Callistus Valerius Da Vinci Code

in 505268 20060522 101444 "Basjan" wrote:


something like this movie/book will upset that person. Just because someone
may be agnostic, does not give that person the freedom to curtail someone
else's freedom to believe in and demonstrate for the opposite.

And just because someone is a believer doesn't give him the freedom to preach
to non-believers, as I am constantly telling people on my doorstep.

"Qui si parla Campagnolo" wrote in message
oups.com...

....some discussion...

Geez, then don't read the book, don't see the movie....Nobody is going
to change their mind about what they 'believe' because of a book or
movie...the 'Bible' included.

Not the point at all... but then again, I am not here to argue, merely to
state my opinion regarding the much abused "it is fiction, not fact
argument" used by people who claim that Christians are overly sensitive in
this matter. If you do not wish to understand my argument, then you won´t. I
read an interesting article regarding the Muslim cartoon uprising recently,
which contained

" The main difference between Western culture and the culture of Islam is
the West holds nothing sacred anymore, and it's evident in their movies,
literature, referring to God as 'the guy upstairs', etc. Religion may be
something they indulge in once a week on a Sunday, but for a Muslim, there
is no separation between every day life and religion. Your religion
permeates and directs every aspect of your life."

There are many Christians who actually do hold some things sacred and fro
whom their religion also premeates their lives, hence their apprehension at
the Da Vinci issue.

Again, warm regards.

Basjan

"Allez1" wrote in message
...

....some discussion

I haven't seen anyone turned away from protesting this film.

Again not the point, which focused more on the fact that the "fiction vs.
fact" argument is being used to illustrate how Christians are non-tolerant
when opposing so-called fiction. All I ask is that enjoyers of the movie
realize why many Christians are upset about something that blasphemes a
critical aspect of what is holy central to their religion.

Keep well!

Basjan

In article , Werehatrack
) wrote:

Some of us understand the difference between fiction and fact. Worst
of all, however, is that some of us can *spot* fiction when we see it.

Especially if it's as poorly-researched and badly-written as the entire
output of Mr. Brown thus far...

--
Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
Like Kant, it is my wish to create my own individual epistemology. But I
also wish to find out what is for pudding.

On Mon, 22 May 2006 15:33:48 +0200, "Basjan" wrote:


There are many Christians who actually do hold some things sacred and fro
whom their religion also premeates their lives, hence their apprehension at
the Da Vinci issue.

And I regard them as being every bit as dangerous as the Muslim
extremists. (And yes, there *are* Muslims who do not hold that
blasphemous behavior merits any reaction; they tend to be ignored
because the other variety makes more noise.)
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

On Mon, 22 May 2006 15:11:07 +0100, Dave Larrington
wrote:

In article , Werehatrack
) wrote:

Some of us understand the difference between fiction and fact. Worst
of all, however, is that some of us can *spot* fiction when we see it.

Especially if it's as poorly-researched and badly-written as the entire
output of Mr. Brown thus far...

It's not by Brown, but "The Eye of Argon" is one of the most
entertaining things I've ever read, precisely because it's so badly
written that the average person can't get through a paragraph of it
without breaking up. It's the stuff that's written in a reasonably
workmanlike manner but which fails to hold the interest - that vast
middle ground of mediocrity which may well include the subject line's
tome - where I tend to fall asleep. (That's if it's not just bad
enough to engage Parker's Evaluation, which The Return Of The King did
for me on the first several attempts at reading.)

Overall, I prefer Pratchett.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

"Werehatrack" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 22 May 2006 15:33:48 +0200, "Basjan" wrote:


There are many Christians who actually do hold some things sacred and fro
whom their religion also premeates their lives, hence their apprehension
at
the Da Vinci issue.

And I regard them as being every bit as dangerous as the Muslim
extremists. (And yes, there *are* Muslims who do not hold that
blasphemous behavior merits any reaction; they tend to be ignored
because the other variety makes more noise.)

I think one has to be very careful to assume extremism when one encounters
someone whose beliefs "permeates" their lives. Someone who fully endorses a
belief-system might seem extreme to you, but might actually be normal in
terms of religious frameworks. On the contrary, another person´s religious
apathy, and associated actions and words, are *extreme* towards the other
end of the scale for some.

Basjan

On Mon, 22 May 2006 17:03:51 +0200, "Basjan" wrote:


"Werehatrack" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 22 May 2006 15:33:48 +0200, "Basjan" wrote:


There are many Christians who actually do hold some things sacred and fro
whom their religion also premeates their lives, hence their apprehension
at
the Da Vinci issue.

And I regard them as being every bit as dangerous as the Muslim
extremists. (And yes, there *are* Muslims who do not hold that
blasphemous behavior merits any reaction; they tend to be ignored
because the other variety makes more noise.)

I think one has to be very careful to assume extremism when one encounters
someone whose beliefs "permeates" their lives. Someone who fully endorses a
belief-system might seem extreme to you, but might actually be normal in
terms of religious frameworks. On the contrary, another person´s religious
apathy, and associated actions and words, are *extreme* towards the other
end of the scale for some.

Basjan

I think the problem begins with you, when you assume that because a
Christian lets their religion permeate their life, they would be
apprehensive about the Da Vinci Code. I know a fair number of
Christians that would qualify and they are in no way apprehensive. Its
been out there for a while and made no real dents in their life to
date.

The extremist label may not be fair based on the first part of your
description, but if they are 'apprehensive' for no better reason than
a poorly written book and an even worse movie, they just might be
dangerous...

If nothing else, the Da Vinci Code does start with the belief that the
issue of whether or not Christ had children and the line exists in the
present day is of significance: the issue is Christian and the concept
would be important in that context. For many of us, we aren't and it
isn't.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:

Nobody is going
to change their mind about what they 'believe' because of a book or
movie...the 'Bible' included.

Applies to "helmet studies", too eg

"Sorni" wrote in message
...
Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:

Nobody is going
to change their mind about what they 'believe' because of a book or
movie...the 'Bible' included.

Applies to "helmet studies", too eg

I wonder - why do you suppose that most of those that say that helmets
aren't the greatest safety device ever invented are engineers or scientists?

Do you believe that these people all started out hating helmets? Apparently
that's what you believe to be the ONLY possible motivation for ever saying
anything negative about helmets.