Why do you want to remove the parental part from Parental Guidance Suggested? Do you hate families? Do you want to prevent parents from knowing or participating in what their children watch?
CV Rick - 08:06am on 06/10/2006
Why do you ask such pathetically stupid questions? Are you congenitally disfunctional between the ears? Do you oppose intelligent discourse?
Do you honestly support the idea that a movie totally devoid of sex and sexual inuendo, without so much as a “damn” in the dialogue never mind any of the currently-celebrated gangsta-style obscenity and violence, with no bloody body parts and nothing more violent than a high school football game, that such a movie should be rated “PG” simply because it addresses questions of personal faith? Are you that much of a leftwing bigot?
Bat One - 08:06am on 06/10/2006
Are namecalling and personal attacks your only rhetorical tools? Do they contribute to the debate or detract from it?
CV Rick - 08:06am on 06/10/2006
"My only rhetorical tools?”
Hardly. But you have certainly not demonstrated the capacity to deal with anything less blunt and blatant? The point of the ooriginal post was to challenge the rationale for assigning the movie in question a rating of “PG.” There is nothing in either the quoted article nor in my brief comments to remotely suggest a challenge to the entire MPAA ratings system. Have you stopped beating y0ur wife? Has she noticed?
Bat One - 08:06am on 06/10/2006
More personal attacks . . . how quaint.
I’m a parent and I insist on knowing what it is my children watch and discussing in depth the messages they receive through education and entertainment. I certainly and unequivocably want to know when they are being fed religious indoctrination disguised as drama. As far as I’m concerned, fundamental Christianity is a detriment to individual and national morality and I want to be sure to explain to my children how and why so that they can enter society with clear information and open reasoning skills.
I was raised in a severely fundamentalist household by a strict father. The messages and sheltering I received were not beneficial and did more to restrict my understanding than to facilitate it.
If you feel differently, that’s your perogative . . . but I for one want to be aware of the evangelical content of movies in advance of my children seeing them.
And, quit calling me names.
CV Rick - 09:06am on 06/10/2006
So, Rick, your hostility toward Christianity and your desire to censor it are sourced in bad childhood experiences? Why does this sound so familiar?
robert108 - 09:06am on 06/10/2006
r108,
You are lying about me again. You are a complete and total liar. I said nothing about censoring . .. I did not advocate changing the content of any movies, preventing the release of any movies, or dictating writing standards on any scripts. I said that I want to know in advance of any evangelical Christian messages. You surely, if intellectually honest, would know the difference. Quit lying about me.
I never blamed any childhood experiences for any adult problems . . . you are lying again. I merely explained, for purpose of understanding a viewpoint, what I believe the danger of evangelical fundamentalist messages can be. I’m quite well-adjusted and have conquered any setbacks quite well. Don’t lie about me.
and, finally, quit lying, r108.
CV Rick - 09:06am on 06/10/2006
Rick,
First of all, I have not called you any names. I have asked if you were a leftwing bigot, and enough of one to approve of utilizing the MPAA rating system to cover apparently wholesome, faith-based movies, as well as the violent and sexually explicit fair those rating were intended to cover. Clearly you are, although your answer was more in the form of a rationalization than any sort of proud affirmative. I’m not surprised. Once again, the left, which preaches “diversity” and “inclusiveness” is caught in a web of their own duplicitous hypocrisy.
Ah, well! So much for that “debate” you alluded to.
Once again, as you appear to be somewhat slow today, the point of the post was to question the assignment of a “PG” rating to the subject movie. If I had intended to challenge the ratings system itself, as you have so dishonestly accused me of doing, I would have done it clearly, concisely, and with no equivocation… so that even a liberal could understand my purpose.
Bat One - 09:06am on 06/10/2006
Wishing that I had been caught in a web of “duplicitous hypocrisy” doesn’t make it so. I fully support a system that allows parents to know what their children, or themselves for that matter, are going to be exposed to while in a theater or at home watching a movie. It’s part of being well-informed and having the knowledge to make informed choices. I have always supported such a system - for movies, games, music, etc. I think sucker punching an unsuspecting public with an evangelical message is the height of “duplicitous hypocrisy” - - especially from the religious claiming to be honest. Let us know what’s coming . . . let us decide, in advance, if that’s what we want to spend our time and money on.
