being anti-semetic, why did some people want the right to pre-approve it and suggest changes?
quote:Yes, but in this case, they're all strangers. Saying that the deaths of strangers who were really very different from you, except that you have family members currently in the military, hit closer to home than the deaths of people who were really very much like you, except that they practiced a different religion, seems rather odd.
This was directed to me on the previous page,and I just want to say that my post was a hypothetical, it does not represent my personal belief. I simply posed it to point out that just because someone feels differently about a tragedy like the Holocaust does not mean they hate Jews. It just means their perspective is different.
Personally, I do see the extermination of non-combatants to be more disturbing than the deaths of trained soldiers, so you have no argument with me on that.
However, I would not think someone who did feel the loss of American soldiers more keenly was anti-Semitic. That's my only point.
I dislike the inference that in order to keep from being labeled a bigot I have to agree that the Holocaust was the worst thing that has ever befallen any group of people. To some people, it is. But it's not the only incident of genocide in the world's history, as other people on this thread have pointed out.
The attitude I see being presented is "You must agree with what I say, or I'll call you a bigot and an anti-semite." I don't like that.
You want to know my personal opinion? Not that it's relevant, but yes, the Holocaust was one of the most terrible things I can imagine. The idea of families separated, mothers being torn away from their children and sent to a gas chamber, twins experimented on, - those have to represent the worst events any humans can do to another human.
I do recognize that. What has my ire up is the attitude that because I'm a Christian I must hate Jews after I see this movie. What has me upset is people like Ela and Rivka telling me they are afraid of their Christian neighbors.
We are not the Nazis. Christians have supported and loved the Jewish people in America for a long time. We are, as pointed out by members of the Jewish community, among the most ardent supporters of Israel. We have done nothing, nothing to earn the fear and loathing with which we're being spoken about.
It's all well and good to say "Oh, but we're not talking about YOU Belle, we're just talking about other Christians." Those other Christians are my brothers and sisters. And I think you are insulting them.
For the love of all that's good in this world, can you not see that nothing has happened yet! You have no reason to believe anything will, except for your knowledge of "those things happened in the past." In the past a lot of things happened that never will again. Despite our great fears and trepidations after the twin towers were destroyed we did not bring back the internment camps of WWII and round up all the muslims. No, we had the President visiting a mosque and urging the country not to lash out against their muslim neighbors.
Before this movie has even been released we have Christian leaders urging people not to blame the Jews, and you know what? Most Christians are confused. We don't know why we're being warned not to do something we never even considered in the first place!
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
So, "No one is saying Christians are going to rise up and violate their religion, but don't you dare say people are wrong for being worried that they will."?
You don't get to pander to everyone.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks, kat. I'll keep you in mind the next time I need to know what I can or cannot do.
No, I don't think anyone here is saying "The Christians" definitely are going to rise up against Jews. However, history within our own lifetimes tells us that there is a possibility that there might be a negative reaction from some misguided people under the guise of Christianity. Such things are not unthinkable. And yes, the group of people that has repeatedly borne the brunt of hatred by groups under the guise of Christianity has every right to be worried. That's all they are: worried. They aren't actually doing anything. What's wrong with being cautious?
Posts: 2220 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote: "No one is saying Christians are going to rise up and violate their religion, but don't you dare say people are wrong for being worried that they will."
I'd say that sums it up in a nutshell Kat. I don't think it is "having it both ways" at all. Look at history for the proof. Of course the people that violate their religion are behaving in an "un-Christian" manner but throughout history, numerous religions [Islam anyone?] have been twisted used to validate horrible causes that the actual writings of the religion strongly opposed.
I would say that the Christians who don't understand why Jewish people would be concerned (not Belle!!!) don't have the understanding of many of the years of Church history, before the Protestant Reformation, when there was only one "Christian" church in name, and lots and lots of nasty things took place!
AJ
(I'm not saying that Protestant History is pure as the driven snow compared to Catholicism. Calvin drowned the Anabaptists right and left. I'm just making the point that most US Christians are generally unaware of a large section of the joined "church history" that the catholics and protestants share.)
quote:It's all well and good to say "Oh, but we're not talking about YOU Belle, we're just talking about other Christians." Those other Christians are my brothers and sisters. And I think you are insulting them.
But, Belle, not everyone who calls themselves Christian shares your understanding of the faith. Some twist it to mean terrible things, and some act on those misguided beliefs, all the while calling themselves Christian. For example, I think that the people who vilify Mormons and desecrate religious items in the Temple Square during weddings and peaceful gatherings are doing a terrible thing. And they're doing it in the name of Christianity. Would you also claim them as your brothers and sisters?
