GrayBeard Wrote:All I can say is Whatever.

Tough to refute. ;-)

Give me 20 hours of videotape and an editing machine and I can make a 90 minute film making anyone, no matter how dull, look like a freak. I have a feeling that the makers of this film had an agenda going in and it wasen't to make Christains look sympathetic. I am just supprised that the camp people let the cameras in knowing how many Micheal Moore type, propaganda "filmmakers" are out there.

If you saw some of the video of the recent anti-war march in DC, you would have seen some of the extreams on that side of the Iraq War debate. Would anyone think that a documetory which featured only the most extream of those participants (the American Communist Party, Transvestites for Peace, people carriyng extreamly racist, anti-Jewish signs, etc.) would be a fair portrayal of the anti-war movement?

NIUFAN Wrote:Give me 20 hours of videotape and an editing machine and I can make a 90 minute film making anyone, no matter how dull, look like a freak. I have a feeling that the makers of this film had an agenda going in and it wasen't to make Christains look sympathetic. I am just supprised that the camp people let the cameras in knowing how many Micheal Moore type, propaganda "filmmakers" are out there.

If you saw some of the video of the recent anti-war march in DC, you would have seen some of the extreams on that side of the Iraq War debate. Would anyone think that a documetory which featured only the most extream of those participants (the American Communist Party, Transvestites for Peace, people carriyng extreamly racist, anti-Jewish signs, etc.) would be a fair portrayal of the anti-war movement?

The director of the camp has said that she supports the documentary and think its a fair and accurate depiction of what goes on.

Next.

OUGwave Wrote:

NIUFAN Wrote:Give me 20 hours of videotape and an editing machine and I can make a 90 minute film making anyone, no matter how dull, look like a freak. I have a feeling that the makers of this film had an agenda going in and it wasen't to make Christains look sympathetic. I am just supprised that the camp people let the cameras in knowing how many Micheal Moore type, propaganda "filmmakers" are out there.

If you saw some of the video of the recent anti-war march in DC, you would have seen some of the extreams on that side of the Iraq War debate. Would anyone think that a documetory which featured only the most extream of those participants (the American Communist Party, Transvestites for Peace, people carriyng extreamly racist, anti-Jewish signs, etc.) would be a fair portrayal of the anti-war movement?

The director of the camp has said that she supports the documentary and think its a fair and accurate depiction of what goes on.

Next.

Big deal, the American Communists would say that they are the real face of the anti-war movement. It doesen't mean that they ARE.

RebelKev Wrote:

OUGwave Wrote:By the way, I am well aware that the war rhetoric and militant symbolism in the film is probably metaphoric, symbolizingg a struggle with the Devil, temptation, etc.

But I'm really uncomfortable with war metaphors in religion. Why? Because Jihad, in the Qu'ran, is the same kind of metaphor. But people with an agenda can take advantage of confused and vulnerable young people... the potential for abuse is too great.

Ask yourself who it actually is that has made this war about Religion. It's not the Christians.

....and if the Christian flag is the white one with the blue cross, I've heard of it and seen it. However, no one told me I was supposed to salute it. Damn, those "fundies" must be slipping.

I'm not talking about who "made the war about religion"...

I am talking about people making religion about war. I thought I made that pretty clear I was talking about the use of war metaphors and symbolism in religion, not the other way around.

Reading is fundamental, too, you know.

OUGwave Wrote:

NIUFAN Wrote:Give me 20 hours of videotape and an editing machine and I can make a 90 minute film making anyone, no matter how dull, look like a freak. I have a feeling that the makers of this film had an agenda going in and it wasen't to make Christains look sympathetic. I am just supprised that the camp people let the cameras in knowing how many Micheal Moore type, propaganda "filmmakers" are out there.

If you saw some of the video of the recent anti-war march in DC, you would have seen some of the extreams on that side of the Iraq War debate. Would anyone think that a documetory which featured only the most extream of those participants (the American Communist Party, Transvestites for Peace, people carriyng extreamly racist, anti-Jewish signs, etc.) would be a fair portrayal of the anti-war movement?

The director of the camp has said that she supports the documentary and think its a fair and accurate depiction of what goes on.

Next.

Big deal, the American Communists would say that they are the real face of the anti-war movement. It doesen't mean that they ARE.

The "Pro-choice" people like to say, "if you don't like abortion, don't have one."

So, if you don't like Jesus Camp, don't send your kid.

NIUFAN Wrote:

OUGwave Wrote:

NIUFAN Wrote:Give me 20 hours of videotape and an editing machine and I can make a 90 minute film making anyone, no matter how dull, look like a freak. I have a feeling that the makers of this film had an agenda going in and it wasen't to make Christains look sympathetic. I am just supprised that the camp people let the cameras in knowing how many Micheal Moore type, propaganda "filmmakers" are out there.

If you saw some of the video of the recent anti-war march in DC, you would have seen some of the extreams on that side of the Iraq War debate. Would anyone think that a documetory which featured only the most extream of those participants (the American Communist Party, Transvestites for Peace, people carriyng extreamly racist, anti-Jewish signs, etc.) would be a fair portrayal of the anti-war movement?

The director of the camp has said that she supports the documentary and think its a fair and accurate depiction of what goes on.

Next.

Big deal, the American Communists would say that they are the real face of the anti-war movement. It doesen't mean that they ARE.

Fine, like I said, that is a far better argument to make against the documentary than to simply argue that what it depicts isn't so bad.

But if you've seen the film, its pretty even-handed in pointing out that not all evangelicals practice things like that.

