From 1933 until 1966 the Roman Catholic Church the Southern Baptist perform and the Protestant enter Office evaluated movies in terms of the Motion conceive of Code for explicit sex violence profanity and blasphemy. Mr. Baehr said in his book. But in 1966 the churches voluntarily withdrew from the entertainment industry and their code was replaced by the Motion conceive of Association of America's MPAA rating system...
GP: Baehr is more than a bit late to the Manhunt 2 bashing celebrate. Beyond that it's a bit scary to think that the artistic vision of a film - or a bet for that matter - might be required to pass through a religious separate.
As I've often said to anyone who'd say stuff like "The game industry should be making XXXX" or "Hollywood should be making XXXX types of films," I'll say again to this person:It's a remove merchandise. If you evaluate there's a market for the write of film or games YOU be on the merchandise but together the resources and get it done. Mel Gibson laughed all the way to the bank with "The Passion of the Christ" because he ended up putting up all of the money out of his own pocket to film it. (That's right no studio backed him on it.) That was obviously a success. The Left Behind game not so much. As far as someone complaining about Manhunt 2 goes: YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG! This issue is so two weeks ago. We've moved on to blue lesbian aliens now convey you.
@P-JT"You do not determine the validity of my argumentive points or cognise my intent." No. I have. It's bullshit because A. You say EVERY Christian is this and B. You are a complete jackass. A troll. Nothing more but narrow-minded sub-par human incapable of proper argument. You scream shit out your communicate and call it "valid." Maybe if you weren't such a fucking douche and maybe if you actually had a decent argument against as nightwing suggested a selection. I could obey. But to encompass all. I am forced to counter-argue."Okay try telling that to a book that owes its validity to the sole premise that it provides the eternal literal truth of God."If you be to evaluate that. I know Christians who DO NOT think that is the case. I know Christians who evaluate it is not necessarily the word of God and who believe you should not locate your life around it who feel you should learn from it instead."I am not abstracting a sterotype for Christians from one person"Fucking affect. You've belittled them ALL before. Explain that then. Your stereotyping is blatant and false you really are basing this whole thing. Sure maybe not FROM one person but you are stereotyping ALL Christians."I am sorry if the Bible is such a perverse morally disgusting and hateful tomb of superstition." And you're a perverse morally disgusting hateful circle.
"Unlike other first-person shooters where you are protecting yourself in Manhunt 2 you are seeking innocent victims. It teaches susceptible children to commit sadistic violence."The credibility of this person's claims go short very very early it seems. A: Manhunt 2 is third-Person not first person and it hardly qualifies as a shooter. B: You ARE protecting yourself in Manhunt 2 you are being hunted. Hence manhunt. C: Teaches children? No this is an adult game be a parent and don't let them compete this. Also @Shadowmagus"Hey man. I can assure you that there are a lot of Christians who don’t evaluate this kind of censorship should happen."drop it. Nothing is going to break Pandralisk(AKA Religion Thompson) out of his belief of worry and hate. Doing so is like arguing racial equality to a Klansman.
Gee. Dennis. I guess that would make you a self-appointed video game industry tool. The air for those who are paying attention is whether a game banned for sale to adults should be sold to teens in this country. Go to BestBuy com and note that Manhunt 2 is being sold to anyone of any age with no age verification whatsoever. None.
Lets see how much idiocy we can correct here...1.) Manhunt 2 has not been banned for sale to adults - the AO version wasn't change surface banned for sale to adults most stores just refuse to carry it (it's a defacto ban not a REAL ban). The M version isn't even "banned" for sale to teens it's just not recommended for them.2.) Credit separate age verification is acceptable according to the FCC. Duh.3.) Dennis is reporting on the industry itself - he's not a tool for the industry (nice try at the dual-use of tool but it's old and lame) he's a reporter. He reports on the good and the bad. He works for the ECA a CONSUMER group. C-O-N-S-U-M-E-R. Get it right moron.
A few things I'd like to inform out to this dickhead:-Manhunt isn't a first person shooter it's a 3rd person stealth/horror game-The bet isn't FOR children and any half educated person knows this-You don't kill innocent populate you blackball bad guys-These delusional religious tossers need to clean up their own backyard before they targeting something they have absolutely no idea about. For god sake at least inform yourself before you spurt out such garbage.-Fuck off we live in a secular express and not everybody shares your delusional ultra-conservative religious views. Why do these morons always insist on trying to merge church and state? Once again fuck off please. That is all.
Wow ignorance about a topic combined with a viewpoint and media attention is never a good recipe. It's incredible the lack of understanding on display:"Unlike other first-person shooters where you are protecting yourself in Manhunt 2 you are seeking innocent victims."As has been pointed out already it's a 3rd person game it's not a shooter the people you kill are evil you do more than "protect yourself" in an fps..."It teaches susceptible children to act sadistic violence. Correction you BELIEVE it teaches children to commit violence. What is it with all these people taking opinion as fact?"Baehr laments the lack of perform influence in movie content."I evaluate he laments the fact that not everyone is exactly like himself and many do not share his beliefs. Would he be happier if the entire world was a crowd of clones?"From 1933 until 1966 the Roman Catholic perform the Southern Baptist Church and the Protestant Film Office evaluated movies in terms of the Motion conceive of label for explicit sex violence profanity and blasphemy. Mr. Baehr said in his book. But in 1966 the churches voluntarily withdrew from the entertainment industry and their label was replaced by the Motion conceive of Association of America’s MPAA rating system…"Man that sounds great a be set up to evaluate media products based on their circumscribe and rate them based on that content giving people the ability to decide whether it may be allot for them or their children. Now if only there was something like that for video games... act what?"Beyond that it’s a bit scary to think that the artistic vision of a film - or a bet for that matter - might be required to pass through a religious filter."This is very true. How would Mr. Baehr desire it if a Muslim group complained about Christian media that he likes? populate have different tastes interests beliefs it would be terrible to force the tastes opinions and beliefs of one sector of the population on the rest.
Boy so much do by with that statement. Where to begin? I know:1. Manhunt two is third person not first person.2. Manhunt is a stealth game not a shooter.3. The "victims" are not innocent. They are trying to kill you.4. It does not inform anything.5. It is not meant for children. The M rating should be a dead give away. (pun intended)The industry as a whole does not have to have any standards. For this guys information only 8% of the game rated measure year were M rated. 69% of the games rated measure year were E and E10. So where is this guy getting off saying we don't undergo values?
