LAT Article Questions Literacy Of Those Who Protest 'Golden Compass'


The protests against the forthcoming anti-religious film, "The Golden Compass," are "fundamentally ridiculous" and are perpetuated by "America's religious fear-mongers." That's according to Laura Miller in an opinion article in the Los Angeles Times (Sun., 12/2/07).

But that's not all. Writing about the various e-mails that Christian groups have sent to warn the public about the disturbing themes in "Compass," Miller spews:

[Y]ou have to wonder how much actual reading goes on in the sort of household that welcomes e-mails like the ones denouncing 'The Golden Compass' ...

Good ... grief. Just when you thought the level of condescension could not get any worse at the Times.

The man behind The Golden Compass is a British author named Philip Pullman. The forthcoming movie is based on the first book of Pullman's trilogy called "His Dark Materials." Quite simply, Pullman has openly declared, "My books are about killing God" (source) and "I'm trying to undermine the basis of Christian belief" (source). So is it any wonder at all why Christians are determined to warn believers about this film?? The ads for the film, which stars Nicole Kidman, give no hint of its troubling underlying themes. Many viewers could be duped into thinking it's just another innocent made-for-children fantasy flick. Hence the warnings by various Christian groups and individuals.

Apparently, Pullman's books have been a hit in Britain for a number of years. Miller adds, "What's really astonishing, and telling, is how long it's taken America's religious fear-mongers to notice Pullman."

Well, Laura, not everyone keeps up to speed on the latest in children's literature across the Atlantic. Pullman is on this turf now, and what's really astonishing is your arrogance and ignorance.

—Dave Pierre is the creator of TheMediaReport.com and a contributor to NewsBusters.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Just imagine if he had

Just imagine if he had replaced the word God with Allah! How heads would roll...

The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy

tactic

(Please forgive this intrusion into an area not of my experience and if 'G'/'g' use is incorrect)
Since the people wanting religious understanding between Christianity and Islam like to say that it is the same God why can't Christians make a big deal about this being the god of Allah and of Christianity or at least see if the books are specific about which god they are attempting to kill. A few Christian leaders in the media issuing sympathetic statements to Muslims and Christians about the affront to God may go a long way in bringing attention to the message of this film.

Because... Allah is NOT

Because... Allah is NOT God. Allah is the 7th century MOON god that Mohammed adopted as Islam's one god.

When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).

The whole "moon god" thing

The whole "moon god" thing explains why muslims are so torked off at America.... probably because we landed on his a$$ back on July 16th, 1969, NABUH [Neil Armstrong Be Upon Him]

 

Life can be a real b*tch... so why vote for one?

HA! Bravo! Well, for

HA! Bravo!

Well, for once, the rich white man is in control. --Montgomery Burns

You are part of teh probelm

You are part of teh probelm and don't understand teh importance of tese types of films.  The Christians won't lock teh people behind teh film and books up like the ydo otehr places but we will express our displeasure.  God is not allah and there is no otehr to a true Christian.

Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.

not the point

My point is about God or whose god is real, my point is that unless the author specifically says he is only trying to kill the Christian God than this does apply to Muslims as well and I believe that message would scare the crap out of a few theaters. On the other hand if the author has to admit that he is only out to kill the Christian God then there would have to be a lot of tap dancing in order to explain why. No offense meant to religious beliefs and the terms I'm using are only to make a point about perception in the media not about theological beliefs.

I believe that message

I believe that message would scare the crap out of a few theaters.

You're right about that: if Allah were being disrespected in this movie, theaters, and in fact cities, in the US would be burning by now.

Agnostic brings up a fine

Agnostic brings up a fine point:)

Today we Christians will be rioting - on the blogs that is:)

Ag, Only God is God. If

Ag,

Only God is God. If Allah is God, then why do they call him Allah? If Buddha is God, then why do they call him Buddha? Is "Allah" God's nick-name? Why worship Him through a nick-name? Why continually say, "We worship Allah, but btw, Allah is God"? The truth is, Allah was one of the many gods that were worshiped during the 7th century, specifically the moon god. Buddha was just a man.