Not all "Christians" are going to go into this film with an open mind and an open heart. Some of them are going in already distrustful or even hateful towards Jews. How will they come out?
Posts: 2220 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Honestly, it is completely inconcievable that this movie would convince anyone to do anything that wasn't already in their head. It's laughable that a good Christian would happily go along their loving-everyone-way, see this movie, and decide to join the genocide.
If you are that convinced of the power of media, does this mean those clamouring for censorship are also clamoring for the censorship of sex and violence in the media? Where's the enthusiasm for eliminating all mentions of adultery, because some people might think it was then okay to cheat on their spouses?
quote:That's all they are: worried. They aren't actually doing anything.
Not true. There have been requests for changes, and requests for boycotts. In other words, non-authoritative censorship.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Belle, I understand your point of view, and I agree with most of what you say. The only thing that has me a bit worried is a jump in association which, I believe, is similar in nature to the jump the worst of the Passion-haters are making.
Several Jewish leaders are afraid that this movie will focus the violence of borderline individuals against members of the Jewish faith, or percieved members of the Jewish faith.
No one has said or accused all of Christianity of such acts. Indeed, the fear they feel does not come from your brothers and sisters in faith, but from those who claim to be Christian, but know nothing of the beliefs behind that name.
Yet you see this as an attack on Christianity and on your beliefs. Why? Because its a (the) Christian story that this movie is about? Because the movie is a declaration of faith, which are rare and fragile these days?
I fear that your fear based on their fears, no matter how meaningless their fears are, will cause a greater split between Jews and true Christians than anything in this movie could.
Those who would manipulate renewed hatred between Christians and Jews have had the Deicide card taken from their hand. Instead, they are playing the "Their Fear is an attack on Christians. How can we tolerate people who do not tolerate us" card.
I am hoping that the Christians around the world will live up to their names and Turn the Other Cheek to such rabble rousing.
Just as I hope that the Jews around the world will refrain from blaming all the Christians in the world for whatever actions some who claim to be Christian may or may not make. After all, that is what they want from the Christians, not to be blamed for the actions some Jews did 2000 years ago.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would like to agree with Belle that people are worked up over nothing. I’d really, really like that, but I can’t.
I live in a very rural area, where there isn’t a lot of diversity. I think bigotry is a lot more open here than it is in places where people have neighbors of different ethnicities and religions. We don’t, and the level of ignorance about modern Judaism is scary. I have had people brag to me about the stupid and offensive things they’ve said when meeting Jews.
One that immediately comes to mind is someone who told me that he met a man in Des Moines “who said he was Jewish, and I said to him, ‘then where’s your altar for animal sacrifice? You can’t be a Jew unless you sacrifice animals.’” The Jewish man apparently excused himself from the conversation at that point, but the guy telling the story was looking to me for approval of how he’d gotten the better of the man in their religious debate. He was quite put out when I told him that being Jewish does NOT in fact, require a home altar for animal sacrifice.
I have heard several people say, when the topic of inter-faith dialogue comes up “well, I just don’t see why Jews don’t believe in Jesus. Don’t they understand their own scriptures?” I don’t even want to get into some of the answers I’ve heard to that question.
And only last year two middle schoolers came to me to settle a debate – one of them spends summers with his dad in a larger city and had a Jewish friend there, he was trying to defend his friend from the other student’s accusation that “the Jews killed Jesus.”
There are a lot of people around here (and in other areas of the country, I’m sure) who have never met an actual, live, Jewish person. Their only referent for the word “Jew” is the bad guys in the Biblical narrative. And no, it doesn’t work to point out that Jesus and the disciples were also Jewish, because to them once a person started following Christ he or she was automatically no longer Jewish. “The Jews” equates to “the ones who rejected Christ and killed him.” And by continuing to reject Christ (by not becoming Christian) some people DO see modern Jews as culpable.
To sum up – I think Christianity has a shameful history of anti-semitism, and we need to be aware of that and watch out for its legacy. I’m going to see the movie. I will probably go with church groups and arrange discussion times afterwards. But I will be very aware of the potential for anti-Semitism and make sure that the post-movie discussion deals with it.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Honestly, it is completely inconcievable that this movie would convince anyone to do anything that wasn't already in their head. It's laughable that a good Christian would happily go along their loving-everyone-way, see this movie, and decide to join the genocide.