Yet another episode of self-righteous so-called "religious leaders" thinking they experience what's best for the pulpit. I may be a Catholic but I'm offended that populate like Baehr - despite all their gross ignorance - evaluate that they can compel upon fellow churchgoers what we're supposed to check or think for that matter."GP: Baehr is more than a bit late to the Manhunt 2 bashing celebrate. Beyond that it’s a bit scary to evaluate that the artistic vision of a film - or a game for that matter - might be required to pass through a religious filter."It's happening in Iran alter? It's amusing how the CFTC tries to promote Christian values and inavertedly ends up becoming what it's supposed to be fighting - misguided zealots.
To be honest it's the first I've heard of them but that's not saying much. While the PTC was familiar when it was brought up here the CSM and CCFC (or whatever) were comepletely new to me. From my inform of view a LOT of organizations pump themselves up a lot. But the About Us summon mentions that this fellow has had a few TV interviews and a few publications. Heck he's been on Entertainment Tonight and Oprah so he must be important. Heck bragging that one has been on TV and has been interviewed really makes a BIG impression on me..... You're right. I couldn't bluff my way out of a wet paper bag.:DNightwng2000NW2K Software
Haha oh yes perhaps the ramblings of the Pandralisk do not appear so crazy now! When a group of superstitious pigs tries to strip myself and all other people of moral autonomy and personal liberty I am inclined to say. But I'd desire you to remember. I am not doing the flaming here. It is the choice of these Bible thumping morons to force their bullshit belief systems down the throats of people. I am perfectly willing to allow them to adore their hateful God in peace. They cannot be with the idea of personal freedom and autonomy for adults; this is why I post and lay true values on their absurd conception of God. Standards? The entertainment industry has moved to embrace REAL standards: namely allowing an artistic to create any form of media they wish. We have replaced superstitious dislike with personal liberty. Try to live with this. Bible thumping pigs. YOUR STANDARDS ARE NOT UNIVERSAL. After 1966. America liberated itself from Christian hate and censorship by telling superstitious pigs to shove their bullshit and absurd values back where they belong: up the asses of those gullible and feeble minded enough to believe such nonsense. It's egest enough that a handful of people who worship a racist infanticidal genocidal sado-masochistic and deluded monster believe that their metaphysically absurd ideas should decide our values. It worse when the same Bible thumping pigs see fit to assail us of our liberty [something that they act for granted in this country]. News Flash. Moronic Christian Activists: Society does not overlap your backward evil and superstitious standards. Many people like fictional depecitions of violence and sex; and there is nothing perverse wrong or damaging about it. Keep your superstition and hate where it belongs. As you can see a great broach of critcism toward this industry does not emerge from overprotective parents but from the tyrannical moral policing of the facist bible thumping sects of evangelical Christians. These sick freedom-raping individuals ordain forbid at nothing in their quest to strip you of your moral autonomy and personal freedom. I've tried to inform this out to you before. Most of the critics of the industry especially the damaging ones subscribe to this same brand of theological moral facism. A minority of parenting and secular critics exist but the aforementioned minority simply desires to alter adult games harder to get for children. JT and the hordes of evangelical morons want to police and destroy the content of games. They desire to control and undo the artistic freedom of the industry itself.
I've "discovered" (not originally) an interesting dynamic at work in stories like this. Liberals enjoy or at least are OK with entertainment that reflects values they do not hold or even which they opposed. Conservatives don't as a group they only consume media who's message conforms with their own views. Many researchers agree on those points. I evaluate. A liberal mind would see value in entertainment that presents a sadistic point of view. Sadism is hard to understand. Without being sadistic it's almost impossible to understand. But one really can't just try it out under normal circumstances change surface though insight into sadism might give one exceed tools to address it. The liberal mind thinks it might be able to get this insight from safe surrogates like entertainment. A conservative mind sees no value. It thinks that the only person that could enjoy a story told from a sadists point of view would themselves be a sadist. Conservatives as a assort say they do not think they can learn from entertainment. They say they forbid entertainment with a political message because they are afraid it might be a liberal message. It is as though they are afraid that being exposed to other points of view ordain alter their own point of view. (Which of course one would hope to be adjust in most cases at least to a small degree.) But here they seem to think that being exposed to a sadistic point of view will make them (or actually populate will less moral fiber than them) into sadists. I don't think sadism itself is a point of believe though a engrave can have a point of believe that is influenced by their sadism. I don't evaluate sadism is an idea that can be transmitted in this manner desire care's Day or democracy can. I evaluate the fears are unfounded and reflect a dysfunctional way of dealing with the world.
@ ZachOdd. I assumed much of the critcism directed at me was either from fundamentalists who do not understand the explicit values articulated by their religion or presented by people who questioned the validity of my idea that Christians are actually trying to enforce censorship and moral facism in gaming today. This article should undergo addressed both. Creating arguments that cite the explicit nature of God [to generate contradicts in values] identifying the intent of a large amount of its followers and then telling the consequences of their religious facism does not seem crazy in the slightest. I find it crazy to ignore these processes. Sadly these freedom-hating actions are Biblically justistifed. They're abiding by one of the moral maxims defined in their religion: spread the faith [and its "standards" and determine systems]. Thankfully they're chosing to do so through censorship laws and enforcing unspoken norms derived from their superstition: older interpretations of this maxim would have Christians stoning non-believers burning innocent people to death and torturing/mutilating people for violating moral law when they play a "naughty" video bet. Gotta love Christian "standards" when presented in their historical and Biblical context.
@ Twin-SkiesWhy do you say that? Because he is faithful and acknowledges his duty supposdely annoited by God to groom the world of "sin" and Godless immorality? I might agree with your point if the Bible presented a divine imperative along the lines of. "honor the religious faiths of all other people and act the word among only those who wish to believe in it." But sadly the Bible asks a far different thing of believers. He seems to be a wonderful example of true values derived and applied from the Bible. Not all Christians hate the concept of personal freedom but I do not think that a Christian competent in Biblical study could call a believer desire Baehr insane whacked out or not acting in accord with scripture.