 

When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).

Whenever God wanted to

Whenever God wanted to reveal something about Himself to His people he used a name that would define that Divine Attribute. For instance, in the OT "God" doesnt always translate as "God". Sometimes it's Elohim, as in Geneis 1:1. Sometimes it's Jehovah-Jirah meaning "God Provides". The work that God is doing is characterized in His Hebrew name. In the NT He is called "Abba" - Father.

Allah is NOT one of the names Yahweh revealed to His people. It was revealed to Mohammad but not by the Hebrew God.

There is none so blind as they that won’t see. Jonathan Swift 1667-1745

excuse me but God spoke

excuse me but God spoke English only, dammit!

the name "Allah" comes from "Elijah" or "Eli" - a name certainly revealed to the people as well

God does not have a name that we can know

He calls Himself "I am"

and that's it - nothing else - PERIOD

Allah is just as legit as Allah - unless your a bigot of course

Allah is not "I AM" and as

Allah is not "I AM" and as Jesus put it a pretender, one who comes and says he is God.  He is false just as all gods that have come around since Jesus.

Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.

Check the references in the article...

If you read the reference material on the author, he states very clearly that he hated with burning passion the Narnia books by C.S. Lewis (allegories of the Christian faith).

Also, as was stated in the article, it is the author's stated purpose that he is "...trying to undermine the basis of Christian belief" in his own words.

I would say that this is pretty compelling evidence that it has nothing to do with Allah or Islam. He is a very delusional, hate-filled man. He claims to be an Atheis (there is no god), but also says that he "hates God". How can he hate something that he claims to believe doesn't exist?

The real problem with this film is that it is a very disturbing story about children killing God wrapped in a very appealing and supposedly entertaining package. It is very deceptive and disingenuous for others to defend this work as just "art".

Just my $.02.

Kahuna

There are persons...who see not the full extent of the evil which threatens them; they solace themselves with hopes that the enemy...will be merciful.

Thomas Paine, Dec. 23, 1776

Kahuna, As George Orwell

Kahuna,

As George Orwell said: "He was an embittered atheist, the sort of atheist who does not so much disbelieve in God as personally dislike Him."

That is what Pullman is.

Liberal: a power worshipper without power. George Orwell

Iam/God/Allah/Yahweh is not

Iam/God/Allah/Yahweh is not worried in the slightest - me neither then:)

TM, you lack of fear has

TM, you lack of fear has made you blase about the truth. God is in fact extremely concerned about this movie. You claim to be a fundie but you have no compassion for the lost. If you believe the Bible then you understand the fate of the unsaved. If you don't believe the Bible then you're a ChINO. Back to the movie; there will be people influenced by this movie to reject God. What's their fate? God doesn't want any to go to hell but it's their choice. So I'd say God is extremely concerned about any material that comforts atheists and lulls them into a gentle sleep from which they'll awake in hell.  Stand for something.

"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." Winston Churchill

I have a feeling he's

I have a feeling he's trying to kill the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the One Christians also worship.

What I think is really interesting is, he's trying to "kill" something that he says doesnt exist. So even in his heart he knows Yahweh is real. Otherwise he would ignore Him as he does allah.

There is none so blind as they that won’t see. Jonathan Swift 1667-1745

According the world class

According the world class sanctimony dribbled out by Lady Laura Miller, there's a "democracy of reading"

Except if you’re a Christian who finds The Golden Compasses well documented paean to atheism "unsettling" and being touted by "unsavory organizations of atheists."

Then it's a dictatorship of reading where Christians are meant to know their place. And that's deferential to the likes of Laura

However it's good to know that Laura, like the Barons of the English middle-ages extend that crude democracy to our betters, like Lady Laura, when it comes to say, the 2005 movie of The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe.

