Is 'Golden Compass' 'selling atheism to kids'?

[Jazz]

[disclaimer: the use of the masculine pronoun 'he' should not be taken as any sort of judgment as to God's chromosonal make-up. ]

I do share the agnostic view.

My biggest gripe with organized religion: I thank that "God" ( or Yahweh or Tao, or Allah, or whatever), if truely infinite and all powerful, would take exception to the anthropmorphism that most religions apply to it.

Of course this flies in the face of Catholic (the only religion I'm intimately familiar with) dogma that man was made in God's image and likeness....

<shrug>

 

[BitterPill]

I want to return to JAMiAM's original question because it is an interesting one.

Originally Posted by JAMiAM
And how, exactly, is selling atheism to kids worse than selling religion to kids?​

Forget the Narnia and Golden Compass movies for a minute, is it acceptible to present any and all religions, lifestyles, concepts, and worldview's to children?

To children? No. Not until they're ready, or being prepared, to make choices on their own.

[Slippery slope warning]

I didn't fall in or suffer anything worse than momentary vertigo, and the vertigo could have been anything. Of course, if I did fall in, I might not know. You guys will have to tell me. Please do.

Should communism receive a fair shake and be presented on equal terms along with democracy?..

Why not? Communism receiving a 'fair shake' and being 'presented on equal terms with democracy' can only lead to communism being destroyed. Indeed, it has unless someone here is prepared to make a case for China, Cuba, North Korea et al.

... What about gay and straight lifestyle? Faith vs. atheism?..

Those are personal choices. At an appropriate time, children should be made aware of such things and even worse, the existence of liberals.

For me, that was part of becoming an adult.

... Do these themes have a place in mainstream movies intended for children?

That goes back to the question of Jam's 'selling' post. I don't like the 'selling' of such things. The selling of an idea asks no thought of its purchase. I prefer it when people are able to make their own, cognizant, choices.

 

[Tater]

To children? No. Not until they're ready, or being prepared, to make choices on their own.

How many kids do you have? I ask because I want your expert opinion on when this mysterious "they're ready" status might be.

The fact is that NO ONE (of any age) makes choices just on their own...we are all influenced by the world around us and by what we read/see/hear. So if one isn't directing one's child in a good (as you the parent sees it) direction then some one/thing else IS directing your child in a particular direction. At 47 years of age I know enough about the world to realize that the odds of a child finding "good" influences just on their own is not very high.

So, NO...I am not simply going to leave the influencing of my child to mere happens-chance and the vagaries of "The World". If you want to do that with your children...fine...I am sure they will enjoy your weekend visits at the penitentiary. :nuts:

 

[wrongway149]

I think all the heady debate could ruin both movies for kids.


Heres another (might as well); Discuss the different religious experiences of the Grinch's epiphany vs. that of "Santa Claus is Coming to Town"'s Winter Warlock.

 

[Markdv5208]

How many kids do you have? I ask because I want your expert opinion on when this mysterious "they're ready" status might be.

The fact is that NO ONE (of any age) makes choices just on their own...we are all influenced by the world around us and by what we read/see/hear. So if one isn't directing one's child in a good (as you the parent sees it) direction then some one/thing else IS directing your child in a particular direction. At 47 years of age I know enough about the world to realize that the odds of a child finding "good" influences just on their own is not very high.

So, NO...I am not simply going to leave the influencing of my child to mere happens-chance and the vagaries of "The World". If you want to do that with your children...fine...I am sure they will enjoy your weekend visits at the penitentiary. :nuts:

GACK. I'm agreeing with Tater on this one. Kids have no "they're ready" status.

I take my kids to church. End discusssion. Faith, the existence of God, the Bible, Christs birth, life and death on the cross are all fact in my house. When they're 18 and out of the house, then they can make the choice. B/c if I DIDN"T raise them in a faith environment, I would argue that is as much a choice against faith is raising them IN a faith environment.

HOPEFULLY, by my example (sometimes not perfect) they can figure out whether my faith as I claim it means anything. Looking at my dad, that's the choice I made. And so hopefully will my kids to.

And if they don't? Well, I'll be sad, but hey, that's then their CHOICE...and they made it from a informed and faith driven background...

Just my .02 cents.

BTW, I'm tempted to now read this book, to see if it's as bad as my church says it is.
Or is it just a good story like LION/WITCH/WARDROBE was/is?....

