Here's why "Passion" is dangerous

[ithacan]

If you're a FUNDIE, you love Jesus.

So here's what this movie is like:

It's as if you go to a film that shows your own mother or father (or anyone else you love) being tortured, beaten, etc.

It's like watching a snuff film starring a loved one.

For many fundies the reaction, very predictable, is going to be extreme anger.

And that anger will be directed in various ways: "nonbelievers", libruls, jews, democrats, etc.

Nonfundies seeing this film will say, no biggie, or too much violence, a kind of typical movie response. But the fundies will see this very differently (thus the extreme reactions for example in Wellstone_Democrat's husband's post - here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1163531

That said, this is extremely inflammatory, and serves the purpose to whip up into a frenzy the religious right's legions.

Very scary times.

Any thoughts?

(edited to add link to thread)

[molly]

1. I think you are correct

got a link to the other thread?

[ithacan]

5. just added link to original post

but here it is again:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1163531

[molly]

8. I'm beginning to think Mel and daddy are on the payroll

[hippiegranny]

59. thank you for this link

just reading that review made me break out in a cold sweat. this could actually be dangerous.

[loudnclear]

15. It's all about the money...for the funddies as well as the Gibsons

Mel know that violence sells and he will be making more of this. The hypocrites on the right will not boycott violence as long as it serves their needs. They only decry violence when they think they can attack the Dems and liberals about it.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

63. Dominionism-Hitlerian theocracy is winning!. READ THESE LINKS! Last one..!

We are living in the closing minutes of a culture war that the American Taliban is winning. 'Might Makes Right' is WINNING over 'The Rule of Law.'I've decided to post this synopsis in all my thread responses:

Georgie's brain is much worse than you think and he's being used for terrible purposes. Here's a British clinical psychologist's researched analysis of the boy king. He interviewed Georgie's family, friends and such and determined that he was abused as a child and developed an 'authoritarian personality,' the root of fascism! Read it and weep for him and us.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1033904,00.html
(So George, how do you feel about your mom and dad?)-CLICK

And this personality is being exploited to further the creation of a Hitlerian Theocracy called ‘Dominionism’, which has been going on in this country for the last thirty years. Read it and wonder what the hell we're in for next now that Eugenics is domestic policy and Imperialism is foreign policy.
http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_5160.shtml
(God Bless America, The Constitution is Dead)-CLICK

If you'd like to read the full speech of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia back in the dark ages of January 2002 when he said that 'democracy interferes with the Divine Right of Kings and he's doing something about it,' read this and wonder what century we're living in and just what that Constitution was for, anyway.
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/scalia.htm
(God's Justice and Ours)-CLICK

How can they get away with it when everyone seems to be pissed off at Georgie and we're supposed to be able to vote the bastard out of our White House? By fixing the electronic voting machines for 'the House.' Read this and decide which country to escape to this fall when Georgie is reinstalled to finish the job he was sent to do-eliminate democracy totally, create a police state, and conquer the world.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm
(Diebold, Electonic Voting, and the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy)-CLICK

LATE BREAKING NEWS-FEB. 26 2004
Right now the Dominionists are introducing legislation to replace 'The People' as the authority in our democracy’s Constitution with ‘God’ in a bill called ‘The Constitution Restoration Act of 2004,’ exactly the opposite of what it really is. The legalities of the Christian Theocracy are being used to destroy our laws as if by the Taliban in Afghanistan.

This is not a test! It is absolutely real and happening right now while the media are busy covering gay marriage and Mel Gibson’s bloody crucifixion porn film, ‘The Passion of the Christ.’

“…on February 11 , 2004 Dominionist leaders in congress made their move; they introduced a bill in both houses called The Constitution Restoration Act of 2004. Among the sponsors of the bill are Rep. Robert Aderholt (Alabama), Rep. Michael Pence (Indiana), Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, Sen. Zell Miller (Georgia), Sen. Sam Brownback (Kansas), and Sen. Lindsey Graham (South Carolina).

The House version is H.R. 3799 and the Senate version is S. 2082. The bill limits the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts to hear cases involving “expressions of religious faith by elected or appointed officials.”

Although the claim by its sponsors appears to be that the intention is to prevent the courts from hearing cases involving the Ten Commandments or a Nativity Scene in a public setting from being reviewed, the law is drawn broadly and expressly includes the acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law by an official in his capacity of executing his office.”

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0402/S00172.htm
(The Constitution Restoration Act of 2004)-CLICK

[ithacan]

75. don't forget this link:

http://www.TheocracyWatch.org/

The Rise of the Religious Right in the Republican Party

[coltman]

2. i think breathing

whips the jesus freaks into a frenzy.

[formernaderite]

103. I think even the non-freaks are being whipped into a frenzy....

...this is about the scariest propaganda piece I've ever heard of. All day long, I'm hearing all this moral this and that crap. Okay, I'm an atheist, so perhaps I just don't get it. I do get that people are mulling over the lives so far...just after having seen a moveie...A friggin MOVIE!!!

[BR_Parkway]

3. It ties in very well to Shrub finally coming out for FMA

I mean, it's been rumored/threatened for a while, but why did he pick when he did to say, Emergency, we need to restrict gay marriage.
Then yesterday? CNN, back and forth all day - Gay Marriage / Passion of Christ / Gay Marriage / Passion over and over and over

If there wasn't an implied contrast there to stir up the base, I don't know what is.

The thing I've noticed today is the word play about all the GORE in the movie....hmmmm.

[Beer Snob-50]

4. I don't totally agree with your premise.

I don't think it will whip them into taking it out on "non-believers", Jews, or Liberals. I am disturbed by the over the top violence of the whole thing! Someone last night compared it to Mel's other movies (Mad Max, Lethal Weapons, and Braveheart) in terms of the violence. Being a good little Catholic, I don't need to see someone getting whipped and have splurting all over the place to understand the sacrifice.