Why then, it's perfectly acceptable to point out, as a matter of "apprehension and concern" the "Christian" subtext this bozo has until recently, missed. Wow. Not so smart there Lady Laura.

Lady Laura Miller: Dec 7, 2005

“These are antsy days for anyone who has loved C.S. Lewis' "Chronicles of Narnia." Even people with unambivalent memories of the series have reason to be apprehensive about the new big-budget film of "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe." How often has the screen version of a magical world you passionately entered into as a child lived up to your own imaginings? But those of us who fell for Narnia without realizing the books' Christian subtext have particular reason to be unsettled. The movie is poised to flush us out: Can we still cherish the books without believing in their most obvious message? Will we still enjoy them after critics remind us of their flaws and unsavory organizations embrace them as pious family fare? Will we still feel like reading them to our own kids?”

Get that. Lady Laura grants to herself the priviledge of objecting to the sub-text of a book because it's Christian, but objects when Christians object to the subtext of a boof because it's atheist.

Hypocrite thy name is Laura Miller.

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

Great research,

Great research, Jack!

It's just jaw-dropping, isn't it?

I'm not sure I'd call it hypocrisy though...I think I would use the term "bias."Or how about "bigotry"?

In Miller's mind, it's OK to subject kids to an atheistic "message" woven into a film, but she fears that the "Christian subtext" of the Narnia series will ruin enjoyment of the stories for everyone.

If that's not anti-Christian bigotry, I don't know what is.

PS I hope the LAT prints your letter. Please let us know here if they do. 

 

Thanks motherb... It's

Thanks motherb...

It's like dese peepoll thunk were like ilitrate dummies man, know what I mean der bro? But dat cant be rite?


If you'd like to read the whole thing which proves that this woman is... well, you fill in the blanks...

it's at
http://dir.salon.com/story/ent/movies/feature/2005/12/07/narnia/index.html
The Jesus symbol, the witch and the wardrobe
The religious right is hyping "The Chronicles of Narnia." But just how Christian is C.S. Lewis' masterpiece?

By Laura Miller

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

Sheesh, she's about as

Sheesh, she's about as arrogant and smug as "Margot" Pullman!

Please, oh, please, it would be so easy to start forming stereotypes about athiests. The problem is they're helping those attitudes along.

.

I took the time to page through about half of the responses on the LAT page about the article, I couldnt belive what rubish they were.  They ranged from denouncing christianity because of the muslim teddy bear story to one moron declaring that it was not a parents job to decide for their children.  Sorry... I was under the impression that it was EXACTLY my job to decide for my children what is and is not approprate.  Tell ya what, next time my son wants to throw a tantrum in a restraunt and decides to jab a fork in your eye as a method of "expressing himself" dont bitch.

 Too bad stupid isnt lethal.

I just posted on the site a

I just posted on the site a highly edited down version of  my NB post below. But they have to be "reviewed" first by ther LA Time's censor.

Gee -- I hope I pass their standards. So much for the democracy of "reading." Lady Laura is all for.

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

Crud, scanned through it,

Crud, scanned through it, but couldn't find it.

Remember, for the LAT...

It's still the wee hours of the morning, so a human being probably has yet to look at Jack's message.
JMR

Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.

bretzy...I keep

bretzy...

I keep checking, but not yet. They only allow 650 characters, so it is, as they say, a highly REDACTED version.

And as sarc points out it has to be read by an LATbot first.

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

"it has to be read by an

"it has to be read by an LATbot first"

Jack, does this mean it will be a LATeral interpretation of the literal meaning. Your straight black coffee will be sold as a LATte, all doctored up to be more palatable to their editors.

 

When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).

Jerry LATer

Jerry

LATer dude!

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

Nice -- has it posted yet?

Nice -- has it posted yet?

lotr -- no I checked half

lotr -- no I checked half hour ago.