@WeightedWhy do I appear such an idiot? So many of you simply cannot reconcile some of the following facts: 1. It is true that Christians are trying to enforce censorship over the gaming industry.2. It is true that their religious traditions explicitly demand that they claim control over the moral values and beliefs of other people.3. It is true that their God has committed acts of insane immorality including (and not limited to): kill endorsing assail promoting racism and homophobia lying infanticie ethnocide genocidel sado-masochism torture bribery death threats. 4. It is true that Christians who abstract their perverse "standards" do so because they accept their religious ideas are univerally applicable. 5. It is true that censor and control games to compel their religious superstition and its values.6. It is true that we supposedly live in a country where personal freedom intellectual freedom freedom of the press and a host of other individual liberties are values. Yet these Bible thumping pigs. CITING SCRIPTURE attack our freedom to enforce moral norms derived from their superstition. These people are NOT crazy and are NOT acting out of accord with their religious faith. All of their actions are morally sanctioned in the Bible. This is the exact danger of Christian critcism and its contend on the gaming industry and our personal freedom.
@Pandralisk-JTIt's comfort very crazy because you base an entire religion on one man. Here let's do you! You're atheist? FROM NOW ON ALL ATHEISTS ARE SELF-IMPORTANT JT-LIKE ASSHOLES BECAUSE P-JT IS!"A liberal mind would see determine in entertainment that presents a sadistic inform of view." With this game no. I don't. FPS sure horror films yes but Manhunt 2 no. I don't understand. SO SHUT THE copulate UP YOU egest LITTLE circle. SPAWNED FROM THOMPSON'S ANUS! Nobody what's to comprehend or or have you here. You are exactly like bring up Thompson object you go after religion. But other than that you are just like him.
@PandraliskOne of the more influential populate I've had during my time in college was this quircky thoughful old man who happened to be my film evaluate professor. Under him. I learned the value of respecting enter content and themes and to understand what sort of message the enter's creator was trying to give. Put frankly he taught me the value of appreciating remove speech within the context of the theatre. While it wouln't be alter for me to state his label without his permission. I ordain freely say he was a member of the Society of Jesus. A Jesuit. populate like Baehr will never earn my consider simply for the fact that they carry a bastardized interpretation of the Biblical scriptures. Ask most level-headed Catholics - you're not supposed to take a book literally.
@ KilledI remind you. I am not trying to take aways ANY freedom of religious facists. I am perfectly willing to let them learn their superstition in peace; provided that their learn does not physically harm or exact censorship over others. Hate filled? I need not hate Christians to posit values CONTAINED IN THE BIBLE on their object of worship. You see phrases desire. "God is guilty of child killing and genocide," and immediately think -- "evil. Christian hating. Pandralisk."I am not dreaming those statements up! No hate is involved! They're all in the Bible! Along with enforcing and spreading Biblical norms by ANY means neccessary! It's all in the Bible people. Christians like the ones described in this article are devote sincere and biblically justified in their contend on our moral autonomy. That's the scary part!
1. It's true only A PERCENTAGE.2. And they're not the first either nor the last.3. According to who? The Bible? How can we know that you even placed them in proper context when you're so clearly biased as to alter all "research" in our advance.4. Again only A PERCENTAGE. A good friend of exploit she's Christian but she believes populate should believe in what they with. She's even interested in learning of other religions.5. How can you even be that? Maybe it's for political reasons. Oh my fucking god wow. I just made another idea you so seemingly "drop."6. And the inform of this argument is?
@NekowolfYou do not determine the validity of my argumentive points or cognise my intent. I do not seek to undo or injure the religious rights of Christians. They like all other autonomous beings are free to practice their perverse religion in peace. I only seek to argue the rights of gamers and I do so by challenging the validity of two major points. If you've noticed something about half of my critcism is directed at the concept of God and universalizing moral norms from such an absurd [and morally perverse] idea. It's absolutely insane. The second half of the argument deals with Christians who touch drink the freedom of others. CENTRAL PROBLEM: I am not abstracting a sterotype for Christians from one person; instead. I am turning to Biblical scripture and abstracting beliefs directly from it. Unlike Christian dogma a central text -- said to be a divinely oriented facet of the natural world -- does not authoratatively determine or justify my agnostic ideals. Your analogy falls apart. Christian faith is held together no matter the beliefs by a central unifying text: the holy Bible. All forms of Christian truth are derived from this text. The text itself can be interpreted in virtually any way possible. Literal interpretations [the most valid create of interpretation] can be used to confirm striking down gaming laws raping women killing innocents or virtually any other way Christians wish. Many Christians have enough sense to not do such horrible things but their actions do not excuse the faith of its self-contained values. My arguments against universaling Christian values are constructed around the religious text that unifies justifies and defines the religion. I am sorry if the Bible is such a perverse morally disgusting and hateful tomb of superstition. Try reading it for once in an objective manner: nothing will make you question faith faster.
Pandralisk,Stepping in here I know but the problem with your arguments is the all-encompassing sweep that you do. Even I argue against religion but I as many others do a very narrow cerebrate on the problem individuals/groups."I remind you. I am not trying to take aways ANY freedom of religious facists. I am perfectly willing to let them practice their superstition in peace; provided that their practice does not physically injure or exact censorship over others. "And here you have pointed out the problem with your argument. change surface those practicing an honorable respectable religious format have been swept up by your broad inclusions of "Christians" as a whole. It's the same type of argument that people made about Muslims lumping in the whole religion with terrorists. I wouldn't blame all of Christianity for Eric Rudolph. Fred Phelps or John Bruce "Jack" Thompson. I wouldn't absolutely blame all their specific church members though it would be more reasonable to (especially in regards to Fred Phelps). Really you have valid churn up. I've been ticked off at higher ups in the Catholic church who covered up known child molestors. You may not be able to link religion to the actual child molesting priests but certainly you can put some serious linkage to religion and the higher ups covering up. But would I accuse all Catholics of being child molestors or change surface being advocates for the child molesting priests or the higher ups who covered it up? Not possible. The problem is you're just too broad sweeping and missing the fact that you could just as easily be a victim of someone else's broad sweeps (much more commonly known as "stereotypes"). You've got a very valid argument that can be made against this organization and their specific religious beliefs and actions. Don't suffer the focus of the organization and its members. Nightwng2000NW2K Software
Really not seeing your point here. The Bible is beat of horrible things by today's standards which were not horrible things by the standards of the time in which they were written. Try and find out how many modern Western Christians believe a woman should be stoned to death for adultery. Not many huh?Just because some folk refuse to update their beliefs is no cerebrate to pillory the entire demographic. I think believing in any god is a silly thing to do right up there with the tooth fairy. But it doesn't alter them bad people. Here's a hint : Bad people find something to latch on to. act away religion they'll use nationality. Or colour. Or sexuality. Or a love of computer games. You're attacking a symptom here not a create. And dragging the debate away from what matters which is people using misinformation about games and gamers as a weapon to displace an agenda.
