alt.education

In article <269e0c40-564b-4953-9d93-0f4df4ad67fd@ > Wide Eyed in Wonder writes:
> On Nov 15, 10:46 am, c...@ (Cary Kittrell) wrote:
> > In article <65feaad2-f587-4151-a041-6e45c802b...@ > Wide Eyed in Wonder writes:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Nov 14, 1:31 pm, Anlatt the Builder wrote:
> > > > On Nov 13, 6:46 pm, Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
> >
> > > > > I don't think I've taken a position on Pullman's book or film, since I
> > > > > wasn't familiar with the books enough to do so. What started
> > > > > intriguing me, though, was that the opposition to the film could all
> > > > > be traced right back to either the film itself or supporters.
> > > > > Basically, it seems they started saying Christians would oppose this
> > > > > film, before any such opposition occurred. They WANT to stoke
> > > > > controversy to try to get sales.
> >
> > > > Can you actually cite any "supporters" of the film who started saying
> > > > Christians would oppose this film, before any such opposition
> > > > occurred?
> >
> > > > I've read comments from a number of fans of the book who are
> > > > displeased that, in their opinion, the book's anti-religious-
> > > > institution message has been toned down or eliminated from the movie.
> > > > That's a little different, though.
> >
> > > > This Christian opposition to the film:
> >
> > > > /entertainment/movies/news/ ...
> >
> > > > does not appear to have been based on any "stoking" at all. To me, a
> > > > better description was that William Donohue was waiting to pounce. He
> > > > considers the fact that they've toned down any anti-religious themes
> > > > in the movie as little more than a soul-threatening "bait-and-switch:"
> > > > Christian parents will allow their kids to go to the movie because
> > > > it's not blatantly anti-religious, the kids will then turn to the
> > > > books and absorb their "atheistic" message, and - *bang*! - more kids
> > > > going to hell.
> >
> > > Who's William Donohue? Most people wouldn't have a clue who he was,
> >
> > Most non-Catholics, more likely.
> >
> > > and...more importantly...NO ONE would know he was opposed to the film,
> > > if the papers hadn't posted his comments to STOKE opposition.
> >
> > Well, yeah, that's pretty much what you do when you want to
> > mount a boycott: publicise your campaign as widely as you
> > can and urge like-minded people to join it.
> >
> > Sort of like they did in boycotting Miller beer, an effort
> > which any right-minded person should have been doing already.
> >
> > -- cary
>

> So, you are saying the Catholics ASKED the paper to write the article
> on Donohue?

The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights issued a press release.
It's what they do. They're quite accomplished at it. Go to
their site to see the current batch of releases on other
topics.


> I mean, this opposition that was presented was from a
> supporter of the film,

Not what I read: the article gives quotes from League
president Donahue taken directly from their phone interview
with him. Not something like "Golden Compass producers Heckel and
Jeckel claim that William Donahue said...", but direct quotes from
Donahue, from an interview conducted for purposes of this article.

And in fact, I see only two sentences from the Golden
Compass folks -- and these are second hand, lifted
from another article.

Hardly "presented from a supporter of the film".


> saying there is Christian opposition and not a
> press release from the Catholic church

No one claims the Catholic Church has said anything at
all about this.

> (basically confirming everything I said).


-- cary