It still however speaks to the main discussion here, which is that Christianity can be perverted in some pretty scary (and non-Christian) ways, much like Islam can be also.

That is not to say Christianity is as bad as al-Qaeda -- instead its to say that Islam is not as bad as al-Qaeda either.

NIUFAN Wrote:The "Pro-choice" people like to say, "if you don't like abortion, don't have one."

So, if you don't like Jesus Camp, don't send your kid.

One bad argument does not justify another, for the intellectually honest among us...

OUGwave Wrote:Fine, like I said, that is a far better argument to make against the documentary than to simply argue that what it depicts isn't so bad.

But if you've seen the film, its pretty even-handed in pointing out that not all evangelicals practice things like that.

It still however speaks to the main discussion here, which is that Christianity can be perverted in some pretty scary (and non-Christian) ways, much like Islam can be also.

That is not to say Christianity is as bad as al-Qaeda -- instead its to say that Islam is not as bad as al-Qaeda either.

What exactly are you arguing about anyway? You seem to be jumping from one argument to another...

NIUFAN Wrote:The "Pro-choice" people like to say, "if you don't like abortion, don't have one."

So, if you don't like Jesus Camp, don't send your kid.

I'm a bit more cruel. If you don't like abortion, perhaps you'll be lucky enough to be raped and inpregnated to give yourself a new worldly view.

Your analogy is also very very weak.

Just using liberal logic. ;-)

georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:

NIUFAN Wrote:The "Pro-choice" people like to say, "if you don't like abortion, don't have one."

So, if you don't like Jesus Camp, don't send your kid.

I'm a bit more cruel. If you don't like abortion, perhaps you'll be lucky enough to be raped and inpregnated to give yourself a new worldly view.

Your analogy is also very very weak.

Yours is weak as well, as hard cases make bad law.

GrayBeard Wrote:

OUGwave Wrote:Fine, like I said, that is a far better argument to make against the documentary than to simply argue that what it depicts isn't so bad.

But if you've seen the film, its pretty even-handed in pointing out that not all evangelicals practice things like that.

It still however speaks to the main discussion here, which is that Christianity can be perverted in some pretty scary (and non-Christian) ways, much like Islam can be also.

That is not to say Christianity is as bad as al-Qaeda -- instead its to say that Islam is not as bad as al-Qaeda either.

What exactly are you arguing about anyway? You seem to be jumping from one argument to another...

I'm sorry, did I get too sophisticated for you? Its pretty simple -- There is some pretty radical and dangerous stuff in some evangelical corners that can be potentially violent and shouldn't be dismissed as secular liberal paranoia about Christians. Faith can be a very powerful thing, but without humility on behalf of those preaching it, it can be very dangerous too. However, that does not mean that all Christianity is like Radical Islam. The documentary is instructive of a *particular phenomenon* -- it doesn't need to be widely representative to be scary in its own right. An al-qaeda suicide bomber isn't representative of most Muslims, but its still instructive of a particular, scary phenomenon.

OUGwave Wrote:I'm sorry, did I get too sophisticated for you? Its pretty simple -- There is some pretty radical and dangerous stuff in some evangelical corners that can be potentially violent and shouldn't be dismissed as secular liberal paranoia about Christians.

Sure it can. Like I said, show me where Christians are going out attacking people with bomb vests. Show me where they are doing ANYTHING to harm your life.

OUGwave Wrote:

GrayBeard Wrote:

OUGwave Wrote:Fine, like I said, that is a far better argument to make against the documentary than to simply argue that what it depicts isn't so bad.

But if you've seen the film, its pretty even-handed in pointing out that not all evangelicals practice things like that.

It still however speaks to the main discussion here, which is that Christianity can be perverted in some pretty scary (and non-Christian) ways, much like Islam can be also.

That is not to say Christianity is as bad as al-Qaeda -- instead its to say that Islam is not as bad as al-Qaeda either.

What exactly are you arguing about anyway? You seem to be jumping from one argument to another...

I'm sorry, did I get too sophisticated for you? Its pretty simple -- There is some pretty radical and dangerous stuff in some evangelical corners that can be potentially violent and shouldn't be dismissed as secular liberal paranoia about Christians. Faith can be a very powerful thing, but without humility on behalf of those preaching it, it can be very dangerous too. However, that does not mean that all Christianity is like Radical Islam. The documentary is instructive of a *particular phenomenon* -- it doesn't need to be widely representative to be scary in its own right. An al-qaeda suicide bomber isn't representative of most Muslims, but its still instructive of a particular, scary phenomenon.

You people scare pretty easy. Better look under your bed tonight, there might be an evangelical under there!

Are there ANY rational people on this board of over 15K, other than the ones that posted in defense of Christianity?

Geez, you people are comparing Christians to Islamic Radicals? Damn I wish you guys would spend a few weeks in Iraq. There IS no comparison. You only hate Christians because they try to instill morality. They don't f'n cut heads off of the people that won't convert.

BTW, as I understand it, Rudy's official policy is:

If your municipality has a 77% or higher increase in crime, you should have the option to locally ban assault rifles and similar high powered weapons.

georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:BTW, as I understand it, Rudy's official policy is:

If your municipality has a 77% or higher increase in crime, you should have the option to locally ban assault rifles and similar high powered weapons.

Well, I'm sure the criminals, whose firearms are probably appropriated illegally anyway, will just voluntarily give them up.


Gun control didn't bring the crime rate down in NYC. His hard line leadership and staunch support for the law and the NYPD did.

OUGwave Wrote:I'm sorry, did I get too sophisticated for you?

Who'd a figured an "I am smarter than you Tulane fan". Shocker.