Guess they don't like anyone actually making a researched point against a star writer using her own words to show that 2 years ago she held the opposite view.

Though they do like rants from nutjobs who can't even perform joined up thinking.

Democracy of reading indeed!

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

Thanks -- if you don't

Thanks -- if you don't mind, please keep us posted.  I can't believe they wouldn't post it.

John Edwards says it isn't

one moron declaring that it was not a parents job to decide for their
children. -
mindwerkz

When John Edwards was asked at a debate whether he would object to the story "King and King" (about a same-sex marriage) being read to his kids in 2nd grade, he responded (emphasis added)

"I want my children . . . to be exposed to all the information . . . even in second grade . . . because I don't want to impose my view. Nobody made me God. I don't get to decide on behalf of my family or my children. . . . I don't get to impose on them what it is that I believe is right.

Amazing, ain't it???

PS Your "fork in the eye" thing cracked me up. 

"moron" is a perfect description.

Unmitigated nonsense -- a

Unmitigated nonsense -- a pathetic example of slick, self-contradictory political maneuvering.

It appears that Edwards

It appears that Edwards won't even lead his own family yet he wants to lead the country.

"I don't get to impose on them what it is that I believe is right."

Huh? As a parent, if you feel that something is WRONG, it is not just your right, but your solemn duty to impart that wisdom upon your children.

When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).

Well, Jerry, that's in

Well, Jerry, that's in regard to his family. You know darn well he thinks he does get to impose on you and me and everyone else what he believes is right.

I, for one, cannot believe

I, for one, cannot believe the amount
of free press both sides are giving this author and film company on
this book and film. I am taking a rather novel approach to all this,
I am reading the first book, The Golden Compass. For $7.50 plus tax, you too can make an honest
opinion about this story, rather than allowing someone to make it for
you. I have formed my own thoughts about the story, keeping in mind
the fact that is is as much based in the fantastic as some of my
other favorites, such as Narnia, Lord of the Rings, and Harry
Potter.

Just a suggestion after all.

Well, jcon,

Well, jcon,

People that have seen the film (reviewers) and those who have read about Pullman's theology (or lack thereof) are simply recommending that parents don't take their kids to see the movie, and giving their reasons why.

Something that reviewers do all the time. You do sometimes read reviews of a movie before you go to see it? Parents with several children don't usually have time to read a book or go to see a movie alone before deciding if they want their kids to see it.

When "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" came out, everyone knew that C.S. Lewis was a (Catholic) Christian, and that his books were an allegory of Christ and redemption. Some recommended it for that reason; others panned it. Parents were free to expose their kids to it or not.

What's wrong with letting people know that Pullman is an atheist and his work is anti-God; letting people recommend or pan it, and then letting parents decide? (Unless you're John Edwards; then you let your young children decide. See my reply to mindwerkz above.)

That was well stated MB.

That was well stated MB. Freedom of speech is a two way street. The right to "Influence public opinion" is not the exclusive property of elitist journalists.

When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).

Nor is it the right of

Nor is it the right of pro-Christian commentators. See comment about finding out for yourself.

Ummm...did I say there was

Ummm...did I say there was anything wrong with it? all I am saying is read the book, make up your own mind. Do not allow it to be made up for you. How many people commenting about this have actually read it?

To answer your question, no, I rarely if ever read critical reviews. Most are worthless to me, in my opinion. I view or read based on if the story interests me, is thought provoking or entertaining, not based on what was printed in a magazine, or on a website.

I myself greatly enjoyed C.S. Lewis, both the Narnia series and the Screwtape letters. I do not consider myself a Christian in any way. I enjoyed them for their story and entertainment, not for any real or percived religous message. Again, I made up my own mind up, and enjoyed them very much.

As to allowing reviewers to decide what to watch, well, who watches the reviewers? How do you know they have you or your childrens best interests at heart? Why not take a little bit of time, maybe an hour a night, to find out for yourself? Seems like the best way to ensure what information your kids are absorbing.