[Iris]

6. I grew up Catholic

and just can't fathom why anyone would need to SEE this portrayed so realistically. Reading The Passion every spring was moving and inspiring enough for me.

[asjr]

7. I am sure Mel Gibson is a devout

person. What I don't understand is his penchant for portraying violence in most of his movies. Translating books into movies is a natural thing, but I still don't understand why this movie has to be so violent. Unless Mel was there at the actual crucifixion (and of course he was not) how can he accurately portray it. I know there is such a thing as poetic license but this goes too far.

[Lab Owner]

13. Crucifixion

From what I've read, crucifixion was a fairly typical form of execution among the Romans. The two individuals who were being crucified along with Jesus were simply thieves. Therefore, I would assume that there is ample evidence of how crucifixions were performed. This film is probably a whole lot more true to life than what we've seen in other "Jesus" films.

[Az]

20. I am beginning to suspect Mel has a bit of a Martyr complex

Seriously many of his rolls from Max to Braveheart have played suffering Martyr types. Max represents a sort of John the Baptist story. Braveheart he definately gets sacrficed in.

Now it may just be Hollywood recycling messiah stories. But maybe Mel has some issues he is working out on the screen before us.

[Lars39]

34. Why not?

There was violence committed against the "un-patriotic" after bushco whipped the Fox-watching crowd into a frenzy over "going to war to fight the terrarists".

[dand]

9. It is scary thinking of all the closed minded people......

whipping themselves into a frenzy over this mythical event, about a person who probably never existed.

[RebelOne]

11. Yep, I agree with you..

And besides, who wants to watch some guy being beat up and tortured for 2 hours.

[adadem]

10. Similar "take" in this week's Newsweek

HOLLYWOOD: GIBSON’S “PASSION” AS FILM
David Ansen, Newsweek senior editor/film critic

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4338528/

snip>
It's the sadism, not the alleged anti-Semitism, that is most striking. (For the record, I don't think Gibson is anti-Semitic; but those inclined toward bigotry could easily find fuel for their fire here.) There's always been a pronounced streak of sadomasochism and martyrdom running through Gibson's movies,

snip>
From a purely dramatic point of view, the relentless gore is self-defeating. I found myself recoiling from the movie, wanting to keep it at arm's length—much the same feeling I had watching Gaspar Noe's notorious "Irreversible," with its nearly pornographic real-time depiction of a rape. Instead of being moved by Christ's suffering, or awed by his sacrifice, I felt abused by a filmmaker intent on punishing an audience, for who knows what sins. Others may well find a strong spirituality in "The Passion"—I can't pretend to know what this movie looks like to a believer—but it was Gibson's fury, not his faith, that left a deep, abiding aftertaste.

[Mari333]

12. The very heart of thwarted sensuality

or a theology that denies the flesh, or nature as "evil" , usually creates a twisted form of that same sensuality ..war, anger, beatings, control, hatred of ones body, self loathing, fear..
I find it maddening to see someone cry crocodile tears over a man being beaten in a movie, but turn a blind eye to a child lying crumpled in a ditch with their bowels turned inside out in Iraq, which is actually happening as we speak, and turn a blind eye to a soldier who is arriving home in a coffin in the dead of night whose body is so mangled he cant even be shown to the family, which is happening as we speak.
It is a form of insanity imo to deny the flesh as evil and treat the actuality of a REAL war that is going on right now as tho it isnt happening, and yet embrace a celluloid character on a screnn thats an actor in a movie as tho it is real.
Another heady reason I am dedicated to pretty much avoiding the human race as much as possible, and sitting with my dog, who makes more sense then most humans I have met.

[LeahMira]

18. Couldn't have said it better...

I find it maddening to see someone cry crocodile tears over a man being beaten in a movie, but turn a blind eye
to a child lying crumpled in a ditch with their bowels turned inside out in Iraq, which is actually happening as we
speak, and turn a blind eye to a soldier who is arriving home in a coffin in the dead of night whose body is so
mangled he cant even be shown to the family, which is happening as we speak.

Absolutely, Mari.

It's a film only, and a film about events that allegedly took place 2000 years ago. Not enough is said about ending the suffering that is going on right this minute. It's too late to make a difference in what happened to Christ, but it's not too late to make a difference in what is happening now. Seems that these devout Christians don't want to be bothered with Iraqi suffering.

The more I see of some people, the more I like my dogs! ;-)

[smirkymonkey]

108. I'm with you...great post!

I am beginning to give up on humanity and have always preferred the company of dogs to humans anyway.

Are we sane people in an insane world or are we going crazy? I can't get my mind around the state of the world, especially this country, anymore. I feel like that Edvard Munch painting "The Scream" - a silent scream that no one hears.

Sorry you are going through such a tough time, hopefully we will get these warmongering bastards out of office as soon as possible.

[JohnyCanuck]

14. I think you're exactly right Ithacan

It's tied into the right wing attempts to manipulate and use religion as a hot button issue to keep the population under control and from asking embarrassing questions of their divinely appointed leader. This is what I posted on another DU thread about The Passion movie (starting with an excerpt from the article The Despoiling of America):


Strauss’s teaching incorporated much of Machiavelli’s. Significantly, his philosophy is unfriendly to democracy—even antagonistic. At the same time Strauss upheld the necessity for a national religion not because he favored religious practices, but because religion in his view is necessary in order to control the population. (my emphasis /jc) Since neo-conservatives influenced by Strauss are in control of the Bush administration, I have prepared a brief list that shows the radical unchristian basis of neo-conservatism. I am indebted to Shadia Drury’s book (Leo Strauss and the American Right) and published interviews for the following:

First: Strauss believed that a leader had to perpetually deceive the citizens he ruled.

Secondly: Those who lead must understand there is no morality, there is only the right of the superior to rule the inferior.