True, but how do you know what is truly in other people's heads? I don't. Think about your darkest most awful thoughts (of course we don't like to think about them.) What if someone's worst thoughts just happen to be anti-semitic? We would hope they struggle against them, but we don't know for sure.
Many fundamentalist Christians that still believe the Jews have a direct part in future prophecy, also believe that many of the calamaties that have befallen the Jewish people have been caused or strongly influenced by agents of Satan trying to thwart God's plan. Therefore in many ways they should be the most concerned about anti-Semitism, because even something meant for good like this, can be twisted by evil to cause a fire to start where only a spark was before.
---- I don't understand what you mean by this kat.
quote:non-authoritative censorship
If it isn't authoritative (as in from the government), it isn't censorship. There is nothing wrong with convincing people to boycott something on intellectual arguments. That is an American tradition.
As far as "authoritative" goes in speaking for the Jewish people, while there are various rabbinnical councils, like non-LDS Protestants you don't really have an over-arching "authority" that can speak with one voice for the entire people, especially with such widely diverging branches and the convolution and convergence of race vs. religion as in Jews.
posted
So, Banna, in that theme, do you condemn all portrayals of anti-social activity in media, on the chance it would nourish and encourage a cancer in someone's heart?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Kat, no one has condemned the movie. We’re expressing concern and trying to be aware of potential problems so as not to be hit unprepared.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Kat, I wasn't saying it for myself or for my personal beliefs. I was saying that that is a commonly taught fundamentalist Christian belief.
The logic is: If Satan takes specific joy in tormenting the Jewish people, then he's going to take every possible opportunity to cause trouble for them and thwart the work of Christianity in general.
You could look at all the hoopla now as that "trouble" (the perspective which most fundamentalists are currently taking) I was simply taking that logic, and applying it slightly differently but within the same parameters.
Personally, if I had 1000+ years history of persecution of my race behind me, I'd be a little nervous too. I can't say that the wariness is invalid. In fact from a historical view, the wariness seems prudent to me.
I look at it from the same way I look at it when Steve (who is multi-racial) has a job in a either a really ethnically white, or really ethnically black area of Chicago. Either could be dangerous for him if someone percieves him to be something he isn't. So I worry just a smidgen. Not enough to take over my life, but enough to keep me aware of him throughout the day more than normal.
posted
I was thinking of the proposed disclaimer at the beginning.
How about a disclaimer at the beginning of Unfaithful: "This is not an endorsement of adultery; committing adultery will be harmful to your marriage, your self-esteem, possibly your health, and can lose you the respect of your children and yourself."
----
I think...there are several different conversations going on here. I have to admit dkw's post was an eye-opener - I was in college before I knew that anti-semitism existed as a widespread phenomon. I certainly knew all about the Holocaust, but figured Hitler was freaking crazy. In my Christian culture, there's more of an attitude of a kid hanging out at the edges of the dinner table hoping for someone to notice us. I've still never seen it, except for news reports and second-hand.
I also take issue with blaming any one religion for the anti-social and evil acts of its members. People will do them anyway - religion just occasionally provides a convenient excuse. Few people actually revel in evil - most anti-social acts are committed by people who have justified them to themselves. But I suspect that justification will be found anyway.
Why pick a religious movie to suddenly get huffy about alleged portrayals that might encourage anti-social behavior?
Why is Unfaithful praised - and adultery destroys trust and marriages - and this movie selected out?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
and WHY isn't Gibson willing to put a disclaimer at the front of his movie (or at the end)? There isn't any harm in the disclaimer, so why not? It pops up before the movie ever starts so it isn't like it is ruining its "artistic" merit.
I didn't hear the same outrage over, oh crumb, Mystic River where a father commits vigilante murder. That's not even obliquely and allegedly encouraging anti-social behavior - it's trumpeting it.
---
So, you're saying this movie is singled out because people don't like Mel Gibson's religion? If a Jew had made the movie, it would be fine?
posted
How many pogroms (ignoring Helen of Troy for the moment ) were started by infidelity?
Let alone movies about same? Don't get me wrong, I won't see and object to movies like that -- I think the critical acclaim for The Bridges of Madison County is nauseating.
I keep hearing "it can't happen here" and "it can't happen now"!
That's what the German Jews who didn't heed the signs in the mid-1930s said too . . . I just PRAY that this time it is true.