Why is it that the morally

Why is it that the morally relativistic always insist that you bite the apple before you decide whether it's right or wrong for you?  I don't need to peruse Playboy (for the articles, of course) to decide for myself whether it's a morally appropriate thing to do.  I trust certain people and certain groups to aid me in my decisions.  If they fail my trust, then I rethink.  But it strikes me that your idea of a person individually sampling every single thing on earth to determine its worth to that person is either one that is disingenuous or hopelessly naive. 

Without recognizing the ordinances of Heaven, it is impossible to be a superior man. - Confucious

I think there's a little

I think there's a little more to be interpreted in the Golden Compass than in Playboy.

When you have the author's

When you have the author's own words regarding the intent of his books' message, how interpretive do you have to be?  The argument for Playboy goes, "Is it art or is it porn?"  Pullman doesn't intend to leave anyone guessing about where his books stand.  And if you tell me they're merely anti-authoritarian instead of blatantly anti-Catholic and anti-God, you're only Kidman-ing yourself.

Without recognizing the ordinances of Heaven, it is impossible to be a superior man. - Confucious

all I am saying is read the

all I am saying is read the book, make up your own mind. Do not allow it to be made up for you

all I am saying is eat the arsenic, make up your own mind. Do not allow it to be made up for you

bad logic happens

GoHunter08

Terrible comparison. Those

Terrible comparison. Those that let others think and decide for them are more likely to "drink the Kool-Aid" than those who do not.

economic

In order to show your disapproval for a product you have to vote with your $$ and persuade others to do the same. By paying $$ to "think for yourself" you are in effect giving economic approval for the product. I don't disagree with your premise that we should all make up our own mind but there has to be a way of doing so without economically voting your approval for something you don't believe in; otherwise you can only research and make an educated guess.

Jcon

actually it is a great comparison, send me twenty bucks and I'll explain it to you so you can make up your own mind

GoHunter08

How many people

How many people commenting about this have actually read it?

I've never quite understood the logic of this argument.

I've never read Mein Kampf, or The Communist Party Manifesto either.

I'm not supposed to have an opinion on the evil intent of these influential ravings?

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

no Jack

and until you've seen 'Debbie does Dallas' you can not say it is not the sequel to Bambi.

GoHunter08

Or  the follow

Or  the follow up

Debbie Does Bambi

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

So the Satan Times is

So the Satan Times is keeping with the status quo by bashing Christianity again and to prop an athiest movie.

I didn't know anything about this guy or movie until our priest mentioned the themes of this movie. I knew it had to be serious since we almost never get movie suggestions from our priest. My feeling is hopefully people do get info about what this movie is about and then make a decision to go or not.

 

Do you realize how much it costs to run for office? More than any honest man could afford. -Montgomery Burns

Check out the intellectual

Check out the intellectual standard of liberals foaming at the mouth because Christian folks use their First Amendment Right to dissent against an atheist agenda.

The gall, the audacity, the cheek of these people. Who do they they they are? Americans?

So how can one possibly argue against this level of brilliance and firepower demonstrated on all the tolerant and nuanced posts to the LAT site ? Such as this gem...

13. its fun to watch the thick foreheaded Neanderthals wave their bibles and shreik... makes it easier to spot and avoid cretins celebrating their limited intellectual abilities. amazing the world lets them breed............
Submitted by: perry

9:32 PM PST, December 2, 2007

Go Perry. Clearly another illustrious alumni of Berkeley.

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

Jack, just like the joke

Jack, just like the joke that if you tie an Italian's hands behind his back, he can't talk (I'm Italian; it's true! LOL),

If you require liberals to construct an argument without insulting the people they disagree with, they become mute.

mama mia. Thata cannota be

mama mia. Thata cannota be truea!

(Its a great to be bi-linguini, lika whatta I am.)

