Activists oppose gay hockey movie...

[FLAMESBURNOIL]

Originally Posted by Reaper

Actually, I didn't imply it. You have obviously read more into it than what was written.

I also never used the term "religious machine." I did not intend nor did I brand all "religious" people "xenophobic" or "close minded." I branded the religious right who stage those kinds of protests as xenophobic and close minded. I was specific in my statement as I clearly organized the entire thought into a single sentence which was seperate from the one that preceded it.

my bad here is what you said

As per usual, religion is the engine of intolerance. Whenever the religious right stage these kind of protests I cannot help but shake my head at their xenophobic, close minded mentality.

just replace the bolded part with lets say Whenever people like this - instead you branded every one who is on the religious right a "xenophobic" and "close minded " - even though you have no evidence to suggest that they all share the same opinion.

I agree with your statement, i just dont agree with broad application of it.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Reaper

As per usual, religion is the engine of intolerance.

This implies that people who follow religions will become intolerant, as that's what religion teaches.

Whenever the religious right stage these kind of protests I cannot help but shake my head at their xenophobic, close minded mentality.

I'm religious, and I'm right wing. I would however suggest that I am not xenophobic or intolerant. Perhaps I'm not as right wing as some, but I am part of the religious right...

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

What really frosts my buns are gay extremists, religious extremists, and prejudiced people.

sarcasm/

There are only two things I can't stand in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures... and the Dutch.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by TheDragon

I find such irony in the fact that movies like this take such extreme heat, but movies like "Hostel," or "Saw I, II, III" get made depicting people being mutilated, tortured and horribly murdered, and nobody says a peep.

No kidding, these movies depict some of the most heinous evils around. People get all up in arms about something as natural as sex, yet when the most cruel and violent things are depicted, nobody cares. Firefly, why no outrage?

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by FireFly

This implies that people who follow religions will become intolerant, as that's what religion teaches.

I fully stand by the statement "religion is the engine of intolerance." Countless acts of brutality and intolerance have been committed in the name of whatever deity is the proclaimed focus of the religion in question. A great example of this is The Crusades of the eleventh through thirteenth centuries where people were pretty much told to convert to Christianity or be killed. The Bible does teach intolerance and barbarism. Leviticus is a virtual bloodbath.

[FLAMESBURNOIL]

Originally Posted by Table 5

No kidding, these movies depict some of the most heinous evils around. People get all up in arms about something as natural as sex, yet when the most cruel and violent things are depicted, nobody cares. Firefly, why no outrage?

oh you bet there was outrage over voilence in movie's - as recent as 20 years ago, but now people have become tolerant, just like as time passes the extreme will become tolerant to homesexuality, people just dont change over night....

i suppose people dont remeber who is responsible for those lyrical warning stickers on CD's. none other than Al and Tipper Gore - all in the name of religion!!

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Table 5

No kidding, these movies depict some of the most heinous evils around. People get all up in arms about something as natural as sex, yet when the most cruel and violent things are depicted, nobody cares. Firefly, why no outrage?

From me? Why am I not outraged? Some people choose to ignore certain scriptures such as "Judge not, lest ye be judged." I see most things in movies as what they are... entertainment. Nothing more, nothing less than mindless entertainment. Why aren't others outraged? Well, I cannot comment on the thought processes of others.

[FLAMESBURNOIL]

Originally Posted by Reaper

I fully stand by the statement "religion is the engine of intolerance." Countless acts of brutality and intolerance have been committed in the name of whatever deity is the proclaimed focus of the religion in question. A great example of this is The Crusades of the eleventh through thirteenth centuries where people were pretty much told to convert to Christianity or be killed. The Bible does teach intolerance and barbarism. Leviticus is a virtual bloodbath.

bah ha ha ha ha - its funny how the non religious basically lampast the religious right for taking the bible literally - but will also take it literally when trying to make their point.

I am not religious but i was educated in the catholic system in calgary which requires religious education and i can tell you we werent taught intolerance and in fact were pointed out the historical mindsets and how they dont apply to today

in fact the religion 12 course was nothing but a course about Hindiusm, Judaism and all the different religions other than christianity....

[Reggie Dunlop]

Movie producers love controversial build-up. Can't buy that kind of buzz.

Anytime the Toronto Maple Leafs are blamed to the downfall of Canadian society, I'm all for it.

[TheDragon]

Originally Posted by FireFly

From me? Why am I not outraged? Some people choose to ignore certain scriptures such as "Judge not, lest ye be judged." I see most things in movies as what they are... entertainment. Nothing more, nothing less than mindless entertainment. Why aren't others outraged? Well, I cannot comment on the thought processes of others.

Quoted For Truth. It's just a damn movie.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by TheDragon

Quoted For Truth. It's just a damn movie.

Well I dunno. 1971's movie Face-Off (a fictionalized account of Toronto Maple Leaf Billy Duke) caused the widespread societal acceptance of plaid polyester slacks. So there's a precedence for moral degeneracy.

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by Reaper

There are only two things I can't stand in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures... and the Dutch.

Ya, those bloody Dutch, eh.

[TheDragon]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Well I dunno. 1971's movie Face-Off (a fictionalized account of Toronto Maple Leaf Billy Duke) caused the widespread societal acceptance of plaid polyester slacks. So there's a precedence for moral degeneracy.

Ahh yes, I heard many campfire tales about this. Fortunately, I wasn't born yet, so I was unaffected by the plaidulization.

