• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Predjudice, or Standing on one's Personal Belief?

Motokid said:
Why is it that it's up to everyone with extremely strong christian beliefs to accept homosexuality but it's not up to everyone else to accept those with strong christian beliefs?

I don't see why everyone can't live in harmony yet still have different opinions. I don't see this guy yelling that the movie should never have been made, he just doesn't want to show it in his theater.

Nothing wrong with that in my mind.
Click to expand...

Amen, brother!

Would anyone here be discussing a movie theater owner's decision not to show a movie with explicit heterosexual sex, such as "Brown Bunny"? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0330099/ I think not. Homosexuality is a hot button and any appearance of disapproval is sure to generate a heated debate, which is what some people like.

and what about a Christian theater owner who refuses to show the Harry Potter films because he thinks it promotes witchcraft? How is that different from refusing to show "Brokeback Mountain"?
 
Stewart said:
Because those with "strong Christian beliefs" are selective about what's Christian. The clue is in the name: Christian; you know, the one who said "love thy neighbour" and was all about forgiveness and acceptance. Of course, when those with "strong Christian beliefs" want to be selective they go to the Old Testamant, a Jewish tome.

To answer your question, though, those with "strong Christian beliefs" should have more pressure to accept homosexuality because Christianity is already accepted in society. Society needs to accept homosexuality to move on.
Click to expand...


Society will, eventually, just like it has accepted other things. It's just not moving fast enough for some people.
 
It doesn't matter what his belief is, in theory, a person has the right to believe whatever they want. If this guy does not want to show this movie he has that right, and no amount of "social PC pressure" should be able to force him to show it.

Let capitalism run free. If people really find his actions to be outrageous, and offensive, they should stop patronising his business. He is making a business decision based on personal belief. Let the customers decide his fate. Not some PC lynch mob.
 
Miss Shelf said:
Would anyone here be discussing a movie theater owner's decision not to show a movie with explicit heterosexual sex, such as "Brown Bunny"?
Click to expand...

No, but the two are not equivalent. Brokeback Mountain does not have explicit homosexual sex in it - not to put too fine a point on it, Brown Bunny has boners, for Chrissake! Brokeback Mountain is R-rated.

As for Motokid's strange reliance on the term 'PC' as though political correctness was somehow a bad thing, I can only refer to Armando Iannucci's piece in last week's Observer:

Though I'm as against restrictions on free speech as anyone, I've always felt that political correctness is mostly correct. It's the reason we don't use words such as spastic, nigger and poof in railway station Tannoy announcements.

I don't think we should ever stop people from saying politically incorrect things: I just think we should be more up-front in telling them they're just plain rude. Not offensive or outmoded: that just encourages them. No, just rude. After all, the thing that really riles the gentrified hefferlumps who simply want to 'speak their mind' is telling them they've all got bad manners.
Click to expand...

Yes, Motokid is right, the man should be free to refuse to show whatever he wants to, without explaining his reasons. But if it is for the reason we all think it is, then all people of a liberal persuasion have the right to think he's a twat.
 
If I own a convenience store and I have an extremely strong opinion about smoking, so much so that I one day decide that from now on, I'm going to no longer stock, or sell cigarettes, cigars, chew, or tobacco. Would all of you be making a fuss over my right to do that?

Why is this any different?
 
This is different because there is not a history of smokers being persecuted, assaulted, intimidated and murdered because of what they do. This has happened, however, and still does, to homosexuals the world over, so if you take a 'moral' stance against homosexuality then you are, if not buying into that history of hatred and violence, then at the very least you are offering succour to those who practise it.
 
Shade said:
so if you take a 'moral' stance against homosexuality then you are, if not buying into that history of hatred and violence, then at the very least you are offering succour to those who practise it.
Click to expand...

You have absolutely got to be kidding me.....

edit:

succour

n : assistance in time of difficulty;
 
Of course not. A more apt comparison than the smoking one would be if you were a multiplex owner refusing to show a film because it featured black people, or Jews.
 
Shade said:
Yes, Motokid is right, the man should be free to refuse to show whatever he wants to, without explaining his reasons. But if it is for the reason we all think it is, then all people of a liberal persuasion have the right to think he's a twat.
Click to expand...
Shade said it better than I ever could. What a plonker (not Shade, the other guy ;) )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top