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

if God be for them...they

if God be for them...they shalt not worry...

whatever they do to the least of Christ's bretheren, they do to Him...

Wow! That just reeks of

Wow! That just reeks of "open mindedness" and "tolerance". So loving. So inclusive. So intellectually grounded and factually driven. Perry may very well be a Berkeley alumni, but more likely, a Berkeley professor.

When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).

I thought both "Shreik" and

I thought both "Shreik" and "Shreik 2" were funny, but haven't had a chance to see the third one yet.

"My books are about killing

"My books are about killing God" (source) and"I'm trying to undermine the basis of Christian belief" 

Oh sure, that's the ticket.  Let's just keep on rejecting God. That's the kool thing to do.  And let's make doubly sure that we put the kids on point in that rejection.  That's simply brilliant. Pullman and his followers are possessed. 

  

Well, I'd say Pullman was

Well, I'd say Pullman was pretty explicit about the point of the books and the movie.

Liberals can't claim that Christians are imagining things and reading way too much into what's just an adventure story.

Oh, and Nicole Kidman, who stars in it, says it's not an anti Catholic movie.

Her proof? She is Catholic and her family would be very upset if she made an anti-Catholic movie.

 

Her proof? She is Catholic

Her proof? She is Catholic and her family would be very upset if she made an anti-Catholic movie.

Oh well then....    never mind..   

And again, I point to

And again, I point to "Birth".

 

*sigh*

The movie and the book

The movie may be different from the book, but I heard Scholastic is promoting the movie/book connection in the classroom and offering a curriculum for teaching the book.  Why can't a Christian book be promoted in the classroom, but a atheistic book can be?  Atheism is just as much a spiritual belief system as any organized religion. I know my nephews once they see a movie want to read the real book, not just the Scholastic movie picture book.  We are not going down that road here.

Why can't a Christian

Why can't a Christian book be promoted in the classroom, but a atheistic book can be?

That is a truly outstanding question.  Cuts right to the point.

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

The movie may be different

The movie may be different from the book, but I heard Scholastic is
promoting the movie/book connection in the classroom and offering a
curriculum for teaching the book

The fact that "Scholastic" is promoting the book doesn't mean that it is worthwhile or valuable for kids. It just means that "Scholastic" is jumping on the bandwagon too.

In Miller's piece in the LAT, she tells of the awards that the books have won. Having sorted through the books on the Caldecott and Newberry Award lists when my daughter was younger, I can say that isn't necessarily an indication that it's something you want your kids to read either. I decided just from reading the synopses of a lot of the books that I didn't want my daughter reading them.

Those awards are apparently decided on by liberals who choose the winners according to the worldview that they want to promote. Apparently Scholastic is going down that road too. It's more and more about pushing their agenda on children.

I suppose at this point I should admit...

I managed to read the entire Narnia series as a kid, and I sorta enjoyed it as I recall, but I can't remember any explicitly-Christian message. I'm not sure which side's argument this plays-into. It was just a good story to me at the time.
JMR

Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.

I think Lewis wrote a

I think Lewis wrote a series of children's books infused with his Christian faith as he retold the Christ story in an allegorical form to inspire younger readers to do good, and tell an exciting story at the same time. 

I don't think he ever stated his goal was to convert children to Christianity. His original audience was already Christian in 1930's England.  The point was moot.

Pullman has explicity stated that it IS his aim to convert children to atheism. If God is dead, how can one worship God.

That's my take.

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

sarc, I didn't read all of

sarc, I didn't read all of them, my son did and loved them... And if you are a Christian, the allegory in LWW is plain....Aslan, the Christ figure, willingly sacrificing his life, and then rising again.

 

Never let it be said

That I always see things that are right under my nose. I'm just like lots of other people in that way, I guess. ;)
JMR

Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.

Loons rule LAT website! It's true!

More impeccable logic from the typical LATimes reader.

I am not making this up, it's hot off the LAT website, check it out...