Are just so much of an imbecile that you can’t understand that?
(see, I can ‘not call you names’ the same way you don’t.)
CV Rick - 09:06am on 06/10/2006
at least they rated that gay S&M pornography flick “Passion of the Christ” R
Why do you want to remove the parental part from Parental Guidance Suggested? Do you hate families? Do you want to prevent parents from knowing or participating in what their children watch?
Why do you ask such pathetically stupid questions? Are you congenitally disfunctional between the ears? Do you oppose intelligent discourse?
Do you honestly support the idea that a movie totally devoid of sex and sexual inuendo, without so much as a “damn” in the dialogue never mind any of the currently-celebrated gangsta-style obscenity and violence, with no bloody body parts and nothing more violent than a high school football game, that such a movie should be rated “PG” simply because it addresses questions of personal faith? Are you that much of a leftwing bigot?
Are namecalling and personal attacks your only rhetorical tools? Do they contribute to the debate or detract from it?
"My only rhetorical tools?”
Hardly. But you have certainly not demonstrated the capacity to deal with anything less blunt and blatant? The point of the ooriginal post was to challenge the rationale for assigning the movie in question a rating of “PG.” There is nothing in either the quoted article nor in my brief comments to remotely suggest a challenge to the entire MPAA ratings system. Have you stopped beating y0ur wife? Has she noticed?
More personal attacks . . . how quaint.
I’m a parent and I insist on knowing what it is my children watch and discussing in depth the messages they receive through education and entertainment. I certainly and unequivocably want to know when they are being fed religious indoctrination disguised as drama. As far as I’m concerned, fundamental Christianity is a detriment to individual and national morality and I want to be sure to explain to my children how and why so that they can enter society with clear information and open reasoning skills.
I was raised in a severely fundamentalist household by a strict father. The messages and sheltering I received were not beneficial and did more to restrict my understanding than to facilitate it.
If you feel differently, that’s your perogative . . . but I for one want to be aware of the evangelical content of movies in advance of my children seeing them.
And, quit calling me names.
So, Rick, your hostility toward Christianity and your desire to censor it are sourced in bad childhood experiences? Why does this sound so familiar?
r108,
You are lying about me again. You are a complete and total liar. I said nothing about censoring . .. I did not advocate changing the content of any movies, preventing the release of any movies, or dictating writing standards on any scripts. I said that I want to know in advance of any evangelical Christian messages. You surely, if intellectually honest, would know the difference. Quit lying about me.
I never blamed any childhood experiences for any adult problems . . . you are lying again. I merely explained, for purpose of understanding a viewpoint, what I believe the danger of evangelical fundamentalist messages can be. I’m quite well-adjusted and have conquered any setbacks quite well. Don’t lie about me.
and, finally, quit lying, r108.
Rick,
First of all, I have not called you any names. I have asked if you were a leftwing bigot, and enough of one to approve of utilizing the MPAA rating system to cover apparently wholesome, faith-based movies, as well as the violent and sexually explicit fair those rating were intended to cover. Clearly you are, although your answer was more in the form of a rationalization than any sort of proud affirmative. I’m not surprised. Once again, the left, which preaches “diversity” and “inclusiveness” is caught in a web of their own duplicitous hypocrisy.
Ah, well! So much for that “debate” you alluded to.
Once again, as you appear to be somewhat slow today, the point of the post was to question the assignment of a “PG” rating to the subject movie. If I had intended to challenge the ratings system itself, as you have so dishonestly accused me of doing, I would have done it clearly, concisely, and with no equivocation… so that even a liberal could understand my purpose.
Wishing that I had been caught in a web of “duplicitous hypocrisy” doesn’t make it so. I fully support a system that allows parents to know what their children, or themselves for that matter, are going to be exposed to while in a theater or at home watching a movie. It’s part of being well-informed and having the knowledge to make informed choices. I have always supported such a system - for movies, games, music, etc. I think sucker punching an unsuspecting public with an evangelical message is the height of “duplicitous hypocrisy” - - especially from the religious claiming to be honest. Let us know what’s coming . . . let us decide, in advance, if that’s what we want to spend our time and money on.
Are just so much of an imbecile that you can’t understand that?
(see, I can ‘not call you names’ the same way you don’t.)
at least they rated that gay S&M pornography flick “Passion of the Christ” R