How ironic that some believers in a virgin birth and a resurrection from a death (which by the way show up in many stories about various gods) want to ban others from seeing a movie whose plot includes a "heresy" in that it proposes the possibility that two people (who themselves may be fictional for all we know) may have been married two thousand years ago.
Ah. Yeah. Run that by me again?
Marissa Laguardia, chairwoman of the Philippine government's movie-review panel, told the AP... "So are we just out of the Stone Age?"No, sometimes it seems we are still *in* the Stone Age.
2 comments:
I enjoy your technical observations of Smalltalk. Your analysis of the emotions about the movie might need some broadening beyond the narrow scope you've instantiated. ;-)
Let's change it slightly, to see if we can invoke the same feelings another way. Let's say someone wrote a movie about your personal family history. (Christians consider themselves part of "God's family".) Your family stories handed down from generation to generation, which you believe, might be myth, but, you wouldn't want someone broadcasting to the world in a fictional movie that your favorite ancestor was a deceiver, lived a double standard from the morals taught, and lied about intimate relationships, and that famous people believed all this about your ancestor and about you being hoodwinked.
It’s tough for some to swallow.
Darius, thanks for your comment. It may be a challenge for some to face alternative theories, granted.
Maybe some of them will actually think about it rather than attempt to keep others from thinking or even just enjoying a movie.
Post a Comment