4. Bashing this movie by institutional religion is akin to what's happening today in Sudan. Where an innocent school teacher being persecuted by that states religion for naming a teddy bear. Justifiably we in the west are shocked and angered by what this Islamic state religion is doing to this poor woman, but is bashing this movie for a precieved religious slight really any different?

Submitted by: Mark
11:23 PM PST, December 2, 2007

Sure loon, sure.  Word.

The cases are so identical I'm surprised no one else has noticed. Clearly he graduated Suma Dumb Laude at a major libarts college.

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

Jack

When it comes to religious subjects the loons run rampant at the LA times or the San Francisico Gate...you read ad nauseum stuff about pedophile priests, how religion keeps you from free thinking, etc., etc. They rehash the same arguments over and over again. Sure every once in a while you'll get some backward logic such as the comment above. So their "free" thinking has just made them stupid and narcissistic.

 

Do you realize how much it costs to run for office? More than any honest man could afford. -Montgomery Burns

Allah is God in Islam

Actually Allah is God in Islam. It is just their word for it, not some "other" god or polytheistic one.

Allah (Arabic: الله, Allāh) is the standard Arabic word for "God".[1] The term is most likely derived from a contraction of the Arabic article al- and ʾilāh "deity, god" to al-lāh meaning "the [sole] deity, God" (ho theos monos); another theory traces the etymology of the word to the Aramaic Alāhā.[2]

While the term is best known in the West for its use by Muslims as a reference to God, it is used by arabic-speakers of all Abrahamic faiths, including Christians and Jews in reference to "God".[3][1][4] The term was also used by pagan Meccans as a reference to the creator-god, possibly the supreme deity in pre-Islamic Arabia.[2]

The concepts associated with the term Allah (as a deity) though differed from tradition to tradition. In pre-Islamic Arabia, Allah was not the sole divinity, had associates and companions, sons and daughters. There was also a kind of kinship of between Allah and the jinn. [5] In Islam, Allah is the pivot of the Muslim faith who is only God, all-merciful and omnipotent, transcendent creator of the universe, and the judge of humankind.[3][1]

    One of the reasons

    One of the reasons there is so much anti-Christian bias is because Christianity promotes the value and dignity of the individual.  For liberalism (and any other political system that represses individuality) loyalty to the state is the highest calling for its citizens.  Kings, communists and despots have always fought the Christian Church.  The liberals wish to take us back to a time before Christianity where the elites/tribal leaders decided what is best for the group.  Then people live their lives as good citizens not good individuals.  Morality under a state system is do what you wish as long as it does not impact the control of the state.  If you look at Europe you can see how this process plays out.  As Europeons have walked away from their Christian heritage they have become increasingly less free and moralistically ambiguous.  Individuality has been replaced by beurocrats who micro-manage their lives. 

censoring religion

We were just talking about this yesterday on another thread. Teachers are forbidden to discuss religion in any way and children are not allowed to do school projects on religious texts. But liberal books like Harry Potter are practically forced on them.

I wonder how many critics read the book of Esther before panning One Night With the King. I wonder how many read the four gospels before trashing The Nativity Story or Passion of the Christ. Did they read Bridge to Terabithia? Because of Winn Dixie?

Unless critics read every single religious book before they trash the film, they've no right to expect that of us.  

 

The most dangerous thing in the world is an angry person with political power.

The left

It is irritating some of the time , but always amusing that these  "elites" act as though they are oh, so smart, when in realty they are some of the most ignorant, closed- minded individuals you'd ever not want to meet. O'Reilly's popinjay and Pecksniffian fit Laura Miller and her ilk to a tee.

NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"

Proproganda at it's best.

"The man behind The Golden Compass is a British author named Philip Pullman.
The forthcoming movie is based on the first book of Pullman's trilogy
called "His Dark Materials." Quite simply, Pullman has openly declared,
"My books are about killing God" (source) and "I'm trying to undermine the basis o