Thirdly: According to Drury, Religion “is the glue that holds society together.”<40> It is a handle by which the ruler can manipulate the masses. (my emphasis /jc) Any religion will do. Strauss is indifferent to them all.

Fourthly: “Secular society…is the worst possible thing,” because it leads to individualism, liberalism, and relativism, all of which encourage dissent and rebellion. As Drury sums it up: “You want a crowd that you can manipulate like putty.”<41>

Fifthly: “Strauss thinks that a political order can be stable only if it is united by an external threat; and following Machiavelli, he maintains that if no external threat exists, then one has to be manufactured.”<42>

Sixthly: “In Strauss’s view, the trouble with liberal society is that it dispenses with noble lies and pious frauds. It tries to found society on secular rational foundations.”

www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5646.htm

These neocon SOBs are using and promoting religion as a means to keep the sheep under control. In a way it's like a form of brainwashing. After all if you are a good Christian believer and your religious leaders (Falwell, Robertson etc)tell you God has anointed Dubya to lead the country, if someone says Dubya is really an incompetent, undereducated, intellectually challenged, shallow-minded buffoon it's obvious that person must have been sent by the Devil to lead you astray and put your immortal soul in peril of eternal damnation and hell fire.

Authorities have been using religion and the fear of the consequences of displeasing God (or gods) to maintain control of people since time immemorial, we are just seeing the latest evidence of this set before us.

If you think I'm being too cynical and that this massive hype and hysteria over this movie is just happening on it's own and it is not being used as a means of manipulation and control, check out this article by Dr. Norman Livergood (former head of the Dept of Artificial Intelligence at the US Army War College)
Brainwashing America

Quote:
The puppet Bush regime is using new, aggressive forms of brainwashing to change the very way Americans think and feel.
This is the psychological dimension of the "High Cabal's" general onslaught against American workers, just as the "war on terrorism" is the military dimension and corporate crime and tax cuts for the rich comprise the economic dimension.

We are living under the beginning stages of a military dictatorship in precisely the same way that 1930s Germans suffered under the Nazi regime.

As in the case of Nazi Germany, state-sponsored propaganda (brainwashing) is a vital part of the Bush regime's strategy.

[ithacan]

16. GOP - Religious Right connections

apart from the neo-cons, it does seem however that it's the religious right that has taken control of the GOP. Every one of the GOP's congressional leadership has a 100% rating from the Christian Coalition. Bush's entire agenda is word for word from the Christian Coalition's priorities and agenda.

For all the details on this, go here: http://www.TheocracyWatch.org/

So your comment really points to the question: who's in charge? The Religious Right, or the Neo-Cons, or are they using each other.

Either way it's scary stuff.

[adadem]

17. Many in the GOP

see themselves as the God Ordained Party.

[LeahMira]

23. Using each other!

So your comment really points to the question: who's in charge? The Religious Right, or the Neo-Cons, or are
they using each other.

People turn to religion when they feel that they are losing control of their lives.

The neo-cons are interested in taking control of everyone's life. They therefore manufacture crises of the sort that threaten people of all groups (location, socio-economic status, etc., as well as race, gender, etc.), and then encourage the religious revival and establishment of total control that follows. Religions, insofar as they assume the authority to tell people what they should eat or what they should (not) drink, as well as with whom and when and under which circumstances they can have sex, are uniquely positioned to enforce monolithic control of a population.

[scarletwoman]

27. Excellent post!

Brava!

sw

[scarletwoman]

26. My new favorite quote:

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."

-- Napolean Bonaparte

;-)
sw

[randr]

31. I think I will make this my mantra today!

[Mari333]

33. Thank you for the links again

I send them to everyone I know

[terryg11]

19. It is scary thinking of all the closed minded people

who can't accept that this is one man's vision of a movie he wanted to make and so he did. People are going to respond to it the way they will and nothing can change that. I'm so amazed that people who are so against this film haven't learned anything from critics of past controvrsial events, by bitching about it, you only feed the flames.

I understand that Gibson took some liberties with "historical accuracies" but that was his choice. Unfortunately he doesn't own up to that very well but he will most likely continue to pay for that error.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

21. all those X-ians just need one little push

and they will be out in the streets rioting and killing jews and homosexuals and athiests! They are just beasts of course, and easily stirred up by emotional manipulation. Christians have no ability for rational thought like the higher forms of man.

/DU

[terryg11]

22. nice blanket statement

not something I would expect from a more enlightened person.

christians have no ability for rational thought like the higher forms of man.?

do you really believe what you said, said it for effect or was it a knee jerk to what's been going on?

[ithacan]

28. he's being sarcastic

and obviously not every single person will react in the same way.

But I stand by the analogy of watching a film about a loved one being tortured. How would you react?

I think that explains the reactions that wellstone_dem's husband saw; for details see the thread I link to in the original post.

And of course Gibson has the right to make any film he wants, and people have the right to see it. But that doesn't mean that the impact is going to be positive.

And by the way, I'm not talking about all christians, but some of those who go by the name "christian" who are actually following beliefs that seem to me to have little to do with Jesus's real message of love, compassion and tolerance. The Religious Right. And even among them, there are going to be different reactions.

And finally, the whole thing is quite ironic, since Gibson believes there is no salvation outside of the (Roman Catholic) Church.

[terryg11]

32. Gibson has made some interesting choices with this movie

I don't agree with some of them from the standpoint that he wants us to believe this is what happened.

as far as the analogy of watching a film of a loved one being tortured, I don't know if I agree totally.
This story while accepted overall by most christians is still debated in many circles as to the specifics. While the bible doesn't linger on the gory details as much as the film, to many it was the suffering of christ that really means alot. He wasn't just killed, he was brutally killed and suffered a great deal, even the most sterile of the crucifixion movies show that. So, too many the suffering Jesus did on the cross is integral to the story.