Mark DV
Ada, MI

 

[JAMiAM]

Well...my fifteen year old daughter, who is a straight A student, and altar serves every Sunday at the local Roman Catholic parish, saw the film and didn't feel like her faith was threatened. Though she found the film entertaining, she said that the film wasn't as good as the book, which she has read, and that the hoopla and "controversy" over the film was blown out of proportion. I wanted to see the film too, but she went with a friend and her friend's mom since I was busy visiting my mom in the hospital.

Oh well...another mountain made of a molehill. Typically contrived controversy, that we seem to get every Christmas season, when the fundamentalists know they can get some sympathetic media coverage...<yawn>

 

[Dr Zaius]

Oh well...another mountain made of a molehill. Typically contrived controversy, that we seem to get every Christmas season, when the fundamentalists know they can get some sympathetic media coverage...<yawn>

Sort of reminds me of that molehill made from Narnia . . . you know, when those atheists know they can get sympathetic media coverage. :yummy:

 

[alanp]

Oh well...another mountain made of a molehill. Typically contrived controversy. . .

Perhaps a mountain made out of a molehill. But, not 'typically contrived', in my mind, when the director states that the atheism of the book was purposely played down in this first installment and will be explored much more deeply in the second and third films (if they get made.)

The author is known to have anti-religious views. These views are in the book. If the reader doesn't see them, the reader is missing something.

 

[JAMiAM]

Sort of reminds me of that molehill made from Narnia . . . you know, when those atheists know they can get sympathetic media coverage. :yummy:

Indeed. What's sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander. In either case, they are much ado about nothing. Neither movie is causing, reflecting, or have anything to do with the end of the world, corruption of youth, or the breakdown of societal mores. The contrivation is simply the whining of people who feel threatened due to their own insecurities and the selling of news by those who will.

 

[JAMiAM]

Perhaps a mountain made out of a molehill. But, not 'typically contrived', in my mind, when the director states that the atheism of the book was purposely played down in this first installment and will be explored much more deeply in the second and third films (if they get made.)

Yes, typically contrived. Every year for as long as I can remember, there is always a surge of media attention around Christmas time regarding the supposed threat to the "Christian Heritage" of the USA, or the "Lost Meaning of Christmas" and other such rot. It is as predictable and episodic as the third season of a cheap sitcom. Like I said, typically contrived.

 

[Tater]

Oh well...another mountain made of a molehill. Typically contrived controversy, that we seem to get every Christmas season, when the fundamentalists know they can get some sympathetic media coverage...<yawn>

You mean fundamentalist Christians...what do YOU think a fundamentalist Christian is?

Seeing as the "fundamentals" of Christianity revolve around charity, sacrifice, compassion, forgiveness, service and faith...I am not sure why you seem to have such a problem with them.

 

[BitterPill]

You mean fundamentalist Christians...what do YOU think a fundamentalist Christian is?

Fundamentalist Christians are intolerant. That's the impression I got from Jam's use of the word 'fundamentalist'.

Seeing as the "fundamentals" of Christianity revolve around charity, sacrifice, compassion, forgiveness, service and faith...I am not sure why you seem to have such a problem with them.

You forgot to add 'tolerance'.

 

[BitterPill]

How many kids do you have? I ask because I want your expert opinion on when this mysterious "they're ready" status might be.

I have no children; however, I was once a child.

The fact is that NO ONE (of any age) makes choices just on their own...we are all influenced by the world around us and by what we read/see/hear. So if one isn't directing one's child in a good (as you the parent sees it) direction then some one/thing else IS directing your child in a particular direction. At 47 years of age I know enough about the world to realize that the odds of a child finding "good" influences just on their own is not very high.

People, children too, make choices 'just on their own' innumerable times each day. When it comes to choosing which influences to follow, discernment dictates whether the choices made were good or bad--not chance.

So, NO...I am not simply going to leave the influencing of my child to mere happens-chance and the vagaries of "The World". If you want to do that with your children...fine...I am sure they will enjoy your weekend visits at the penitentiary. :nuts:

How you raise your child is your own affair. I have no children, so there won't be any penitentiary visits for me.

You, however, have a child. That means the chances you will visit your child in a penitentiary are infinitely greater than my chances of visiting mine in such a setting.

 

[Dr Zaius]

Indeed. What's sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander. In either case, they are much ado about nothing. Neither movie is causing, reflecting, or have anything to do with the end of the world, corruption of youth, or the breakdown of societal mores. The contrivation is simply the whining of people who feel threatened due to their own insecurities and the selling of news by those who will.

I tend to agree. When you live in a free society you have to accept that you will be exposed to ideas and opinions you disagree with. That said, people have just as much right to comment on or criticize these movies as the producers did to make them.

