CreedFeed Community - Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

CreedFeed Community (http://www.creedfeed.com/community/index.php)

- Political Banter (http://www.creedfeed.com/community/forumdisplay.php?f=37)

- - Spielberg's Munich causes controversy (http://www.creedfeed.com/community/showthread.php?t=10373)

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chase

Alright, first of all... call Bush an "idiot," but at the end of the day we all know which country saved your Dutch ass in World War II and is currently leading the world economically, militarily, and culturally. I'm not trying to discredit the European Union, which is doing great economically, either. Hollywood is a primarily liberal community, a community that is trying to spread it's message through the medium of film. Mel Gibson is pretty much one of a kind. You can have the Sean Penns who sit there and spew all sorts of anti-American, liberal rhetoric. Then, when someone like Mel Gibson makes a movie about the last hours of Christ's life... there's this Hollywood outcry that he's gone too far. It's fine that Michael Moore can make a "mockumentary" of lies to slander his own country and fellow citizens. That's fine... in fact... because he does such a great job at bullshitting the world... he's entitled to left wing praise. I've seen Michael Moore speak live... and it was pretty obvious that he was making stuff up as he was going along.

So because the USA did us a major favor over 50 years ago under the rule of a democratic president, I know cannot criticize what this Republican fool is doing to your country and the rest of the world? And let's not forget that if Pearl Harbor wouldn't have happened, you might even now be standing by and looking at what the nazi's were doing in Europe, so please don't act as if the USA did it for us. They were attacked themselves, but nonetheless the Dutch and several other European nations owe a debt of gratitude to the USA.

And just because the USA is the world leader, the only superpower at least militarily, at this time, they will have to deal with criticism. There is a saying here in Holland, it states "Hoge bomen vangen veel wind", you said you understand Dutch, I don't know if you meant this literally, so I'll translate it "High trees catch a lot of wind". It means that if you want to stand out above the crowd in whichever way, be prepared to draw attention and it might not always be positive. I wouldn't care if, say, Bangla Desh elects a president, with whose ideas I totally disagree with, that would probably have no influence at all at world policy or my life, but Dubya does and therefore he has to be aware that the world watches his every move.

As to the general conservative state of America and the liberal one of Hollywood and let's be honest, the big border states like New York, California and others I have a clear opinion about that. Most rural based Americans have never been any further than their own backyard, they have never been exposed to other ideas, opinions and so on, people from the border states have been abroad and especially the people involved in the movie business, they know what's really going on in the world and look way past domestic American problems. I tend to think that the more ideas, different cultures, influences you're involved in the more open-minded and even liberal you thinking will become. Ofcourse that's only my 2 cents.

Btw I don't think Michael Moore slandered the USA, I love the USA, been there on vacation 3 times, it's your leadership he slanders, I even read one of his books, sure he is negative about republicans, but he isn't that positive about the democrats either. If you love your country, but you don't like the direction it is going politically, there is nothing wrong with criticizing that, it's called democracy, I believe. Not to say that democracy is that great all the time, the proof for that is being shown to us in Palestine only recently.

Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.
Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965), Hansard, November 11, 1947

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chase

Look, I understand your Dutch... and I understand the type of country you grew up in. For the record, I have nothing about the Netherlands... and as a matter of fact, I may be going to school in Maastricht this fall. Nevertheless, it shows a complete lack of ignorance on your part if you can't recognize the role that faith plays in America. This is still a faith based nation... with the majority of population being Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, and Buddhist. It's no coincidence that most states in this union reject the notion of gay marriage.

What a coincidence, as I'm typing this I am sitting in Maastricht, I work there, I live about 15 miles from here. "A complete lack of ignorance" doesn't that mean that I know everything. :) I do recognize the role that faith plays in the USA, and I do think it is biggest problem that your country has, the influence that the religious right tries to gain in the States. As I've stated before, I don't tell anyone to not believe, but when you try to impose the rules of your religion upon others, this is when it goes to far in my mind. Besides isn't it a job of the state to look out that the rights of minorities aren't trempled (sp?) on. I believe that the separation of church and state is not only good for the state, but also for the church. Isn't there some sort of passage even in the bible that states, give unto the king what is the king's and give unto the lord, what is the lord's. And the homophobic nature of your country is just fear for the unknown, I think. As you know we have gay marriage here and we haven't descended into barbarism yet, there are only more happy people around, who have the rights of their partner fully protected when they die.