Me, I wouldn't watch a film of a loved one being tortured unless there was something to learn from it and even then it would be hard as it was for many in the theaters I understand

[starroute]

50. The suffering wasn't the original point

From anything I've read, the original emphasis in the crucifixion story was not on the suffering but on the humiliation.

Suffering came easy in those days. The Romans had a million nasty ways of killing people. But crucifixion was considered a particularly low and degrading way to die. It was never used on the upper classes -- only on slaves, the poor, and foreigners. Not only was it an extremely undignified process, but it made an extended public spectacle of the victim's loss of personal dignity.

The whole thrust of the Jesus story was originally that this was a god who had come to Earth not in a blaze of glory and power, but as the most obscure and insignificant of mortals. Not as some sort of immaterial and untouchable avatar, but incarnated in human flesh, with all its filth and corruption and decay. And not only that, but he had died in the most demeaning and contemptible manner, crucified between two thieves. But in the end, paradoxically, rather than being demeaned by the foulness and corruption of material existence, he had redeemed the world by embracing it in all its lowness.

We moderns can't really understand the mindset which sees the physical world as innately corrupt and loathsome. Long about the Middle Ages, we started regarding the world as beautiful and desirable -- as something to be embraced rather than avoided. In this newer outlook, it was not the world itself which was the problem, but merely the impediments to full enjoyment of life in this world -- disease, suffering, and death.

Because of that change, a god choosing to take on the yuckiness of flesh could no longer be perceived as a sacrifice in itself. So the emphasis of the Jesus story had to be refocused on his suffering and death, in order to keep the emotional impact. And the crucifixion, instead of being a moment of triumph, had to be reconceived as an almost intolerable ordeal. For us present-day folk, even that no longer seems to be enough -- it has to be presented as the worst fate that anyone ever underwent in the history of humanity

The problem is that 2000 years ago, when people saw the cosmos as sharply divided between spirit and matter, a message that this division had been reconciled in the person of Jesus Christ was a positive and exalting statement. But things have changed, and the message of pop Christianity now seems to be, "Jesus died for your miserable sins, you slob, because you weren't important enough in the cosmic scheme of things to do it for yourself." And that message is neither reconciling nor exalting.

I fear "The Passion" because it seems to represent an ultimate capitulation to this lowest-common-denominator, materialistic, philosophically empty version of Christianity. And that cannot be good for any of us.

[liberalpress]

24. I live in the south...

....we're just loaded with fundies. They are seeing it over and over again. They're even having altar calls at the end of the film. There goes your theory.

[ithacan]

29. what is an altar call?

what does that mean?

[JohnyCanuck]

36. Altar call

That's when at the end of a service the minister or pastor asks repentant sinners to come forward to the front of the congregation and publicly confess their repentance for their sins and their believe in Jesus as having died for their sins.

[SheepyMcSheepster]

37. an alter call

is what you have during service where the preacher will ask those who want to get "saved" to come down to the front of the church (by the altar) and get saved and cry and stuff.

i guess they are doing this down in front of the screen at the theaters?

[ithacan]

40. okay, but I don't understand

the comment above, that somehow these altar calls means "there goes your theory"???

[SheepyMcSheepster]

45. i don't understand either

nt.

[rman]

73. me neither

-

[liberalpress]

88. His theory that people will see it and get mad..

...these people see it and get "saved"

[Lars39]

41. So basically they've had a church service at the movie theater.

Great. Seeing it over and over again? Like someone obsessed? Great.:(

[peacebuzzard]

51. I read about that too....

In Knoxville people are getting together to pray after the movie.

[ArkDem]

93. OUTRAGE!

.

[jean]

25. Franklin Graham (to KCouric)said he died for our sins

and it is not the fault of the Jews. He said it repeatedly on her show early this week. So that is the impression from the elite media.

I have no idea how the warped versions of christianity are spinning the movie - we'll have to wait and see.

[stopthegop]

30. I thiknk you're mistaken...at least in the US...

Europe may be another story..though I would not expect the movie to do as well there...
I believe of people at DU and elsewhere would LIKE for you to be correct, to justify their hatred of Christianity and religion in general..the closed minded are those who condemn the movie without seeing it

[leyton]

90. Amen!

I second that.

And calling a film about Christ dangerous? Well, we must censor it! And while we're at it, can we burn Harry Potter and Fahrenheit 451?

[Az]

92. Can you point me

to a thread that calls for the banning of his film? I agree there is a lot of turmoil about it, but I missed the one that called for it to be banned.

Its called the Passion. It insites Passion in people. There are things called Crimes of Passion. People commit them when they are overwrought by strong emotions. The Passion story has a historical record of insiting people to excesses of Passion so much so that they killed other people. Mel's movie is deliberately focused on the violence imagined to be visited upon Jesus. It may well insite more Passion than any version that came before.

Intense emotions
Uncertain interpretation
Historical precidence
Excessive violence
Passion

You tell me if a film about Christ can be dangerous.

[leyton]

97. I object to calling the movie dangerous, that's all.

For me, calling a movie dangerous is reminiscent of George Orwell stuff and the like. Inciting crimes of passion? Perhaps it might, but that's a matter of personal responsibility. If someone is "inspired" to kill because of Mel Gibson's movie then the fault is theirs, in my opinion.

[Az]

100. Consider

As I mentioned we are not calling for the film to be banned. What we are doing is questioning the wisdom of making the movie in the way he did. An extreme example would be to say it is legal for someone to make a very realistic movie about a white woman being raped and beaten to death by a black man. But you have to question the motivation and sense of making this movie knowing the history of racist atrocities in the past.

There is history here. This is not an argument based on supposition that little Johnny may start shooting up his school if he sees one more Bruce Willis movie. Wars have been fought over this very story. People have died. It is historical fact. We know the extremes this moment in the story of Jesus can inspire in some. Particularly when seperated from the peaceful teachings his minestry embraced. The worry is not that something may happen. It is that something may happen again.