 

[Tater]

Fundamentalist Christians are intolerant. That's the impression I got from Jam's use of the word 'fundamentalist'.

Then he AND you are misusing the word "fundamentalist". Truth be told you and Jam's applying the word to Christians is no different than a KKK member applying the "N" word to blacks.

You forgot to add 'tolerance'.

You don't know what the word means. To L/L/D the word "tolerance" means to acquiesce to any/ever buttheaded, dumba$$, immoral sort of behavior...the old "whatever makes you feel good" crowd. That isn't "tolerance"...that is just ignorance or cowardice. Ignorance because you don't know any better or cowardice because you haven't the courage of your convictions.

 

[Tater]

I have no children; however, I was once a child.

Which only reinforces the fact that you know diddly-squat about raising kids.

People, children too, make choices 'just on their own' innumerable times each day. When it comes to choosing which influences to follow, discernment dictates whether the choices made were good or bad--not chance.

What a pile of horse$h!t..."discernment"? Now, how much "discernment" do you think an 8-9 year old kid has?!

Do you really enjoy displaying your gargantuan ignorance like this?

You, however, have a child. That means the chances you will visit your child in a penetentiary are infinitely greater than my chances of visiting mine in such a setting.

True...but, at least I am commenting on something I have at some knowledge about. You, OTOH, are pretty much talking out your a-hole...nothing new there.

 

[Karri]

It is a spot on characterization...

Atheism has it's own dogma, bibles, theology and gods. They are buried under a whole lot of subtleties...but they are certainly present.

Tater tater, I think you've mixed up 'a theist' and 'atheist'.


I know you disagree...but after all, you're not an atheist, you can't possibly therefore know what an atheist is. Right?

 

[Scott Tortorice]

Now that all is said and done, it looks like the so-called 'Christian backlash' did hurt the film:

“GOLDEN COMPASS” MISSES THE MARK
December 10, 2007

Catholic League president Bill Donohue commented today on the box office results for “The Golden Compass”:

“Our goal was to stop ‘The Golden Compass’ from meeting box office expectations, and we succeeded. The anti-Narnia flick pulled in $26.1 million in the U.S. and Canada. Now compare that to ‘The Chronicles of Narnia’: it took in $65.5 million its first weekend out. Indeed, the recent Disney movie, ‘Enchanted,’ took in $33.3 million during its first weekend. And when we consider that ‘Golden Compass’ cost $180 million to produce, and another $30-$40 million in advertising, the inescapable conclusion is that our boycott worked. No wonder the New York Times said today that instead of the movie giving Hollywood a much needed shot in the arm, ‘It got more like a punch in the face.’

“All we heard from the chattering class over the past few weeks was that our boycott would have the reverse effect of enticing more people to see the film. Yet as USA Today reports, ‘Rolf Mittweg of New Line Cinema, which released Compass, concedes that the religion controversy might have had an effect.’ It sure did.

“The disappointing numbers make it far less likely that New Line Cinema will want to produce the film version of The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass, the second and third volumes of Philip Pullman’s trilogy, His Dark Materials. That’s good news for Christians, in general, and for Catholics, in particular.

“Let this be a lesson to militant atheists like Pullman: keep your hollow beliefs to yourself. And ease up on demonizing Catholicism—no other religion has done more to promote human rights, science and goodwill. Why not make a movie about that?”


Copyright © 1997-2008 by Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.
*Material from this website may be reprinted and disseminated with accompanying attribution.

Also from the CL:

Film critic Roger Ebert, who loved the film, said “the box office was wounded by attacks of religious groups.” He added that “The criticism was led by the Catholic League and its talkative president William Donohue.” He concluded that “Any bad buzz on a family film can be mortal, and that seems to have been the case this time.” The buzz was so bad that Hollywood reporters are now saying there won’t be a film version of Pullman’s second and third books.

So much for the theory that there is no such thing as bad publicity.

 

[Tater]

Tater tater, I think you've mixed up 'a theist' and 'atheist'.

Not all "gods" are spiritual in nature.

I know you disagree...but after all, you're not an atheist, you can't possibly therefore know what an atheist is. Right?

Well, it doesn't seem to stop atheists from telling everyone what they think "a theist" is.

 

[Karri]

Not all "gods" are spiritual in nature.

As I said, you seem to have mixed a few words. No problem, just take a look at the dictionary.

Well, it doesn't seem to stop atheists from telling everyone what they think "a theist" is.

That's because most atheist have at some point been theists...not all, but most, probaply. Not that that was my point...