Some say the world just hasn't been the same since.

[GreenTeaFrapp]

One of the objections that the activists have made about the movie that isn't captured in the link is the Leafs are supporting a movie about an 11 year old homosexual boy when the Leafs had their own scandal about homosexuals taking advantage of young boys at Maple Leaf Gardens.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by FLAMESBURNOIL

reread the quote

the whole things stinks of extremist. Not only does he oppose homosexuality, he thinks there is some kind worldwide agenda out to spoil small children.

I guarantee you most religious people dont hold this view, therefore it is extreme

most religious people are tolerant of others - they are ones who are not are extreme...

and no speaking out doesnt label you extreme

I am not saying that most religious people (christians) hold the same view as this character. There is fine line between extreme and not. If he would have said something to effect of "this movie is moraly wrong as it promotes homosexuality", this would have probably not be considered extreme. But instead he talked about a "homosexual agenda" and other things which puts into the extreme camp. Clearly he is an extremist, but other christians are not too far off from him.

Originally Posted by FLAMESBURNOIL

this is more like the religious right extremists

IF your religious chances are you are right wing as well, but most consider the word of god a personal message, so as long as they personally arent homesexual they see nothing wrong with it and are very tolerant - its the extremists that feel this message should be shoved in everyones face..and the extremists are very few in comparison

What I am gathering from what you're is that most christians are supporting of the homosexual lifestyle while a small extremist sect are the ones against it.

I do not see that. There are lots of christians out there that do not support the homosexual lifestyle. They are not as out spoken about it as this guy, but they hold the same view. I have talked with lots of christians who are politically liberal and very tolerant of most people, except homosexuals. It was very surprising for me as these people have been the nicest people I've known, and they were flat out against homosexuality. Where they out spoken about it? No. Would they be considered extremists? No.

The majority of christians are fine with homosexuality. But a large portion are not. In time this large portion will become small and eventually considered extreme. But right now, they are most certainly not. Most christains who are against it merely turn a blind eye to it and disassociate themselfs with homosexuals.

I had a conversation with a born again christian that blew my mind. She said, "I don't have a problem with homosexuals, but the church says it is wrong, so that's how i feel now." She is my friend so I let the conversation die right there because I wanted to say, "grow a f'ing brain." But I didn't want to end our friendship or induce crying.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Well I dunno. 1971's movie Face-Off (a fictionalized account of Toronto Maple Leaf Billy Duke) caused the widespread societal acceptance of plaid polyester slacks. So there's a precedence for moral degeneracy.

How fitting. One of the tag-lines for that movie is "These two should never have fallen in love".

[FLAMESBURNOIL]

Originally Posted by Burninator

I am not saying that most religious people (christians) hold the same view as this character. There is fine line between extreme and not. If he would have said something to effect of "this movie is moraly wrong as it promotes homosexuality", this would have probably not be considered extreme. But instead he talked about a "homosexual agenda" and other things which puts into the extreme camp. Clearly he is an extremist, but other christians are not too far off from him.

What I am gathering from what you're is that most christians are supporting of the homosexual lifestyle while a small extremist sect are the ones against it.

I do not see that. There are lots of christians out there that do not support the homosexual lifestyle. They are not as out spoken about it as this guy, but they hold the same view. I have talked with lots of christians who are politically liberal and very tolerant of most people, except homosexuals. It was very surprising for me as these people have been the nicest people I've known, and they were flat out against homosexuality. Where they out spoken about it? No. Would they be considered extremists? No.

The majority of christians are fine with homosexuality. But a large portion are not. In time this large portion will become small and eventually considered extreme. But right now, they are most certainly not. Most christains who are against it merely turn a blind eye to it and disassociate themselfs with homosexuals.

I had a conversation with a born again christian that blew my mind. She said, "I don't have a problem with homosexuals, but the church says it is wrong, so that's how i feel now." She is my friend so I let the conversation die right there because I wanted to say, "grow a f'ing brain." But I didn't want to end our friendship or induce crying.

That to me that is tolerance, you can still think something is wrong and be tolerant towards it.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by FLAMESBURNOIL

bah ha ha ha ha - its funny how the non religious basically lampast the religious right for taking the bible literally - but will also take it literally when trying to make their point.

Well, either the Bible is to be taken at face value or it is just a nice collection of stories.

People can't go on about proclaiming the Bible to be the word of God, that everyone should subscribe to what it says and then have the luxury of picking & choosing what passages should be followed and what should be ignored.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Well I dunno. 1971's movie Face-Off (a fictionalized account of Toronto Maple Leaf Billy Duke) caused the widespread societal acceptance of plaid polyester slacks. So there's a precedence for moral degeneracy.

And it gets worse. Dances With Wolves promoted a societal acceptance of the idea that Kevin Costner could act. We're STILL paying for that one!

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by FLAMESBURNOIL

bah ha ha ha ha - its funny how the non religious basically lampast the religious right for taking the bible literally - but will also take it literally when trying to make their point.

Well because some christians play the bible card and quote the verse that says homosexuality is a sin and anyone who does a homosexual act shall be put to death. So some christians bascially pick and choose what they want to follow in the bible and take it literally.

Unfortuantely this thinking doesn't really make sense. Because how can you follow some things in the bible as word for word while others are just fairy tales or exagerations not meant to be taken seriously (Gensis for example).