Censorship, what

[Rachmaninoff]

I got to thinking about this on account of some of the criticism I?ve heard towards the movie The Golden Compass, that criticism going along the lines of calling the film anti-Christian and that the theaters shouldn?t play it. Because as I have heard it said? that it?s basically a story where evil wins and they want to kill God.

Now honestly, I don?t know a lot about it, other than I was planning on seeing it when it came out, and there isn?t too much of a protest here in SLC, Utah. But still it got me to thinking just how censorship plays a role in our society. A question of when does the attempt to censor something infringe on someone?s right to see things differently? And by differently I mean that the author is suppose to be an atheist.

Anyway, on some level I think censorship is a good thing, for example rating movies, not allowing swearing or profanity unless in a specific area. Much like how the filter is enabled for most of OtakuBoards and yet is not enabled for the Theater area.

Just as censorship is potentially damaging, I also think it serves a purpose that actually benefits society. So seriously, what are your thoughts? When it comes to ideas in movies, so long as it?s clear that the movie in question is considered fake and considering the content of The Golden Compass I can?t see it being taken any other way?

I think attempting to remove it because it doesn?t conform to religious ideas is absurd and an attempt to censor anyone who doesn?t believe in god. It?s not like those who object have to watch it after all. lol Also, by all means, broaden this topic into all forms of censorship if you wish since it plays a huge role in our world.

[The13thMan]

[COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]Let me start off by addressing the dealy with the Golden Compass. Now, like Rachmaninoff, i don't know a whole lot about it. My understanding is that some christians are protesting the movie and pushing for a ban of the movie because of some atheistic themes. I think in one of the later novels God dies. Now, i absolutely think this is ridiculous, both on grounds that churches should push for bans of movies or control the flow of new ideas to its members and because i generally disagree with a lot of christianity. Obviously since this is not a thread on religion i won't go into any of the latter bit here. But for the former i will.

Churches pushing to ban movies is just plain out silly. Don't these churches have enough faith in their own members and their own faiths not to let some works of fiction shake them? Anybody that tries to control anything that directly contradicts them gives me the impression that they are insecure of their own beliefs and the validity of them. I mean... if you knew with all your heart 2+2=4 then why would you care if there were people out there saying it was 5 to the point of trying to get them not to say it? Instead, you should show how they are wrong. Same goes for churches banning movies.

My other problem is the control on the "flow of new ideas" as i awkwardly put it. I'm very pro-knowledge. I think that there shouldn't be restricted knowledge... to an extent. By that i basically mean there are some things that not everybody needs to know, such as private matters. If i went to the doctors for shoving a light bulb up my *** and don't want people knowing about it then i think it's my right. But uh... i just want you guys to know that's only happened once.... i mean, never! ...Back to my point! It's like the phrase, the truth shall set you free. If you try to control people by hiding things and controlling thought you are doing nobody any good. If instead you try to educate people and convince them to your point you are doing them some good. Whenever i think of this i think of the novel 1984 and V for Vendetta. I recommend both.

Now for censorship!

I generally really dislike censorship, and even more so i hate being censored (****ing otakuboards! jk). But i do think it has its place. ...but that place is quite small. Instead of censorship i believe warning would be more effective. Just like ESRB warnings on video games and on tv and in movies. I like this system. It gives people that want to stay away from that sort of thing the deserved opportunity to. I don't consider this censorsihp as Rachmaninoff seems to. Censorship, to me, is the altering of art, literature, whatever on some grounds, be them moral, political, or anything. ESRB does not change anything in the movie or video game, only warn of it, which is perfectly acceptable to me. Haha, or in some cases preferable. As i recall the parental advisory warning sticker on CDs often times have adverse effects and actually end up increasing sells. ;D

I actually really would prefer OB not to be censored. I understand quite well why it is not - because of the younger audience - i just wish it wasn't so. Do what the ESRB did, OB, slap a sticker on the front of the site for parents to look at for their kids. I don't mind you guys censoring us if it gets out of hand. But i really do think most of us can use it responsibly. After all, we can be mean to each other with or without the use of cuss words.

[/FONT][/COLOR]

[James]

[font=franklin gothic medium]I'm fundamentally opposed to censorship (I prefer ratings than outright censorship), but as per usual there are many shades of grey.

With OB, my feeling is that we can censor swearing while still allowing people to say whatever they want. After all, you can still express any idea without using swearing.

So although specific words are censored, ideas themselves are not. I think that's the main point.

In terms of films and religion, I'm just tired of the whole debate honestly. Religious groups really need to get a better hobby than frequently going after films.