Yes it is some peoples beleifs that these things happened. Yes they have the right to make movies and tell the story of what they believe. But they also bear the burden of responisibility of what happens as a result of their passion and to procede cautiously when they tread on known dangerous territory.

[leyton]

114. Okay.

Well, I accept that. I guess I'll have to see the movie ultimately.

[salin]

96. I wouldn't ban it

but am more likely to rent Jesus Christ Superstar and the Last Temptation of Christ instead of going to see Gibson's movie.

[salin]

95. Interesting

I am a Christian... I am a Duer... after reading a thread about a crowd reaction last night to the film... and having had to deal in our community with a phelps-esque group that comes and spews "religious" hatred (eg hatred based on their interpretation of the religion)... having had a small, private holocaust museum a few cities away torched just a couple of months ago... I, too, am concerned about the fanning of flames and hatred that might torch off violence among individuals who might already be a bit unbalanced.

Do I want to see it happen? No. But I fear that it might happen. Very different things - and not based in a hatred of Christianity (I am Christian), nor religion in general.

[Must_B_Free]

35. Stern / Clear Channel - indicative of Christian / Jewish power rift?

The team effort of rightwing prophetical theology - the political merger of Jewish and Christian power that led to the Corrupt high power mob wich installed Bush is now blown apart by Passion.

The ny Jew take is rightfully vehemency toward the film. You don't traumatize people for two hours and show a movie depicting stereotypical images of jews murdering the saviour, have you father deny the Holocause then try to pass it off as "not Anti- Semetic" - that hogwash just ain't selling.

To keep the jewish block happy, the film would have had to have been denounced as extremist by mainstream Christian theologians, perhaps the administration.

This is part of the payoff to the Christian far right and it is upsetting the Jewish right. All these shots being fired are because of Passion. Stern trashed Bush, Clear channel trashes Stern.

What you are seeing is Bush's unified right wing powe worshipping base splitting into looney extremist crusaders; the less extreme people who bought that garbage at first are hitting the eject button. Stern himself said we have to get rid of Bush at any cost.

[scarletwoman]

47. Fascinating analysis! Thanks! (n/t)

[DinahMoeHum]

38. Methinks this picture is nothing more than horror/slasher PORNO.

After reading the reviews, I think the fundies are
mistaken if they think this movie will help them in their proselytizing. Who would want to be a Xtian after seeing it??


:evilfrown:

[macdevo]

39. The Passion is not Dangerous

I don't think The Passion is dangerous. I believe if you are anti-semetic going in, you are going to be one going out. If you aren't an anti-semite, you won't become one.

I think this movie is a personal experience for religious devouts, and everyone will take away what they want from it.

[Az]

46. The Passion is fuel

For whatever is already in your heart. If you are angry and pissed at those that do not believe as you do this will make it into an inferno. If you believe that Jesus suffered as he did out of love and compassion for all you will be moved along those lines.

The representation of the violence inflicted upon Jesus serves one purpose. It is to instill powerful emotions in his followers. It is irresponsible to throw this sort of live grenade into our society. In fact I would go so far as to suggest that the producer/director of this film is looking for just such a reaction. Jesus forgives peoples mistakes. I do not want to be a victim of one of his followers mistakes.

[ithacan]

49. thank you Az

for so eloquently summarizing and explaining what I was trying to say.

[INTELBYTES]

54. Yeah, good theory!

I seen Private Ryan and I'll never forgive the Germans. They killed our people! Screw them all because of that!!

What a paranoid bunch of crap about a movie! The movie was made to be enjoyed by Christians. If more Christians find Christ because of the movie, well, I say great! But don't expect a jewish killing spree. Can we democrats not embrace a group of people? From what I hear on this board, is that we democrats hate Christians, more than we think the Christians will hate Jews.

Oh, in case you haven't guessed, I'm a Christian!

[Az]

55. Enjoyed?

Ok, now that creeps me out a bit. You enjoy watching Jesus beaten for 2 hours? I will assume you meant something else.

I am not worried about Christians such as yourself. I am worried about the Christians that showed up at the atheist march in Washington DC and shouted at me and my friends that we were going to burn in hell. I am worried about the person that stuck a note in my highschool chem book saying that I should believe in god or else when I dared to suggest that evolution seemed to be the way the world worked. I am worried about the good Christian that dumped 10 bibles on my car because of the darwin fish I have on it. I am worried about the evenagelist that followed me into a parking lot and told me about the glories of Jesus for a half hour. I am worried about my friend who was forced off the road because he had a bumper sticker proclaiming his atheism. I am worried about comments heard in the theater by other DUers such as "Fucking Jews" I am worried about the historic fact that the passion play has insited religious hate crimes in the past. I am worried a worried about Doctors and women who will have to deal with anti choice activists with a renewed sense of zealousness. I am worries about fundimentalists who actively seek the end of the world so Jesus will return. I am worried about the religious right wanting to dismantle our public schools if they do not teach their religious doctrine.

I am not worried about you.

[INTELBYTES]

61. Man you must be a magnet for every zealous freak out there.

...and yep, I can "enjoy" the movie "Passion" in a spiritual sense. But it strikes me odd that would creep you out. When you can plunk down $9.00 to watch a movie like "Natural Born Killers" or "Halloween" or any other gore flick that is out there and "enjoy" those movies, well, that creeps me out. Those are movies that show the blood, guts, gore and killing for the sake of entertainment. You would pay to see that crap, and for what reason? Yet you find it somehow creepy when we could watch one man in a loosely defined "historical" film get tortured and killed for a higher purpose.

I am worried about you.

[Az]

62. Entertainment

Violence in entertainment movies is a form of titilation. We derive enjoyment from them in a variety of ways. Sometimes it is the idea of us escaping the violence. Others we envision ourselves visity vengence on forces arrayed against us. I trust you did not view the beating of Jesus as a form of titilation.