I respect faith, but doubt is what gets you an education.
Wilson Mizner (1876 - 1933)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chase

But I guess I should realize that you're from a country that parades prostitutes in windows, prides itself on legalizing marijuana, and has the Hague. Liberalism defines the Netherlands... just as conservatism still defines much of America's policies. Look at America's history and you'll come to understand why this nation is still so reliant on faith. Yet, this is also a nation that has intolerance. Many liberals in this country take offense to the holiday of Christmas and many homosexuals are intolerant to religious people and doctrines.

Well are we now going to compare crime figures between the US and The Netherlands? Is you country free of prostitution? Does no-one smoke marijuana over there? Were have your restrictions on both got you?
Our abortion rate is lower than most others nations including the US, also because we're more open about birth control. I thought conservatives were such big defenders of personal freedom and responsibility. So what's wrong with letting people decide for themselves if they need to pay for sex of want to smoke pot. Murder, rape and crime like that, let's compare these figures of our both countries, yet we are the nation that has gone totally over the edge, according to some, but come and take a look for yourself if it's as bad as reported over here.

Personally I have never seen a prostitute behind a window, well I did, but it was in Germany, I smoked a bit of pot like 2 weeks ago for the first time since I don't know how many years. Btw what is wrong with The Hague?

The history of the USA isn't that faith-based, as I've gathered. Founding fathers like Jefferson and Paine were all but devout Christians. Statements like the 'under God' in the pledge of allegiance were inserted in the 1950's, I think. Didn't the settlers on the Mayflower travel to America to get away from religious prosecution. Is there a mention of the Christian God in the constitution or the declaration of independence? It seems like the relogious right just wants it to be that way.

When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad, and that is my religion.
Abraham Lincoln (1809 - 1865) (attributed)

Finally I don't think many liberals have a problem with Christmas, personally I think it is great to have a holiday at which we all hope/pray for world peace, to be with your loved ones and if there is a nice story about a birth, one of the most beautiful things a human can experience, involved so much the better for it. Ofcourse you know that the birth of Christ according to the bible stories could never have happened at the time that we celebrate Christmas. In fact the holiday of Winter Solstice was basically a pagan holiday and it was taken over by the Church to persuade pagans to become Christians. I also think the birth of the pre-christ god Mithra (from a virgin, sound familiar?) was also celebrated during that december period. So Christmas is great, I just don't take the religious undertone that seriously.

Oh and about homosexuals being intolerant to religious people, isn't that the pot calling the kettle black? How would you feel if a group of people, in this case the religious, constantly called your lifestile perverse and did their utmost best to prevent you to get equal rights in regard to partnership?

The Christian resolution to find the world ugly and bad has made the world ugly and bad.

A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.

"Faith" means not wanting to know what is true.
Friedrich Nietzsche

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by RMadd

I'm glad you brought this up. That's one thing I've noticed: liberals want conservatives and moderates to be accepting of any and all differences; they want us to be open-minded. They call us close-minded if we don't readily and blindly accept all their social "norms". And, yet, when it comes to religion, as you pointed out, they reject many religious beliefs as utterly false and illogical. So, pray tell, what happened to this open-mindedness? The truth is, everyone has their own set of beliefs and is usually not willing to stretch their own so much that they give in to requests made by those at the opposite end of the spectrum.

Well there is one difference between the social norms of liberals and conservatives? Those of liberals aren't edged into stone like commandments or in a book that says they are absolute and there is not any discussion possible about these rules.

What basically is the reason for not-allowing gay marriage, besides the obvious 'the bible said so'? And keep in mind, I already answered to the biological and STD-arguements.