A film is a film, pure and simple. It is someone's expression. It is an idea. It is not going to hurt people.

And if a film changes someone's mind about religion? That probably means they weren't 100% convinced anyway.

In reality I don't believe that films present any real threat to religion. Organized religious groups need to focus on their own philosophy rather than regularly attacking pieces of fiction.

Besides, I think that people who are truly offended by the ideas presented in a movie will simply choose not to see it. As long as a movie isn't forced on anyone (which I wouldn't say is the case), then I do not see the issue.[/font]

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='The13thMan'][COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]I generally really dislike censorship, and even more so i hate being censored (****ing otakuboards! jk). But i do think it has its place. ...but that place is quite small. Instead of censorship i believe warning would be more effective. Just like ESRB warnings on video games and on tv and in movies. I like this system. It gives people that want to stay away from that sort of thing the deserved opportunity to. I don't consider this censorsihp as Rachmaninoff seems to. Censorship, to me, is the altering of art, literature, whatever on some grounds, be them moral, political, or anything. ESRB does not change anything in the movie or video game, only warn of it, which is perfectly acceptable to me. Haha, or in some cases preferable. As i recall the parental advisory warning sticker on CDs often times have adverse effects and actually end up increasing sells. ;D [/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]I'm not sure if I follow you, I don't really consider ratings true censorship, other than they give someone the ability to censor what they view. More like informed censorship instead of outright cutting out ideas. I consider that beneficial and yet not limiting. :p So it is censorship and yet it's really more of giving people the freedom to choose what they want instead of someone else making that choice for them. Though since censorship usually includes outright banning or deletion of said offensive materials, that was probably not clear on what I really think. XP

[James]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Censorship, in my mind, is when you edit content or block content selectively. Ratings don't really fall under that category.

I mean, yes, if you put an R rating on a film you are blocking minors from purchasing it. But you aren't actually outright censoring the film - adults can still purchase the uncensored movie.

I'm quite comfortable with ratings, especially where they help parents make informed choices. But I don't like the idea of content being edited to make it more palatable, in general - especially where the message of the content is lost.

I mean this in reference to adults, not children. [/font]

[Heaven's Cloud]

[spoiler]My first thought was a simple one, censorship is bad. My second thought was censorship is bad but…

…if I had kids I wouldn’t want to turn on Sesame Street only to be shocked by Big Bird rolling a blunt, Elmo beating up the homeless Oscar the Grouch, or Ernie rolling over to have a little late night action with Bert (although, personally I think that would make for great late night television).

So I can understand the need for the FCC to regulate broadcast television, especially public television, to some extent because they are public forums of entertainment. I am wary of my own statement though because I think that most arguments supporting censorship begin with “we have to protect our children”, where it should be “you have to protect your children but we will provide you with a little help by making sure that child oriented television remains fee of obscenity, violence, an sex (though, to quote George Carlin “I would rather my child see ****ing then fighting any day of the week).

There are very few circumstances where I condone the censorship of art in any form. That being written, I think that in our digital world it is important to understand when one is creating art and when one is partaking in someone else’s artistic endeavors. While the OB allows the users a certain creative and artistic freedoms, the true artistic creation would have to be the forum itself. Since we are just partaking in someone else’s artistic endeavor I have no qualms about following a set of guidelines or rules.

When it comes to the Golden Compass I have a hard time not comparing it to the Chronicles of Narnia. After all, both works are children’s novels with underlying faith based tones (one obviously Christian the other Atheistic). Neither should be censored anymore than the Passion of Christ should have been censored. They are works of art that people can choose to or not to view.
[/spoiler]

[Mr. Maul]

[IMG]http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a376/mrmaul/1153366998742.jpg[/IMG]

[The13thMan]

[quote name='Rachmaninoff']I'm not sure if I follow you, I don't really consider ratings true censorship, other than they give someone the ability to censor what they view. More like informed censorship instead of outright cutting out ideas. I consider that beneficial and yet not limiting. :p So it is censorship and yet it's really more of giving people the freedom to choose what they want instead of someone else making that choice for them. Though since censorship usually includes outright banning or deletion of said offensive materials, that was probably not clear on what I really think. XP[/QUOTE]

[COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]I agree with ya here. I just thought you said that ratings were the same as censorship and i was saying that there was a difference. I guess it was a misunderstanding.

I don't consider ratings to be outright censorship. And at the same time it can restrict some people's ability to view the stuff as in rated R movies or pornography. In my mind, censorship in its most purest form is the altering of material to conform to moral, political, or some other standard. But i think i'm repeating myself here.

Oh, and Heaven's Cloud, i think it's FCC, not FFC. But don't feel bad, i had to google it to make sure. ;D Probably just a typo.