My expectation (and this could well be wrong) is that one would view the torture of Jesus with horror at the suffering visited upon him and gratitude that he took the suffering in your place. Enjoyment seems to suggest someone sitting there with a smile playing about their lips. This to me seems more reminisent of Malcolm McDowals Alex from Clockwork Orange imagining himself as one of the Roman guards beating Jesus. I just don't see the word enjoy in context with watching the explicit torture and murder of an individual, divine or otherwise.

As to the troubles I have experienced at the hands of believers there are quite a number of others I could list. Suffice to say that not all believers act in such ways. But some do. A casual reading of history books will tell that tale better than my personal history would.

This is by no means an indictment of all Christians. It is simply a fact of belief. It can bring out extremes of behaviour in the name of the belief.

[INTELBYTES]

65. But don't let what man does in the name of God be confused with...

God's actual purpose. God doesn't tell people to throw bibles at you, or march to war in crusades, or even have people yell at you at abortion clinics. Man confuses what they think "God wants" with His real intentions. His intentions are for His Son to work through them, and not them using His Son to do what they think they should do.

[SheepyMcSheepster]

68. so what are God's true intentions?

[INTELBYTES]

71. How many words do you want it in?

To make it quick and easy, (no flaming please) He wants to reconile you to Himself through the work His Son completed on the Cross on our behalf.

I'm not sermonizing. I'm just answering your question.

[scarletwoman]

79. Gee, that's not what God told ME!

Sorry, I just have a big problem with ANYBODY claiming to know God's "intentions".

sw

[INTELBYTES]

83. Well if God is talking to you, but all means listen to Him!

By the way, why ask the question if you didn't want the answer?

[Az]

82. The problem

Even if there is a god, you do not know the mind of god. Proclaiming what he wants is problematic. Our means of interacting with God is still limited to the iterpretted writings of humans. We do not have God standing by to correct us if we get the message wrong.

[SheepyMcSheepster]

99. and how do you know this?

[Az]

81. Since you were up front with me

I will be up front with you. I am an atheist. I do not believe there is a god. So I can only go on what the followers of the teachings attributed to God and Jesus do. I do not place the actions of individuals on the heads of others. Thus you present yourself to me and that is what I judge you by. I am aware of social factors and how people act in groups. I have also studied belief and base my observations of social groups in combination with these studies.

[Lars39]

58. Did you forget the sarcasm tag? Good grief!

[ArkDem]

102. Maybe we could get them to quit circulating those

'good books', too. Nothin' but trouble.

[noonwitch]

42. People are responsible for their own behavior, a movie is not

If fundies watch this movie and then attack people who they think killed Jesus, it's the attakers' faults, not Mel Gibson's. This is a nation that at this time still allows artists, writers, musicians and movie directors freedom of expression, even unpopular expressions.

[Az]

48. Fire

Why is it illegal to yell fire in a movie theatre? I mean if the people are stupid enough to fall for it is it not their fault if they get hurt?

When speaking to a wide array of people there is some level of responsibility one must take in the reaction one might expect. The Passion has a history of leading to religious uprisings of a violent nature. It has lead to the death of countless people. To make a absurdly violent rendition of this story and not cover it up and down reminders of the lessons of peace and tolerance that were the life's work of Jesus is irresponsible.

People in groups behave in predictible ways. You show a group of people their hero, their god being beaten to death for 2 hours they are going to have some issues. Some are going to act on their intense feelings.

What do you suppose would be the reaction of the crowd after having seen this movie if someone in the theater stood up at the end and proclaimed the entire story to be a pile of bull. Do you think he would make it out of the theater alive?

Its not just a movie. It is evangelyzing. It is religion. It is intense belief.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

43. Now they are threatening Gibson's career

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1164541

Censored by DU...

[lulu]

44. Another reason why the Passion is dangerous

The Passion of the Evangelicals
By Robert Lovato, Pacific News Service

snip

Today, eager to see bloody spectacle mixed with apocalyptic desire, millions flock to the opening of Mel Gibson's gory mytho-bio-pic, "The Passion of the Christ." Many rightly fear both the film's anti-Semitic aspects and the boost it gives to right-wing evangelicals and their anti-gay and anti-abortion agendas. But "Passion" is ultimately as much about the elections as it is about Jesus and Jews, government and gays. The film's election-year release boosts the esprit de corps and organizational ability of right-wing evangelicals in this age of multimedia, wedge politics and born-again presidents.


Back when ultra-conservative Catholic Mel Gibson launched his career as the leather-clad Mad Max, I was relinquishing sex, Santana and Satan. I recall the evening that, soon after being born again, I helped bring God to the voting booth. After several hours of winning souls that Saturday in October in San Francisco, our pastor, Joel, had us all get on our knees to pray for the re-election of Ronald Reagan. Projectors displayed Christ's teachings on white walls above the small wooden stand Joel used as a pulpit in our storefront church on 23rd and Valencia streets in San Francisco. Reagan was right with God because he was right with abortion – he was against it.


Our technology and methods were crude, but our prayer and commitment were cutting edge. Twenty years later, America is 46 percent evangelical, thanks largely to the guerrilla theater, door-to-door ministering and relentless organizing initiated by thousands of evangelical churches. Already well-developed local radio and national television chains such as Trinity Broadcasting Network provided airwave support to our work on the ground. Most Americans are still asleep to the fact that we're in the middle of a Great Awakening similar to the evangelically and politically driven movements that have swept the country at various times since preacher Jonathan Edwards stirred Colonial passions.

Link: www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17959

[Armand]

52. I love Jesus.

So I must be a fundie. :eyes:

As far as the movie goes...I'm not going to get my panties in a bundle because some non-believers killed Jesus. It was His time to go...and He died for me anyway to save me from my sins. Jesus also teaches us to forgive.