I would be THRILLED to have it proven that my concerns are unfounded. Looking at some of the vitriol posted on other sites, I don't think they are. Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Partially, his "fringe" Catholicism is what has been covered in depth the previous four pages. I sat and read through pages of history from the web page of that religous order, and they seem to have a fair bit of meglomania going on if nothing else.
posted
I assure you I haven’t been praising Unfaithful. (Actually, I’ve never heard of it. Is it out now?) But I’m not particularly concerned that anyone I know is going to think adultery is justifiable because they see it in a movie. I am concerned that some people I know will think contempt toward Jewish people is acceptable, and that this movie could encourage that belief.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:But I’m not particularly concerned that anyone I know is going to think adultery is justifiable because they see it in a movie.
Why not? People cheat all the time, and that horrible, selfish act breaks the hearts and lives of innocent people all the time. Isn't that worrisome?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let me re-phrase that. I don’t think anyone in my congregation is going to believe that God sanctions adultery because they saw it in a movie.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
kat you are not reading what I post. I'm answering your question in the general and then you keep extrapolating to the specific that isn't there.
Kat:
quote: So, you're saying this movie is singled out because people don't like Mel Gibson's religion?
I am NOT singling out this movie, other "people" have. I didn't even really think about it until this thread started.
My response:
quote:Partially, his "fringe" Catholicism ...
I'm not singling out his "fringe" Catholicism. Others brought it up as a concern. I read their own website and it is a bit megalomaniacal IMO.
So to answer the original question in a single complete sentence:
I believe people are singling out this movie and its relation to anti-semitism partially because of the Catholic sect he belongs to and its anti-semetic leanings and partially because of the 1000 years of connection of passion plays and pogroms.
No where in there do I say anything condemming ANYONE else individually or am accusing ANYONE individually of religious intolerance.
Kat:
quote: So you're attacking the movie because you don't like his religion.
And you're accusing other people of religious intolerance?
How the heck did we get from that to this statment? This is a PERFECT example of how people misconstrue the intent of the written word. Anti-semetics do the exact same thing.
*hugs kat, you know I love you, I'm just frustrated!*
I find the fallacy - the terrible, false, damaging fallacy - that a lover can ease your stressed-out heart, that if your spouse is truly not making you happy, you need to find someone who can, that a younger lover is proof of virility and/or attractiveness, that everyone needs some spice in life, that some people are just meant to flirt with everything in a skirt, and that vows should end when they aren't working for you anymore to be incredibly widespread, and it's a terrible evil. It's everywhere, and it's in people you'd never suspect. If we are going to start demanding disclaimers at the beginning of movies, it should be universal. That I'd listen to.
----
*hugs Banna* I know. I love that we can argue in circles and still understand each other. Fencing with you clarifies my thinking, at least on the days I'm paying attention.
posted
The way I feel is that, whether or not there will be anti-semitic acts instigated by this movie, I think we all should be trying head off a lot of this through discussions with our fellow Christians. To say, "Well, I just don't see it happening," is fine if you are right, and feel comfortable speaking for your fellow Christians. However, if something does happen, then it's really too late isn't it? Yes, we can decry the act, and educate folks. Yet, if we had done the same education beforehand, the whole incident could have been avoided.
I think this is a straightforward application of Pascal's wager, at very minimal cost to all involved.
And I DON'T think that only people who are looking for an excuse will commit these acts. The ignorant, but otherwise benign, folks could easily get emotionally charged, and look to discharge their emotion. If the first person they talk to IS one who is anti-semitic, then I think that person will act out in a that way.
We, particularly here at Hatrack, OVERestimate the rationality of our fellow man. I've seen it all too often, in various places where people have rationalized a certain opinion, and they will outright reject contradiction, for no other reason than they feel like they've done sufficient research on the topic already. The reality is, they DON'T want to discuss things liek we do on Hatrack; they just want to either convince, or label someone as wrong without even holding the opposing viewpoint in their head a moment.
And this behavior is not universal, even with a single person. They might be able to see POV on topics A,B, and C, but not at all on topic E.
Any comment about Mel Gibson's religion instead of the content of the movie is, in my opinion, an anti-religious stance and ad hominem attack.
About adultery:
It's not murder of the body, but it's the murder of many sacred things, including marriage and trust, and it's wildly more prevelant than murder of the body. I would LOVE to see a diclaimer at the beginning of Unfaithful.
About murder:
What about Mystic River, then? That's vigilante murder one by one, instead of en mass.
The problem is that this is a powerful story about a martyr, and if there's a martyr, someone gets painted as the bad guy. No one likes being accused of being the bad guy, even by association. There are also apparently some idiots out there that lack the spiritual understanding and sense of time that would prevent that association. *scowl*
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
) were started by infidelity?![[Frown]](frown.gif)