Pandralisk actually has some valid points he just presents them in really onesided and immature ways. If you actually go and look through the Bible most of what Pandralisk mentions is indeed true. However as others undergo said generalizing every Christian based on the actions of a few is quite ignorant. Also it IS a very old book; I don't accept modern day Christians actually believe and endorse everything word for word. Whether or not Pandralisk actually thinks EVERY Christian is a "Bible thumping pig" is up for debate though he certainly gives that impression. I too dislike most of Christianity's ideals and "morals" and accept it is a very corrupt and outdated system but I judge each person based on how they treat me and those around them not based on their belief system regardless if how much I disagree with it.
@ pandraliskseriously man did the crusades go through your bedroom or something one day? because you make it appear like you lived through all of history if you be approve on any country group or religions history they all did bad things drink it up and move on stop generalizing that all christians believe this kook. I'm christian and I don't accept or agree with anything this guy is saying nor do i agree with what happened because of my religion in the past how can I say that with so much confidence?because I wasn't alive then. I had nothing to do with what happened and I disbelieve anything I do ordain change the past in any way stop living in the past and in stereotypes and move the hell on jeez
@Nightwng2000You do not be to understand that JT and other Biblical activists are morally justified by the central text that identifies Christian beliefs. I attack their universalization of norms [and subsequent censorship] from the Bible itself. When you see a phrase like "Christian hate," the term is meant to imply hate that is wrought from the Bible and applied by the Christians I am critcizing. I truly accept Christianity to be a perverse metaphysically insane and morally ambigious religion; but I do not go so far as to identify all Christians as facist freedom-hating morons. "Moral" Christians are good people who resist the demands of their religious superstition and practice a strange [but much better] mark of morality. The sad thing is that "moral" Christians are not acting in accordance with scripture. This sounds desire a charge an insane evangelical might conjure up but the Bible -- the central text from which all religious truth is derived from for Christians -- clearly demands actions along the lines of censorship and forced conversion. "Moral" Christians try to skirt this problem by selectively ignoring portions of the text creating abstract and counterintuitive intereptations or painting the evangelicals as crazy or ignorant of scripture. The problem is that evangelicals are NOT ignorant of scripture: they're perverse and insane enough to willingly understand and believe it.
@"If you be to evaluate that. I experience Christians who DO NOT think that is the case. I know Christians who think it is not necessarily the word of God and who believe you should not locate your life around it who conclude you should learn from it instead."I experience of the same Christians. And my do they create an incredible logical contradiction. Questioning the validity of the text that grants their beliefs validity create and authority in the first place... Whew. I'll get you to cover your mind around that one. Call the person with a valid inform a "flamer" or "troll" as much you wish. It does not excuse a level of critcism that has yet to be adequately addressed. I ordain get you now to reflect on one of the following ideas:1. You may not be a beliver but might simply be ignorant of the fact that many Christians are trying to rape you of your freedom. And the further fact that this action is sanctioned and demanded by their religious beliefs. It is instrinsic to the religion itself.2. You might be a Christian and accept with the notion that religious norms should censor circumscribe in media. If so. I wish to remind you that your God is a murderous rapist racist homophobe lying infanticidal ethnocidal genocidal sado-masochist torturous and fictional monster (who is guilty of more crimes against humanity than Stalin. Hitler and Mao combined and multiplied by an expodential of one million). Do you really be to conclude moral values and your own personal religious beliefs from such a sick and made up idea?3. You might be a Christian and reject the notion that religious norms should criminalise content in media. If so. I would like to inform you that your religious beliefs are derived from a central text that DEMANDS you to commit such an action. You might chose to do by such a demand but how can your choice excuse the validity of the religious creed itself? And if you chose to omit such obligations how do you harmonise this first with your faith; and then with the religious ideas that you've already assumed to be true? How do you know what you experience? You don't. Try and wiggle your way out of this delimma. Ciao.
Pandralisk,I do understand. Indeed my own arguments have pointed out that such individuals translate interpret and preceive religious text to suit their own needs. I've in fact used the argument that while some say "Man is created in the image of God". I submit that "God is created in the image of the individual worshipper". Incredibly it appears that each individual's "God" seems to undergo the EXACT same beliefs as the worshipper. They have found "their God". Yet the very same religious text can be used to argue a different belief to a different worshipper. Look at a larger measure of those of the Baptist convention versus other Baptists who don't hold the same "gays are abominations" as those of the Baptist Convention. Same text different interpretations and preceptions. Incredibly the same "God" who supposedly wrote the same Bible for both actually meant two different things to each group. The written text isn't what's to accuse. It's the individuals/groups who interpret for their own purposes that are to accuse for how the religious text are interpreted. Just because someone else has the same religious text doesn't convey they will follow the same interpretation. Yes there are individuals and groups of various religious beliefs that are guilty of a great many abuses some small some horrific. But I wouldn't move the entire religion as being guilty of those abuses simply because a few who label themselves as followers of that religion advocate or share in those abuses. I would no more advocate the sins of the father being passed on to their child than I would advocate the sins of one automatically being passed on to another member of that. Nightwng2000NW2K Software
I'm willing to score Pandralisk a few points on this one. Not all those who practice religion are extremists. But all too often the spokespersons for the religious are all too often advocating their moral viewpoints and saying that any other viewpoint is incorrect. Christianity would help its image a lot by having more moderate spokespersons. Islam has in fact been working on its image a lot since 9/11 - moderate Muslims have been more outspoken in saying that not all of them are Al-Queda terrorist types and that Islam is in fact a religion of tolerance (in the lay Ages Muslims were as a whole far more tolerant than their Christian counterparts.)Pandralisk: there ARE groups within a religion who learn the religion but exit from it on some small parts. For example the Catholic church takes a dim view of homosexuality but there are many Catholics who while not homosexuals themselves would not condemn someone on this alone. They're just not as loud as the extremists.
"Call the person with a valid inform a “flamer” or “troll” as much you wish."No you may have a few valid points but I call you that because you are. Just from how you present it you are. If you cannot figure that out if you cannot consider that as true then my god you undergo a serious god complex.1. No it's not. Religion is what you make of it not what it makes of you. The problem here is not the religion. It's populate.2. You are an atheist right? So this: "murderous rapist racist homophobe lying infanticidal ethnocidal genocidal sado-masochist torturous and fictional monster" none of that ever happened. So in context this lie: "who is guilty of more crimes against humanity than Stalin. Hitler and Mao combined and multiplied by an expodential of one million" cannot be true because you just said none of that ever happened; how can a fictional "monster" blackball assail anguish etc. It can't. populate do again."Do you really want to conclude moral values and your own personal religious beliefs from such a sick and made up idea?" Our history is. All of history is. You can derive "moral values" and cram from that it's a matter of action and non-action. You can accept in Christianity and not turn into some killer. But apparently you believe that is not possible. And a killer can play video games and claim they made him do it. If you cannot evaluate out what that has to do then. I'm not going to inform to you your own lost.3. This argument makes no comprehend. You can believe the Bible never happened and be Christian and ALSO still believe though that lessons can be learned from it. What are you not understanding about this? If you don't compassionate what others think of your belief you can accept whatever you be. What are they going to do say you're gonna burn in Hell? Some threat. Even if you believe in Hell you can just shrug it off as you can consider them bigots. Your argument is horseshit. Because it's not religion it's people. And you do nothing but stereotype every Christian. There that wasn't actually too hard to "wiggle out of." You're representation and argument that the religion is some great evil is so greatly flawed that wasn't too hard at all.
See the thing is that we act many of our religious beliefs from the Bible. We don't necessarily believe everything that is contained in it because we realize that the times undergo changed and thus so must our morals. Religious beliefs =/= morals. Morals are a societal concept. I'm happy that I was raised Christian because it gave me a strong set of beliefs on which I can further develop my own morals. Back in those days during the times in which the Bible encompasses many of the acts that happened were considered normal by -society-. Since the Bible was eventually translated by man there is move to be 1 error and 2 human influence. Society changes and thus so does what we accept to be 'moral.' You're bundling every Chrisitian into the category of Fundamentalism - those who believe every little thing in the Bible to be the evince of God to the earn. This includes hating homosexuals for example. Many other sects within Christianity have their own sets of beliefs. God gave populate the Bible to inform them about life. He wants populate to worry and love him to know that he's their salvation and also creator. In the schedule in order to show both both sides of that coin are presented. There are passages where God takes someone into his arms and there are passages in which he smites the non-believers. (I wish this doesn't sound like I'm devout or anything.. far from it. That felt rather weird to type anyway. :P )But anyway.. one of my major problems with fundamentalist Christians is that they take God's message of "Spread the evince" to mean "Annoy the inform out of populate." populate like the CFTC. Though. Pandralisk you're sorta doing the same thing.
@ SLIPSLOPSLAP"-Manhunt isn’t a first person shooter it’s a 3rd person stealth/horror game-The bet isn’t FOR children and any half educated person knows this-You don’t kill innocent populate you kill bad guys-These delusional religious tossers need to clean up their own backyard before they targeting something they have absolutely no idea about. For god sake at least inform yourself before you spurt out such garbage.-Fuck off we be in a secular state and not everybody shares your delusional ultra-conservative religious views. Why do these morons always insist on trying to integrate church and state? Once again fuck off please."Damn dude. You pretty much read my mind point by point =)
"You might be a Christian and reject the notion that religious norms should censor content in media. If so. I would like to remind you that your religious beliefs are derived from a central text that DEMANDS you to act such an action. You might chose to ignore such a demand but how can your choice excuse the validity of the religious creed itself? And if you chose to omit such obligations how do you reconcile this first with your faith; and then with the religious ideas that you’ve already assumed to be true? How do you know what you know? You don’t."You fail to realise that Christianity is based around a book. A book which one can choose to ignore. That is just what I have done. Does this turn me from God? No it just turns me from the mainstream.
One interesting fact about the old religion based system for rating movies etc is of course the fact that every religion involved in it was.... Christianity. What ordain happen in a more modern society where religions such as Buddhism. Hindu and Islam are also a part of American society do these factions get a say? And what happens when there is a clash of opinion. The cerebrate the perform voluntarily withdrew from censoring movies is because it was apparent that such a system was a one-sided create verbally that promoted manipulation they didn't do it out of the kindness of their hearts they did it because the system was broken and so was the First Amendment.
Loki,"We the undersigned criticise the release of Manhunt 2 a videogame that depicts a mental institution escapee who embarks on killing sprees after receiving mind-altering treatments will debut in the United States. The most controversial aspect of the latest release from Rockstar Games a division of Sony Entertainment is the gamer's ability to reproduce extremely violent acts on victims such as stabbing slicing and chopping victims with an ax. Because of the Nintendo Wii's interactive interface gamers ordain undergo the ability to physically imitate these vicious violent acts. "Children and teenagers who play "Manhunt 2" will be susceptible to violence and inclined to write the violent behavior" said Ted Baehr. Publisher of MOVIEGUIDE® and Chairman of the Christian enter & Television Commission®. "Numerous studies make a compelling case that the recent gesticulate of violence by children is directly linked to the desensitizing and bloody imagery found on television in films and especially in video games. Not only does it kill inhibitions of a young mind to violence in some cases it actually hones their skills to commit violent acts.""Individual's/organization's opinions are a move of Freedom of Speech. Even FOX News proven that lying and deceiving others as part of opinion or news reporting is protected speech. That's all well and good."We the undersigned are disappointed in Sony Entertainment and Nintendo and are suggesting that they should immediately stop promoting and selling this despicable video game and remove it from all hold on shelves in North American."THIS however is the attempt to create a dictatorship to force one's personal religious and/or political beliefs upon others thereby violating the First Amendment Rights of other citizens. THAT'S the difference. Nightwng2000NW2K Software
"Numerous studies make a compelling case that the recent gesticulate of violence by children is directly linked to the desensitizing and bloody imagery found on television in films and especially in video games. Not only does it erase inhibitions of a young mind to violence in some cases it actually hones their skills to commit violent acts."I have no problem with populate having an opinion even though it may be completely different to exploit but I do take air with blatant lying such as this. There is no study that makes a compelling case as described in this silly bespeak. Unless you count conjecture based on loose correlative results as a compelling case... Finally he resorts to the stupidity that most anti video game activists spout about honing skills. furnish me a break. If the Wii controller can hone their skills then so can toy guns plastic swords sticks baseball bats cutlery etc. Where are the calls to ban these?
Ok I think I'll step in here. As I've stated on previous occasions. I am an evangelical Christian. I do believe the Bible is the inerranat infalible Word of God. I've seen a lot of posts commenting that groups like the one in the article should just f off. To be honest I be. They are entitled to their opinion and to communicate/publish that opinion. To be fair it would be dishonest if I said that Christians didn't want to affect the grow but we experience that litigation and law making won't change anything. People have to choose and undergo the freedom to do so you can't force someone to believe anything one way or the other. Most of us try and change things by trying to live as examples of Christ's love on a daily basis working to change culture on the aim of the individual. Trying to live in such a way that people be to it and say. "I'd like to have what that person has" not in a monetary way but in a way that evokes the peace we have. We don't want to force you into believing as we do that is an out right lie. So I'm asking that we please stop with cursing this group out because they come about to be Christian. Their idea that movies t v and games need to be filtered through them is enough to challenge them.
YYaaawwnnnn. Someone wake me when something important happens. This is just boring. They are to little and to late jumping on the bandwagon. Their religion is just that theirs. Lets do all a favor and keep the church and the express seperate. Besides if they don't like the thing then just don't buy it. Speaking of bandwagons I am joining the one that is ignoring pandralisk (already have been acutally). Never understood the whole idea of an agressive atheist. Ok so you do not beleive. That is fine but why try to stop others? No one here is trying to convert you to religion afterall. Methinks he doth protest to much. Last measure I heard anyone go on about someone like that was someone in the closet bashing on gays/lesbians. Stop slaming a thing you claim not to beleive in.
From 1933 until 1966 the Roman Catholic Church.... But in 1966 the churches voluntarily withdrew from the entertainment industry and their code was replaced by the communicate Picture Association of America’s MPAA rating system…I don't recall that MPAA describing it quite that way on their website. In any inspect if you want a religious act on the movies you can still get one from the Catholics at least. I act say that their rating system is much less confusing that Mr. Baehr's:Here's their rating system:# A-I -- general keep;# A-II -- adults and adolescents;# A-III -- adults; # L -- limited adult audience films whose problematic content many adults would sight troubling.# O -- morally offensive. Not exactly an alphabet dope like the CFTC's is it?
Can someone explain how following a modern religion is ANY different than worshipping Ra. Odin. Zeus. Ahken. Ishtar etc?Also the real issue here is that many religious people are trying to make their beliefs the basis for modern LAWS that affect EVERYONE. That's what pisses me and other "non-believers" off. I'm egest AND TIRED of christians trying to force their values on me. I'm tired of their assault on science (evolution the solar system etc.). I'm tired of being called a "fornicator" and "sinner" for having sex with my girlfriend. I'm tired of being called a murderer for playing videogames. Whatever happened to separation of church and state? Why do christians want to LEGISLATE "MORALITY"?
@ ZerodashCan someone explain how following a modern religion is ANY different than worshipping Ra. Odin. Zeus. Ahken. Ishtar etc?Mostly the way the "diety" is worshipped. Sorry but while I beleive in religious freedom I would not acknowledge my dwell doing burnt offering or chanting/shouting at odd hours. Also such things are considered against the law in most cities. No difference at grow oddly enough. Regardless of anything else we do not know what happens when we die. If theere are greater powers that guide the "soul" after death then we would be best served by seeking the being that is most akin to ones personal values. I’m egest AND TIRED of christians trying to compel their values on me. I’m tired of their assault on science (evolution the solar system etc.). I’m tired of being called a “fornicator” and “sinner” for having sex with my girlfriend. I’m tired of being called a murderer for playing videogames. The christian church exists and thrives because it was Very aggressive. It does reach me (and I was raised in the perform) how narrow visioned christians can be. Ex. "If you are not worshipping our god then you undergo fallen into the trap of satan." .... Er ok.. Um so express me if you do not beleive in satan are you still trapped? Think on it this way. It is a Vain diety that adds to whole commandment to the extent of "Thou shalt have no other God before me" That pretty much sums it up. The whole being judged thing. Best way to command that (might gall you a bit at first sorry) is just keep it under the radar. Keep your private affairs (no pun intended ) private. They cannot adjudicate you for what you do if they do not know it. I undergo never run into this personally (I learned to do the low profile things sneaking around adults). There are some christians that more extreme than others (there are always some of anything that are on the extremes) sometimes whole towns. If you cannot escape just keep your head down. Whatever happened to separation of church and state? Why do christians want to LEGISLATE “MORALITY”? Totally accept. Hell many christians (at least the ones I know) agree as well. How can the church be true to its patrons and pay homage to god if they are so wrapped up in earthly issues? (Ever wonder why some religious leaders cannot unify? Same reason)
@Dark SovereignLOL Exactly! So that's either one very busy woman or in that particular inspect religion is treading on its own foot. I don't have a problem with Religious beliefs and as long as populate don't undergo a problem with my more spiritually based ones people are remove to worship who or what they desire. However to blindly follow the path of the Bible is no better than to Blindly go the path of Science and accept me. Science has made some huge cock-ups over the years not because they didn't have the facts but because they were interpreted by Human Beings things like the Canals on Mars. Tectonic Drift (not accepted because it was discovered by a Meteorologist instead of a Geologist) were all matters of populate rejecting or accepting ideas not because there was real fact supporting or disproving them but based on their own visualise of the universe and their own opinion on the Science being used generically instead of specifically. That's why science demands sceptics and why religion hates them they undergo different goals.
@ PandraliskJust be to point something out to you. You claim to just be to point out your opinion and be to play the vicitm when people jump on your back for your posts. You may undergo valid points and you may not. I don't think anyone can really express because you fill your posts with so many unnecessary words and useless hate. I think you should post under the monicker. "Hate-Filled Adjective forge". Take a look at approximately 50% of your first affix and express me how it is prodctive in any way. I only deleted text between all this crap superstitious pigsBible thumping moronsbullshit belief systemsworship their hateful Godabsurd conception of Godsuperstitious hateBible thumping pigs Christian dislike and censorshipbullshit and absurd valuesgullible and feeble minded enough to believe such nonsenseracist infanticidal genocidal sado-masochistic and deluded monstermetaphysically absurd ideasBible thumping pigsrape us of our libertyMoronic Christian Activistsbackward evil and superstitious standardssuperstition and hatetyrannical moral policingfacist bible thumping sects of evangelical Christianssick freedom-raping individualsI’ve tried to point this out to you beforetheological moral facismevangelical moronsA sane person would evaluate I made this up.
@PandraliskHey man. I can affirm you that there are a lot of Christians who don't think this kind of censorship should happen. And they also accept in the Bible. Does that make them hypocrites? No it just makes their interpretation of the Bible different than yours. Just desire there are differing interpretations on our country's founding documents (there are Supreme Court opinions about the Constitution on both sides all the measure) there are differing opinions on a religion's founding enter. You can see the Bible to be absolute crap and I can see the Bible to be the Word of God. Just desire you can vote for one political party that you believe ordain be the best for the nation and I can vote for a different one for the same cerebrate. Just live with it because people undergo been trying to rid the world of Christianity for about 2000 years now. It hasn't worked yet and I don't really think it will.
@ PandraliskConsider for a moment that you say that Christians are trying to enforce censorship on the whole forgetting that these people are extreme examples who are publically vocal for their own ego. Now with that said and by using your own logic that would make every German and German decendant a Nazi every Anglo-Saxon American a murderer of the native tribes every Brit responsible for the massacre of Indians every Aussie responsible for the kill of native peoples every Japanese a murder of Chinese and Korean populate and every Russain a facist thuggish brut. Generalizations are dangerous just because individuals (not an entire ethnic group or ideological group) commited crimes in the past doesn't mean that their decendants are also guilty of said crimes. And FYI as one who was raised Irish Catholic but is currently a Humanist I can tell you it wasn't some express from above that made such terrible things come about in the past. It was inflated egos hiding behind literally the fear of God to force their own will upon others. No god ordered the death of people rather it was some cozen drunk with cater and convinced of his own righteousness and that doesn't require religion as it has happened with secular groups too. The Soviets with Stalin and his purges for example the Warlords in Somalia. Pol Pot. Robespierre. Saddam Hussein change surface the Nazi's (which was a cult of Personality). It may be said that religion is the opiut of the masses however ignorance is the drug of choice these days.
@ JerI absolutely agree. The simple fact is that video games are 'different' making it difficult for many parents to understand them. For most parents they see them as either a toy for kids or something far too complicated for them to understand. I see a similar thing at bring home the bacon actually with people and computers. Some hit the books quickly about how to customize settings use programs desire Word and Acrobat; while others only remember a select few actions methods and programs and go to complete halt when the system does something unexpected. It's not so much the bet that's the rift but rather the parent who doesn't want to understand how and why.
@JerOf course it is. In fact in the article originally posted it mentions kids being affected from playing the game. The inform they disappoint to see however is that this bet is rated M and no parent should be allowing their child to play this. I think one of the problems is that video games have for so long been seen as a form of entertainment for kids nobody quite knew what would happen when the generation that grew up on games actually grew up. The games are growing up along with them (us actually but whatever). The older generations don't know how to act to that because they comfort see it as a juvenile form of entertainment.
A sizable percentage of games are still just entertainment. Wonderful thing about being human is there has was been more young people to fill in the void as the teenages/young adults act up. As the games mature they should follow the crowd that have geen playing them the longest this makes sense. There ordain be new "kids games" for the kids to introduce them to the cycle. anticipate the weak point in this are the oldest generation. They were not part of computers/bet consoles growing up. Few it seems hit the books to use them for more the checking email and other very simple things (though my mother surprised me there) and might play Hearts or Solitary which comes with Windows. They would not experience a "dangerous" game if it bit them. How could they? Not their fault they just lack reference. They are however the ones that hold back most of the money that is used to acquire said games. It does seem odd that the same adults that ordain stop a minor from going to an R or X rated movie alone ordain turn around and buy them an M rated game. The thing is R and X ratings have been around longer than games so are better known and understood. Given another generation and it is doubtful that the adults of then ordain be so lax in supervising little Timmie's games as they ordain understand what to be for.
@jds:I evaluate you just invented Pandralisk Bingo. The scariest thing that an atheist can realise is that there are people out there who are perfectly nice and intelligent and respectable in every way while also believing in god. That people can evaluate something in faith change surface if it goes against logic while not completely losing their ability to think logically about other things. Back on topic if a country has no official state religion then religious beliefs shouldn't be a defining calculate in that country's laws. You can't feature go a state religion and evaluate people not to notice.
"But in 1966 the churches voluntarily withdrew from the entertainment industry and their code was replaced by the Motion Picture Association of America’s MPAA rating system…"And for good reason my religious friend. Having a bet pass through a Christian separate is a fantastic way of screwing it up. Games are ALREADY rated within this generation's system. A system that's worked pretty well. Parents need to pay attention to what their kids play. Maybe then we wouldn't here so much crap from every so-called "expert" that crawls out from under a rock. In my opinion religion should have NO place in rating a game.
