• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The results are in Liberals won't acknowledge

Re: Here is further PROOF of the power of the Passion

The Passion is a load of crap that misses the point completly. Not only that, but the anti-semetic image portrayed in the film make me want to take Mel Gibson and skewer him on a pike.

Secondly, politicans are all rich and pompous. Stop pointing fingers at the other party. Politicans by definition are rich. Have you ever seen a poor politician?

And Dawsen, why don't you think before you type? I'm getting kind of sick of your misguided logic.
 
Re: Here is further PROOF of the power of the Passion

ah, but why are they rich an pompous? why arn't any politicians not rich?
 
Re: Here is further PROOF of the power of the Passion

heyjoeo said:
The Passion is a load of crap that misses the point completly. Not only that, but the anti-semetic image portrayed in the film make me want to take Mel Gibson and skewer him on a pike.
Click to expand...
I am not sure we saw the same movie. Also, I am not sure that you know the history in the bible.
 
Liberals won't acknowledge.....I missed something. I should at least get a chance to not acknowledge...things.

I haven't seen The Passion. Do not intend to. I am not a fan of Mel Gibson, never have been. He seems obsessed with depictions of brutality and torture, simply for the sake of brutality and torture. This movie seems more like a progression of this obsession than an independent expression of his faith.

I don't need to see films recreating the inhumanity of man to his fellow man. Maybe I just have too good an imagination, but I can picture it all very well in my own personal cinema.

I understand how Jesus suffered. And I understand how humanity let him down. And I understand that we would do it all over again if given the chance. If some humble, roaming stranger came around preaching unconditional love and tolerance and self-sacrifice without compensation, not to judge or accumulate riches? He'd be rode out of town on a rail quicker than you can say rabble rouser.
 
Re: Here is further PROOF of the power of the Passion

And Dawsen, why don't you think before you type? I'm getting kind of sick of your misguided logic.[/QUOTE]

Please give an example of the 'misguided logic'. You are the one that baffles me.
 
Jack Dawson said:
There are MORE RICH, ELITIST DEMOCRATS in Congress than Republicans
Click to expand...

Please prove this. (It's going to be though, because Republicans have a majority in Congress.

Jack Dawson said:
and there or more RICH ELITISTS in Hollywood than Republicans...
Click to expand...

I assume you mean there are more rich elite liberals in Hollywood than Republicans. Please prove this as well. (FYI: Mel Gibson is a product of Hollywood and it was Hollywood that distributed his movie. And "Hollywood" is a consortium of rich, powerful media companies which are niether liberal nor conservative, Democrat nor Republican. They are amoral legal entities whose sole purpose is to make a buck. And as an industry, it is one of the most successful and lucrative examples of free market capitalism there is. If you don't like Hollywood, you just don't like capitalism.)

P.S. My 12-year-old niece was so horrified by the relentless brutality in The Passion that she had to leave the theater half way through. Not only did she learn nothing about Jesus, it probably permenantly turned her off to Christianity. Jesus deserves better cinematic treatment than this.
 
argexpat said:
P.S. My 12-year-old niece was so horrified by the relentless brutality in The Passion that she had to leave the theater half way through. Not only did she learn nothing about Jesus, it probably permenantly turned her off to Christianity. Jesus deserves better cinematic treatment than this.
Click to expand...
Why on earth did you let your 12 year old watch a rated R movie? It wasn't meant to be a loving caring sweet 16 carebear movie. The targeted audience was quite a bit higher in age, so it's not Gibsons fault.

It saddens me that folks do not even care about the rating system or care if thier 12 year old sees brutality and violence in the extream (ignoring the clear warning even on the poster or commercials). Then they blame the movie instead of the questionable descision by the parent.
 
The comparison is ridiculous. I have many liberal, Christian friends who saw the Passion but were unable to see Fahrenheit 9/11 because of its limited distribution.
 
excuse me, in the words of our beloved president, you "midunderestimate" twelve year olds.
 
Rhadamanthus said:
you underestimate 12 year olds.
Click to expand...
Purhaps I do, but I would hope that the rating system is there for a reason.

Would you let a 3 year old watch Sex in the City?
 
No but i might let a twelve year old. The rating system does not factor in the individual maturity of each child.
 
Hahaha Rhad, misunderestimate.

Jack Dawson. Case in point: The first post in your article. You put two unrelated facts together, and tried to pull some bullshit out of your ass about how the Democrats "suck" and GO UBER RADICAL CHRISTIAN LOVING REPUBLICANS! Nobody cares, go back into your hole and tell your bullshit to a wall.

Am I being mean? Stupid people don't deserve respect, sorry.
 
vauge said:
Why on earth did you let your 12 year old watch a rated R movie? It wasn't meant to be a loving caring sweet 16 carebear movie. The targeted audience was quite a bit higher in age, so it's not Gibsons fault.

It saddens me that folks do not even care about the rating system or care if their 12 year old sees brutality and violence in the extream (ignoring the clear warning even on the poster or commercials). Then they blame the movie instead of the questionable descision by the parent.
Click to expand...


It was my niece, not my daughter. And it was her Christian mother who took her to see it, because it was about Jesus. And who could blame her? Never did she imagine a movie about Jesus would be unsuitable for children.