The movie isn't dangerous. Geez. :eyes:

[laylah]

53. I too love Jesus

HOWEVER, when you get some right-wing zealot who puts "JEWS KILLED JESUS" on his church marquee in response to this movie, I sure as hell call it dangerous! When viewers are heard murmuring "f*ing Jews, Jew Bastards", et cetera during and after the movie, you damned straight it is dangerous! First the gays and now the Jews...deja vous anyone? I am scared pea-green...what the hell has happened to this country? When I have to tell my children that they and their father (Jewish) should have a family meeting and decide their escape from this insanity, you can bet your sweet a** that I find it HIGHLY dangerous! :mad:

Jenn

[Armand]

72. I think you're going a little overboard...

only a few people are saying Jews are the enemy. I don't see masses of people anywhere going on a "Jew bashing" rampage. You have every right to be angry...but there is no large-scale problem to worry about right now.

Sit back and relax for the moment.

[laylah]

111. Well Armand...

I am sure that is what the Russian and European Jews thought in the early 1930's. I would much rather my children and their father have an escape plan than not. Can't happen in this country? Ask the Germans...

Jenn

[slackmaster]

56. Most of the fundie reaction I've seen is overwhelmingly positive

The fundamentalists' opinions I've seen and heard are saying everyone should see the movie because it's the only one that accurately depicts what Jesus actually endured. One wrote "Best movie I've seen, ever!"

[rman]

89. Christian Science Monitor: 'Passion not so accurate'

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0202/p09s02-cogn.html
Christian Science Monitor
February 02, 2004
Controversial 'Passion' presents priceless opportunity for education
A toxic film delivers a dangerous, but teachable, moment

Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" came into my life last April. Gene Fisher, the ecumenical officer for the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, convened a group of scholars to assess Mr. Gibson's script - its historical fidelity, use of New Testament materials, and consonance with Catholic instruction.

Why did we on the panel care? This was, after all, just a movie. The answer, in part, lay with Gibson's own publicity efforts. In numerous interviews, he'd presented his movie as an act of God, insisted that it was the most historically accurate depiction of Christ's passion ever filmed, and paraded his own Catholic piety as authentication of his movie.

But Gibson had revealed some historical gaffes. One source for his story came not from the first-century Gospels, but from Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774-1824), a stigmatic nun whose visions enunciated an anti-Semitism typical of her time. (She believed that Jews used the blood of Christian babies for rituals.) And, finally, website stills of the movie were marked with Hollywood gore: "Realism" had less to do with history than with celluloid violence.
...
My point is that the toxic tradition - Jews killed Jesus; all Jews everywhere are culpable; when something bad happens to them, it is no less than they deserve - is very much alive. The film, if unaltered, is inflammatory, and potentially dangerous.
...

[ArkDem]

57. Yes. They will form up battle lines in the streets and

fight all the kids with video games.

[Romel]

60. This guy no more saw the film then my dead grandmother!!

I see right through his transparency. Why is it that as a liberal democrat, I can't be a believer. His statements make me feel as though he thinks only a right-winger can be a believer. He states his brother was in seminary and yet he states it was Mel's interpretation. The Pope stated "It is, as it was". I see no doctrinal diversion in the movie from the scriptures. Maybe he should read the scripture for himself and not listen to his brother who "didn't finish" seminary.

[Lars39]

64. Do you consider the movie to be inerrant, then?

[INTELBYTES]

67. My two cents...

I know you were replying to Romel, but if you don't mind I'd like to add my take. Inerrant can only be used in terms of the Bible itself. Mel's interpretation seems to be historically accurate, albiet with a touch of hollywood. The word "inerrant" is a trap. If one flaw is found when you claim something is "inerrant" then your whole premise is dismissed. I think Mel did a fine job staying as close to scripture as possible. He may have used "artistic liberties" in over emphasising some aspects in the movie, but that can hardly be held against him.

[rman]

70. ichacan's comment is not about who can or cannot be a believer

His comment is about how reli fundies, who typically are far right-wing, whip them selves into an angry frenzy over this movie, and why this is dangerous: how far fetched is it to think that this anger of right-wing reli fundies will be directed at those who they consider to be their enemies (atheists, lefties, gays, muslims, etc)?

I think it is quite obvious that the comment is not about who can and who can not be a believer, and i find it striking that anyone would interpret the comment as such. Talk about transparent.

[lapislzi]

66. Anybody know the connection between Opus Dei and the Dominionists?

other than their desire to return to the 14th century? Is there a tangible link?

[HalfManHalfBiscuit]

69. Roughly as dangerous as Ernest Goes to Camp

People were worried about janitors' potential violent reaction to the Ernest movies. But guess what? Nothing happened.

It is laughable to think that the Passion will "whip up into a frenzy" any Christians. You see, Christians are well aware that cruxifiction is violent. Also, they are well aware that it is a movie.

But if you are scared of Christians storming out of the theaters and kicking all ass in sight, stay away from the multiplex.

[Armand]

74. Amen to that.

I can't stress that enough. Some people are going waaaaaaaaay overboard.

[Az]

101. Yes as we all know

Janitors have a history of running around and killing people in the name of clean toilets. Happens all the time. Earnest Goes to Camp is a well established story used in the past to whip up religious fervor and saw numerous uprisings of insensed janitors who decided that it was truly the followers of David Spade that had sullied their plungers. They swept the nations and threw anyone even resembling David Spade into dungeons and forced them to renounce his antitoilet ways.

yep, its all the same.

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Armand]

77. I'm sick of people dissin' my religion.

My religion is NOT a myth. My religion is NOT bullshit. My religion is NOT a fairy tale. I wish people can learn to respect my religion and my beliefs. I do not go around and saying other people's religions are "myths" and "fairy tales."

Now...don't let a few RW assholes make you diss my religion as a whole. Respect my beliefs...as I respect others. Geez. :grr: :grr: :grr:

[Name removed]

80. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[turnhardleft]

110. That's what some say about global warming

deal with it.