And even these absolute rules aren't that absolute, because I can remember a passage that states, 'thou shalt not kill', yet if the state does the killing, there seems nothing wrong with it.

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chase

Yes! It's totally contradictory what the liberal, atheist crowd asserts. They want everyone to be accepting of alternative lifestyles... but in reality, they do nothing to put religion down. They don't accept the fact that some people chose to follow what's in the Bible. Isn't that the closed mindedness that they're accusing religious people of having? It's complete hypocrisy.

"they do nothing to put religion down"? So you want us to put religion down???

"If there is a God, atheism must strike Him as less of an insult than religion."
[Edmond and Jules de Goncourt]

To you I'm an atheist; to God, I'm the Loyal Opposition.
Woody Allen (1935 - )

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven Weinberg (1933 - ), quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by RalphyS

If there was a population of homosexuals... they would go extinct after one generation. Explain that to me. Why would they not be able to reproduce? Biologically... there is no benefit to gay sex whatsoever.

In all honesty, I have no problem if the state kills an Al Qaeda member.

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by RalphyS

Isn't that sort of an inherent difference, though? I would think that conservatives, by rule, tend to prefer maintain the social, political, economic (etc etc etc) norms; liberals, on the other hand, by definition seek a variety of ways to alter those norms. Politically speaking, true conservatives in the US (I'm not referring to neo-conservatives, who tend to care little for the federalism debate, but focus, instead, on social issues) have supported a strict interpretation of the constitution, such that the constituent states of the republic should maintain control over a wide variety of issues. Liberals, meanwhile, tend to support the notion that the constitution is a living, breathing document, and that the implied powers of the federal government over the states are many. This, again, is the inherent debate: conservatives have a fast, firm way of looking at something; liberals see things as ever-changing. So to criticize conservatives for seeming to be so close-minded appears to me to be paradoxical: you're bashing conservatives for being just that!

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by RalphyS

What basically is the reason for not-allowing gay marriage, besides the obvious 'the bible said so'? And keep in mind, I already answered to the biological and STD-arguements.

Reading below, I see Chase mentioned the fact that a homosexual population could not survive. Beyond that, I understand that, in the Scandinavian countries, gay marriage was legalized in sometime between 10 and 20 years ago. In the years since then, heterosexual marriage, as an institution, has become significantly less common. I'm not asserting that, with an option for homosexual marriage or union, a bunch of heteros went gay or anything. However, it seems to me that this move represents an overall social shift, one in which traditional and conservative social institutions and norms are overturned (such that the younger generation is getting married at an alarmingly lesser rate). And, for something like that to happen, I would imagine there would need to be an overwhelmingly liberal population. In the U.S., that is not so. There are liberal populations predominantly in the Northeast and Pacific West, but just about everywhere in between is conservative. The vast vast vast majority of the population likely falls between "moderately liberal" and "moderately conservative" on the political spectrum. Thus, we're not ready for a complete overhaul of traditional customs and practices.

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by RalphyS

And even these absolute rules aren't that absolute, because I can remember a passage that states, 'thou shalt not kill', yet if the state does the killing, there seems nothing wrong with it.

As for myself, I'm not too fond of capital punishment or war, for this very reason.

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chase

Ya know...its amazing the way you always get pissed off when someone here criticizes Bush ( what means US foreign policy and NOT your country) but in other hand you are constantly being disrespectful to the other countries ( paiting an image of imorality -corruption) with your erroneous and biased point of views...:rolleyes:

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chase

So basically you're saying, if we allow gay marriage, everybody will be going gay and the population will go extinct. :wtf:

I haven't seen any hetero's going over to 'the other side' over here, since it became legal to marry someone of your own gender.

Biologically, there is a lot to be said for f..king around, if you take the 'go hence and multiply'-advice/rule literally. I don't see you praising that.

As I've stated before, it isn't the sole reason of relations or even our existence to make sure there is offspring.