The reason Passion is unsuitable for children is precisely why it’s a bad movie. And not just a bad movie about Christ, but a bad movie period.

Gibson knew that Hollywood has produced dozens of movies about Christ (contrary to the Republican stereotype of an anti-Christ Hollywood) and most of them didn’t do well at the box office. And he wasn’t about to lose his shirt and jeopardize his career on another one. (Gibson may be a devout Christian, but he’s also a good business man.)

So his movie about Christ had to be different. It had to create controversy and that most coveted of Hollywood phenomena, "buzz." And to do that, you need a gimmick. And what was Gibson’s gimmick? He would do away with the story and teachings of Christ, and instead make his torture and crucifixion the entire focus of the movie. (Who needs the Sermon on the Mount when you have CGI.) But that wasn’t enough. Since Gibson ditched the story of Christ to make room for more of his murder, he had to make it the most bloody and relentlessly gruesome depiction in the history of cinema. (It’s like making a movie about the Kennedy assassination that deals exclusively with the day he was assassinated, complete with a slo-mo, bullet’s eye view of Kennedy’s head exploding, and the bits of his bloody brain hitting Jackie. No one needs to see that. No one should want to see that.) The Passion is pornographic in its depiction of violence. It’s a snuff film.

So what if it was accurate. This material would have been better handled as a documentary on the History channel, where we could use our imaginations instead of having the gore handed to us.

I agree that no one should subject their children to this dreck. But considering the money it made, millions did. What saddens me is that there are people out there so blinded by Christianity they can’t recognize a shitty movie when they see one.
 
Last edited:
It takes scenes of blood and gore to get most of those christians to watch a movie.
 
Rhadamanthus said:
It takes scenes of blood and gore to get most of those christians to watch a movie.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's the after work beer hitting me, but I laughed out loud when I read this!

Thanks,

Hoot
 
stop throwing insults this is a debate not a mudslinging contest

the passion and faranhiet should be judged based on the quality in which they were created was farenheit truthful? did it present facts or get a point across as a documentary this is how it should be judged (i personally think its failed to do anything said above especially since bush still one even regardless of the "facts" of farenheit) the passion should be judged based on content actors and story no one can deny that the story of jesus is powerful one and as far as the tourture scenes why dont you liberals step back and truely analize the point mel gibson was trying to get across whether you beleive in him or not jesus went through that torure for us mel was trying to how horrible it truely was without sugar coating it atheist liberal or christian u cant deny that the passion was the true story of jesus
 
So just because someone is liberal means that they are also atheist?
 
no but you gotta admit there are alot of liberals that are athiest and they tend to work to gether and stuff like the passion
 
Jufarius87 said:
whether you beleive in him or not jesus went through that torure for us
Click to expand...

This is more Christian pomposity. Whether I "believe in him or not," I should be grateful that he sacrificed his life for me? Jesus was a charismatic rabbi who ran afoul of the authorities 2000 years ago. His death didn't prevent a single act of brutality or inhumanity. On the contrary, it's been the rational for some of the worst atrocities in history, from the Crusades to the Jewish Holocoust to the genocide of Native Americans to KKK lynchings to the current "war on terror." (Bush, in probably his most candid moment, called it a "crusade.") Jesus died for nothing.

Jufarius87 said:
mel was trying to how horrible it truely was without sugar coating it atheist liberal or christian u cant deny that the passion was the true story of jesus
Click to expand...

That's just it, there was no story, no teachings, just brutality. There's a name for graphic depictions bereft of narrative context: it's called pornography.
 
argexpat said:
That's just it, there was no story, no teachings, just brutality. There's a name for graphic depictions bereft of narrative context: it's called pornography.
Click to expand...

There was indeed a story, it was Gibsons accound of the passion. Nothing new, it is very similar to "The Passion" - play but with more ketchup.

I cannot argue with the logic of it being pornography. It was very "sensational material and lurid". So was Kill Bill and Natural Born Killers - many more that fall into this genre by definition.

But, I still ask - why would ANYONE in thier right mind let a 12 year see pornography?

On the contrary, it's been the rational for some of the worst atrocities in history
Click to expand...
Again, by definition, every war has be faught on religious grounds. So, condeming Christians only would be harmful to all humanity.
 
do you really think anyone enjoyed the movie for the sake of the blood and guts?(im sure many did in kill bill) i personally think the passion could be looked upon as a good documentary no holds barred true story that is how jesus died and he did it for us

do you really think jesus would have wanted the crusades>? you cant blame that on his death blame it on the peeps who used his death for their own gain
 
Jufarius87 said:
do you really think anyone enjoyed the movie for the sake of the blood and guts?(im sure many did in kill bill) i personally think the passion could be looked upon as a good documentary no holds barred true story that is how jesus died and he did it for us

do you really think jesus would have wanted the crusades>? you cant blame that on his death blame it on the peeps who used his death for their own gain
Click to expand...

Absolutely, there are some truely sick people that would enjoy the the pain and blood alone. I can only assume that you mean that much less would enjoy it. That I agree. Yes, it was an excellent account. There are some questionable spots that add to the drama that are not in the scriptures - such as the guards allowing him to drop off the hill.

I am not sure what Jesus would have wanted. But, you may be right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom