Religions > Atheism > A new film, The Comment: Golden Compass, has been accused ofpromoting atheism to children. But what's wrong with that?
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Sound of Atheist Trumpet" |
| Date: |
27 Nov 2007 09:48:02 AM |
| Object: |
A new film, The Comment: Golden Compass, has been accused ofpromoting atheism to children. But what's wrong with that? |
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/james_ball/2007/11/golden_delusions.html
Golden delusions
A new film, The Golden Compass, has been accused of promoting atheism
to children. But what's wrong with that?
James Ball
The Golden Compass, the film of the first book in Philip Pullman's His
Dark Materials trilogy, is released next week. The books recreate
Milton's Paradise Lost with God as the great adversary: they accuse
the (fictionalised) church of numerous crimes against humanity in the
name of control.
These religious themes have been excised from the film as far as
possible but religious groups in the US are still not happy. Bill
Donahue, CEO of the Catholic League, has accused the Golden Compass of
being part of a "deceitful stealth campaign" to "sell the virtues of
atheism". The Catholic League is urging Christians to boycott the
movie.
Much as I would love to disagree, Donahue is right, though more as a
result of simple marketing rather than some atheist conspiracy. The
film has been toned down in order to reach a wider audience and so
make more money. It will almost certainly encourage some parents to
buy the books for their children. With any luck, their kids will read
them - and start asking some awkward questions.
The extent to which these books are genuinely anti-religious is
debateable: God may be portrayed as a senile despot, but he is at
least real. A truly atheist series would set about disproving him -
but that would be far less entertaining. If we're counting the Golden
Compass as anti-religious, fair enough: provided we remember it is
offset by The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, The Lord of the Rings,
and, well, the entire machinery of Christianity.
Children of religious parents are often indoctrinated into faith from
birth. They are baptised - and baptism is irreversible - before they
can give their consent, told Bible stories from earliest childhood as
if they are unquestionable truth, and taken to church each week. Why
should atheism wait until kids grow up before mounting a fightback?
Atheists and those of a religious bent can live and socialise together
quite happily - we're lucky enough to live in a liberal and tolerant
society. This does not mean we should pretend there are no ideological
differences between us. Christianity and atheism cannot both be right.
If the former is correct, atheists are doomed to hell; if the atheists
are on the money, Christians are allowing an aeons-old lie to restrict
their freedoms and choices in their one shot at life. The stakes are
high.
Christians have a biblical duty to evangelise and spread the faith.
This was once backed up with harsh punishment for heathens and
apostates, but thankfully those days are over. Spreading the good word
remains a worthy way for the faithful to spend their time, though. If
Christianity is allowed to convert the heathens, I think it only fair
that the heathens are given a chance to fight their corner.
This need not be a bad thing for the Church. Having seen, chatted to,
and even socialised with several evangelists, I believe faith is
stronger for being challenged. If believers don't hear contradictory
views, they have little reason to truly consider what they hold dear.
This mature faith is all the better for this challenge: socialised
Christianity often falters under a life crisis - the death of a
relative, say, or the breakup of a marriage.
Christian groups need to decide what they really care about. Does a
religion's worth come from "bums on seats" - the size of a
congregation - or from the number of people who accept it "in their
hearts"? Whether you're a believer or not, any religion that says the
former is worth no-one's time.
So, why not stop protesting against anti-religious material? Instead
of campaigning against a children's adventure film that has actively
attempted to mollify Christian groups, let families go and see it: if
the film echoes any of the book's promise, it should be an epic
adventure. If that leads some children to read opinions which differ
to your own, why worry?
There's no need to stop there. Christianity has almost everything
going its way - culture and art for the last two millennia have been
subject to its influence. It is in the home, it permeates society, and
it recruits young. You can try to keep the flock faithful by silencing
critics - or, failing that, petitioning the faithful to boycott their
works. Alternatively, you can hone your own arguments, rally your
evangelists, and spread the good word: and let your rivals do the
same.
.
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: A new film, The Comment: Golden Compass, has been accused of promoting atheism to children. But what's wrong with that? |
27 Nov 2007 05:04:54 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 07:48:02 -0800 (PST), Sound of Atheist Trumpet
<north_korean_tourist_board@yahoo.com> wrote:
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/james_ball/2007/11/golden_delusions.html
Golden delusions
A new film, The Golden Compass, has been accused of promoting atheism
to children. But what's wrong with that?
The same thing that is wrong with promoting health and well-being to
kiddies: nothing at all.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