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ana4Stapp

You think I'm lying? The Dutch have legalized marijuana and prostitution. That right there makes up a large part of Amsterdam's tourism.

And you're calling my views biased? You're the one who is even against the allies getting rid of the Taliban in Afghanistan... the government that directly funded 9/11.

I only respond to people that attack my country on these boards.

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by RalphyS

Biologically... reproduction is a fundamental part of our existence. Human beings haven't always viewed sex as a pleasureful experience, they did it out of instinct. I never said if gay marriage is allowed, everyone will go gay. I simply said that if there was an isolated population of homosexuals... they were go extinct after a generation. Explain to me why that is. If homosexual is this healthy lifestyle, explain to me the benefits of homosexuality. I don't find an increase of getting STDs to be appealing, nor do I find the impossibility of having children to be either.

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chase

You think I'm lying? The Dutch have legalized marijuana and prostitution. That right there makes up a large part of Amsterdam's tourism.

And you're calling my views biased? You're the one who is even against the allies getting rid of the Taliban in Afghanistan... the government that directly funded 9/11.

I only respond to people that attack my country on these boards.

No one is attacking YOUR COUNTRY here!!!!! I cant understand why you cant see it!!!!!

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chase

I simply said that if there was an isolated population of homosexuals... they were go extinct after a generation. Explain to me why that is. If homosexual is this healthy lifestyle, explain to me the benefits of homosexuality. I don't find an increase of getting STDs to be appealing, nor do I find the impossibility of having children to be either.

I have nothing against homosexuality-- I think people have the right to live their lives the same way I live mine-- and I alao think its getting boring and unfruitful to keep this discussion --homosexuality is an very OLD issue , present in many cultures thoughout the History.

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ana4Stapp

So, basically you can't explain the benefits to the lifestyle. I have yet to hear anyone expain why it's a good lifestyle. You agree with it, fine... but I haven't either of you explain the positives of it.

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chase

Why you are always trying to change my words, Chase? I didnt say I was agreeing WITH it- (homosexuality) -- I said I have nothing AGAINST it! Its different. But to me character is much more important that sexuality.
Imagine THIS: you have a friend who you really really like but one day he reveals to you that hes gay...will you stop this friendship based in prejudices? just because you cant agree with his lifestyle??

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ana4Stapp

No, not at all... but I would definately not agree with it. I have had friends who got into drugs and because I'm so against drugs... I had a major problem with it. I have friends and coworkers who are gay. Yet, with all due respect, can you find any biological benefits to homosexuality?

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chase

Well I was asking about homosexuality -- drugs are other situation...you cant compare gays to people who are addicted in drugs...

Can you find any biological benefits in hetero couples who are steriles?

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ana4Stapp

In terms of reproduction, no. I like how you won't answer my question. Can you find any biological benefits to homosexuality?

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chase

In terms of reproduction, no. I like how you won't answer my question. Can you find any biological benefits to homosexuality?

LOL!!!! The same here cause I love when you ignore my questions...:rolleyes:

Biological benefits concerning to sex except reproduction?

...but I really doubt if you consider about biological benefits when you are going to have sex with someone ...:rolleyes:

Re: Spielberg's Munich causes controversy

Well, after a lot of mischances a nd delays finallyI saw Munich this night and my opinion is that I saw best Spielberg's movie in many years. There's a word to summarize it is impressive. A strong and impressive film. We cant leave the theater without a a lump in the throat.Okay, it is none too pleasant...and never could be this way...since its subject is terrorism that result from hate and intolerance. Theres no hero or happy end in this.

Its also an extremely violent movie despite the possible 'romantization' that shows no " good or bad guys" or even right and "wrong sides"...and at this point I remember a review complaining about the impartial Spielberg who avoided in choose sides...or even painting a 'sympathetic portrait of the Palestinians'.

Eric Bana is a Mossad agent (Avner Kauffman) who leads a group of men that needs to eliminate the names they take on faith as the architects of the Munich massacre. Hes a man who fights all the time with his own conscience until the end...

Disturbing movie! Amazing movie! ;)