[INTELBYTES]

84. "They will hate you in My name"

Don't forget that scripture Armand. That's the reason they are "dissin" your religion.

[Az]

86. Balance

We exist in a world with multiple beliefs. We can either slug it out and decide once and for which belief system has the best weapons. Or we can let each other live in the world along side us.

You believe your religion is not a myth. Some people do believe it is a myth. When you insist to others that your belief system is right you are also saying that theirs is wrong. Respect is a two way street. You seem to recognise this. But sometimes the semantics may cloud the issue.

[leyton]

91. It's not disrespectful to stand by your views.

I too am Christian, and I don't think it's a disrespect to anyone to to say, "I believe in this." I am allowed to think someone else is wrong, and a lot of Christians are able to say "I disagree with you" in a respectful manner. I think there's a double standard here at DU and to some degree in the world in general. It's perceived as okay to say, "I think religion is stupid/misguided" but it's not okay to say "atheists are stupid/misguided."

[Az]

94. Care and effort

in communicating complex ideas goes a long way to making the conversation possible. If I say a believer is deluded I pretty much end the conversation right there and then. If you say the bible is the literal truth and not a myth then we are immediately at odds.

Yes I know you believe your religion is not a myth. I happen to believe you are wrong. If I want to discuss anything productively with you though I cannot simply blurt out you are wrong. I may state I believe you are wrong and we can proceed from there. Likewise you can believe your religious faith is well founded in facts. But stating it as such pretty much says all that disagree with you are wrong.

Thus when you say your religion is not a myth you run afoul of this issue. The question of whether it is true or not is up for debate. In fact your statement essentially opens a challenge to those that do not accept the truth of your belief.

Freedom of speech does not mean it is effective speech. If we wish to make any progress together we have to take each others positions in consideration.

[rocktivity]

78. Replace Jesus with a top-heavy blonde

And it's just a snuff movie.

:headbang:
rocknation

[Dover]

85. And let's not forget the demonizing of the Islamic faith as well....

that has led us, with undue Christian righteousness, to war against whole nations rather than a few violent extremists.

This is not to say the threat from al-Qaeda and other fanatical groups is not real; what the normalisers don't want you to know is that the most pervasive danger is posed by "our" governments, whose subordinates in journalism and scholarship cast always as benign: capable of misjudgement and blunder, never of high crime. Fuelled by religious fanaticism, a corrupt Americanism and rampant corporate greed, the Bush cabal is pursuing what the military historian Anatol Lieven calls "the classic modern strategy of an endangered right-wing oligarchy, which is to divert mass discontent into nationalism", inspired by fear of lethal threats. Bush's America, he warns, "has become a menace to itself and to mankind". ..cont'd

http://pilger.carlton.com/print/133179

A minority of Extremists are the rule rather than the exception in all nations and faiths right now. Why do we allow this?
If we allow them to ignite hatred and suspicions and defensive behaviours toward others then they have won.

[formernaderite]

104. I can demonize christians and muslems equally well....

....they both seem to destabilize the world. Well at least the people who follow the christian religon (besides the Amish) aren't total luddites when it comes to the modern world, and they're not quite the sexists that the muslims seem to be. I also don't expect the christians to run out and slaughter people in the name of religon however frenzied they get after this movie. Maybe it's the way those Muslims have to pray five times a day...seems a bit like brainwashing cult.
So I'm not-pc when it comes to religon...big deal, as an atheist no Gods' going to get mad at me...not even Mel Gibsons.

[TNOE]

87. Now Here's Something Very Odd....

In these strange times - who knows?


http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=295

[salin]

106. well that makes the tinfoil that shows up here... seem... tarnished

in comparison... this is waaaaaaaaay out there. Only slightly further in that the timecube dude.

[IronLionZion]

98. you gotta love religious fanatics

[pacifictiger]

105. What everyone

neglects to say it was the politicians that killed Jesus, a loving peaceful man, in an incredibly gruesome manner. A mirror for our times perhaps?
A great many of the jewish church leaders were corrupt policitians of the jewish people living in palestine, and the Romans were the brutal military occupiers of that land. These leaders obviously would have had to make deals just to effectively stay in power. Jesus was becoming too influential with the average man on the street, and so this thorn in their collective sides and had to go. To buy into the black/white, jews or romans red herring blame game, is to perpetuate hatred and overlook entirely that it was a collaboration by politically powerful and corrupt influences who felt a threat to their absolute authority.

[Hammie]

107. Repeat after me;

It is JUST a MOVIE.
It is JUST a MOVIE.
It is JUST a MOVIE.
It is JUST a MOVIE.

[DennisReveni]

109. Oh crap.

Mel made a film he was personally involved in. His vision. he has that right. Just as we have the right NOT to see it.
But don't read more into it than really exists.
Did you know that during times of trouble people turn more toward mystical answers? Religion, Psychics, all rise during these times.
Also, you sound like one of the Lieberman ban video games crowd.
If religious people want to see the film, fine. They have that right.

[ithacan]

112. I did not say ban it

I just said I think that it will create problems. And based on everything I've seen since I started the thread, I think that was correct.

As for Mel's vision and his right, there are some great posts on that point above.

onedit: here's one post on this thread that makes the point: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1164215&mesg_id=1166590&page=

[laylah]

113. Stupidity is just

stupid; however, ignorance is DANGEROUS. My point being, yes, I agree totally with you that this IS "...just a movie". Unfortunately, many, MANY will take it as "gospel" and use it to fuel their hate of anyone who is not a Bible-thumping, gay hating, whitebread, gun-totin' registered Republican...I call them "good Christians"...with all the dripping sarcasm that I can muster. Sorry, just my humble, recovering Catholic opinion :evilgrin:

Jenn

[ArkDem]

115. Ignorance is truly dangerous.

.