At 9/14/09 10:33 AM, Im-A-Pirate wrote:
how can I let him be while he's wasting my oxygen on his stupid bullshit about an imaginary man in the sky?
And, besides that, he's already said he's 50% religious and 50% athiest, but what he fails to realize is that THAT DOES NOT FUCKING WORK, so he's wasting even more of my oxygen by being an idiot.
He probably meant to say he's more of a liberal Christian, in that he doesn't always take the Bible and/or older theories of Christianity word for word. He might not have worded it properly (and I may have understood what he was saying keep in mind), but I've taken that much from it myself. The thing is that it's not really about "an imaginary man in the sky", or at least it shouldn't be. Some of the more modern/postmodern thinking I believe sees it as more of a symbolist idea that someone/thing is caring for you, rather than a realistic, physical being. With that in mind, it's about self-improvement, not some of the things that organisations that show up in the media do. I've admitted plenty of times that I've read the Bible (mostly New Testament to be fair) a little for my own reasons, just to see if it works for me.
I don't deny that there's a level of corruption in organised religion, nor do I deny the influence of religious extremists. My point is that wanting to improve yourself in a religious way isn't really stupid per se, but my own opinion is that it's not as selfless as people want it to look.
And of course, while agnosticism used to be reserved for intellectuals, it's now an idea that acts as a one-size-fits-all for people that prefer not to bother themselves with the whole business. That might work, I don't know.
If I've made any vital errors, someone let me know!
***
It's a shame that the decision has been made. To be honest though, it's slightly typical to see that article reference more traditional Christian websites but not others, who might be against the film but not sponsor some of the more extreme options. As far as the statistics about the States go, it should also be kept in mind that there was a similar story about Britain earlier this year, citing confusion and intelligent design as being preferred by some. The USA may be far more conservative in some areas, but maybe they're facts to keep in mind too? Anyway, thaat's probably irrelevant, back to the censorship...
I'm hoping action will be made to distribute the film eventually, since it sounds like they were careful enough (for film studio producers) with the handling of the story itself. It might be "divisive", but that means there's still a market for it. I suppose all I can say at the end is that we live in an age where you're giving everyone a voice, and the more extreme groups aren't as stupid as you might think.
It's a good time to be alive :)