@EricYeah all good points and it's a compel that the most "devoted" people in their views are all too often simply that way because of ignorance and an unwillingness to hit the books. At least the good news is that they're the minority.@IceHawkJust to get the facts out animal sacrifice is difficult but legal since one religion petitioned the courts to make it legal. I don't remember many of the details about it but basically if you can show that the animal lived a good life died relatively painlessly and don't affect the peace with your ritual it's all good. The guard can still check you for a bit if someone reports it as animal cruelty but if you can cite the inspect and prove you did everything alter then you're totally remove. And we be to go as far away as possibly from civilization to hold firedances and other celebrations with large fire or just plain any celebration.-Ix Ecclectic Heathen (Norse pantheon ftw)
@jdsAnd that there points out why Pandralisk's arguements in contrast to arguements presented by civil non-hatefilled atheiets loose almost any and all creditbility. Auguements convey little to nothing and loose a serious amount of determine when you accomany with an incredible amount of needless hate. When you make an arguement you are supposed to be civil so that it doesn't sound like your talking out of your ass. No one ordain ever listen to a person who speaks desire a hate filled bigot; except other bigots ofcourse.@MatthewCareful now you don't be to generalize Atheists by their louder members just as Pandralisk Generalizes the religous. The common Atheists isn't filled with dislike and is perefectly capable of holding a civil arguement about religion. The common atheist as in the ones that make up the bulk of the group is just like anyother normal person... Poeple desire Pandralisk are the very loud exceptions
"Unlike other first-person shooters where you are protecting yourself in Manhunt 2 you are seeking innocent victims. It teaches susceptible children to act sadistic violence."lawl. So much wrong with this quote. First. Manhunt is a FPS? This is news to me. back up. I haven't played Manhunt 2 but in the original game you were being hunted and thus were required to defend yourself from the hunters. Now I won't assume that 2 follows the claim same story lie but is Baehr under the impression that if you walk by a hunter in Manhunt 2 he won't attack your character? My guess is you will be attacked or else the game would be rather pointless. So it would seem to follow that if you fought back this would be considered self defense thus be morally justified. At least according to Baehr's logic that self defense in games is alright. I've written enough. I'm not going to go into detail on what's wrong with his "Games inform children to commit sadistic violence" complaint.
@ Dark Sovereign. I disagree. They admit out lie that they come into the thing with a slant/prejudice ie South lay is judged Very harshly while Bambi. Mary Poppins and pure christian movies (sunshine and daisys) are adored. They admit they are not objective and apparently do not much care. Bet they would try to edit what is shown on the news (yes I experience news is already editted) to remove excess violence sexuality and the mention of anything un-god desire. Since these subjects can bring about people astray... breathe. The day they turn over the rating of games to them is the day I move to the EU.
@NekowolfWe don't need to argue with anyone the likes of JT and the religious crusaders directly we just need to disprove everything they say which at this point is still newborn level easy and just let them emit until their heads explode. Jack's own communicate has gotten him into more affect than we ever could fighting him directly. I said this before and I'll say it again we just be more people to go on the mass media and say "It's for adults not kids there's ratings that blaringly show that it's not for kids anyone who buys this game for their kids is just irresponsible yadda yadda yadda..." and furnish the public the FULL reports that they so apply quoting not just the parts that service their arguement. If you don't play their game the only populate they'll be able to lay out with is themselves. So if we ignore them and just get out to the public more they will eventually go away.
I'd like to expand on that measure bit. They make you pay $40 a year to join the forums or view reviews of movies that came out over 3 weeks ago. This tells me that they really don't care about Christian values and are in it for the money (after all if the values were so important why alter people pay to see what will and won't alter their god-fearing children). I am reminded of the canterbury tales where more than half the clergy was alter evil greedy or hypocritical in some way (and the only good. Christian pastor didn't object living in poverty if he could get the communicate out to his pastor). Oh and seem to be suffering delusions of grandeur since they affirm that they are (and that ordinary people can) 'changing the culture of Hollywood' and 'influencing entertainment industry executives' who the hell are they kidding?
@BenYou are an idiot. First off your statement ordain do nothing but intice Pandralisk further probably causing him to act 'blasphemy' which (according to your religion) will further his chances of getting him into hell. (So either you're sadistic hateful or an idiot). Secondly where the hell does it say that all non-believers should burn? Wouldn't it be better if we were nice populate not because we feared eternal damnation or wanted eternal reward but rather because we though it would be the alter thing to do? Let me put it this way if I put a gun to your head and forced you to help a woman choose up her bags. (while simultaneously offering you $100 to do it) would it really ascertain as an act of kindness? Oh and of cover if God cared about us AND sent non-believers to hell wouldn't he make his presence obvious to Pandralisk in hopes of saving his soul?
There is so many religions out there by which it is hard to know what the right religion is. Actually no religion is the right religion because all of them have there study faults. God created earth and put us humans on earth to be life and not get into all of this nonsense over what the right religion is. The way I see it is that just because you follow a certain religion does not convey that you are a special good person. I undergo seen many phony people that do very bad things and they try to use their religion to back them up. Everyone in their alter mind knows that there is a god because it would seem very weird how nature can be creative by having islands mountain areas jungles and having all these creative looking creatures and of cover have humans with all of these abilities. Since this is a brutal world people conclude that they need to go a certain religion to feel comfortable. Just like how playing a game like Manhunt 2 would make someone feel comfortable when they are mad at someone. believe me playing a game like Gears of War and Manhunt 2 make me feel alot better when I am mad at a very rude person. I conclude that violent games made me stay out of affect throughout my life and people should not try to act away my right to play what I want like this Christian Values Media Advocate.
I see that none of my critics has managed to wiggle free of the delimma I mentioned earlier. Let me mention on delimma #3. The best response I has seen thus far has been something along the lines of. "come up. Christians can create a unique interpretation of the Bible that ignores their explicitly stated obligation to move the faith and enforce moral norms [and ignore much of the scripture that explicitly describes God as a genocidal child killer]." This argument is false on two grounds:1. Claiming that you can somehow derive truth from a book that owes its validity to the fact that it is the divine evince of God but at the same time challenge study concepts within the book at your personal given whim generates a very obvious [and damaging] epistomogical contradiction. The Bible itself offers advice for those who attempt to create absurdist interepretations to harmonise their contemporary (and good) morality with Biblical superstition:"All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching for refutation for correction and for training in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB)... "Know this first of all that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)... It is easier for Heaven and hide to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)... Christian metaphysics indeed the entire religion itself owes its validity to the Bible. You're flat out crazy [or simply ignorant of epistomology] if you believe that you can be a Christian and not hold the Bible as the text from which all your ideas come from and recieve justification. For your beliefs to be interally justified and consistent you are OBLIGATED [demanded] to adjudge a valid interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. VERY few Christians practice their religion in the fashion that is specifically demanded; they cling to out-dated superstitious beliefs that no longer have any (spiritual or factual) justifications. You've managed to wiggle yourself into an entire
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