It seems to me that most of us here agree to the main points at the heart of the debate. How boring...


[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Heaven's Cloud]

[quote name='Mr. Maul'][IMG]http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a376/mrmaul/1153366998742.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]

[color=indigo]That is wonderful.

And yes it was a typo. Thanks.[/color]

[Aaryanna_Mom]

You kids and your pictures make me sad at times. :animesigh [spoiler]And yes I know it's most likely suppose to be a joke. Not my idea of humor really. [/spoiler]

In principle, I object to Censorship for the simple reason that it's far to easy to go over the line and get rid of content for personal reasons instead of truly determining if it really needs to be removed. In that respect I think ratings are a better method since they can be used to help you make informed choices where outright Censorship takes that choice from you. In the end, as a parent, it's your job to set those parental controls on your cable box or DVD player to keep your kids from watching stuff you'd rather they did not.

Like the movie in question, honestly, it's a bit absurd in my opinion that people object to it. I have always been of the opinion that an unwillingness to submit one's beliefs to rigorous scrutiny is a manifestation of weakness of faith on your part. In other words if you are so frightened of an opinion or belief that is different, then that's your problem. Attempting to Censor others who see things differently isn't going to solve that problem and doing so is nothing more than a poor attempt to shove your own insecurities onto others.

It also shows a distinct lack of faith or respect for your kids since I also believe that once you do your best to educate them... it's their right to choose whether or not they keep said beliefs. So attempting to get rid of something that is fictional and not even a true story because it "might" influence them just seems laughable to me.

[SunfallE]

[COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"][quote name='Rachmaninoff']I got to thinking about this on account of some of the criticism I?ve heard towards the movie The Golden Compass, that criticism going along the lines of calling the film anti-Christian and that the theaters shouldn?t play it. Because as I have heard it said? that it?s basically a story where evil wins and they want to kill God. [/QUOTE]Well having seen the movie in question, I'm not sure what the fuss is about. Though I am not familiar with the Catholic religion so if any form of hints or symbolism was used, I would not have recognized it. Still, in the end, regardless of the views of the author, it is what's known as [I]fiction[/I]. So the the objections seem pointless in my mind.

Anyway, in general, I strongly disapprove of censorship, not making choices, but the kind where there is no choice because content that is considered questionable by some has been removed. That's just wrong in my opinion. [quote name='The13thMan'][COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic] It seems to me that most of us here agree to the main points at the heart of the debate. How boring...[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]Well it was bound to happen right? A debate where most of us share the same opinion. :p [/FONT][/COLOR]

[Korey]

[FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"]Censorship is really a fuzzy topic to cover because their is no clear definition of what is really damaging to the public. There is a theorhetical limit as to what people can see, but what's obscene to me may not be obscene to you. The definition that the US Supreme Court gave on obscene content is that " anything that lacks artistic, social or scientific value." :animestun Yeah, that's another example of trying to define a really gray area in black and white terms, not possible.

I personally think that the film shouldn't be removed from theatres. Believe it or not, all of C.S. Lewis's works have some sort of athiestic commentary within them and even books like the Narnia series are no exception. Look at the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe; it was one of the highest grossing movies a couple of years ago. Did children who watched it carry the archetypal figures within the movie? Certainly not. They liked it for a different reason. The same applies with the Golden Compass. People are gonna watch it regardless of content, because they are interested in that sort of thing anyways. No one has the right, besides the government, to censor this film. It's like me trying to remove it from the theater because it interferes with my beliefs. It's a case of trying to help a few while ostracizing the masses. Kind of along the same thread as saying "Happy Winter Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" to keep from harming our brothers and sisters who are of a different religion.

As far as ratings go, that's really a case of industry self regulation. It was put in place to keep the government out of the movie industry. Same goes with video games and music. It's really put in place to keep the consumers informed on what they're buying and that product may not be for all types of people. Many congressmen and politicians have tried to take this media off the shelves entirely, but ultimately they've made little progress. Which is a good thing, because many people are capable of making their own decisions. When Columbine came and went, they wanted to blame the video game and music industries for making those kids shoot up the school, when they had little to do with it at all. People make conscious decisions to do what they do, no matter what it may be. I think that media can influence the human consciousness, but only if we want it to.[/FONT]

[Darren]

[quote name='Aaryanna_Mom']Like the movie in question, honestly, it's a bit absurd in my opinion that people object to it. I have always been of the opinion that an unwillingness to submit one's beliefs to rigorous scrutiny is a manifestation of weakness of faith on your part. In other words if you are so frightened of an opinion or belief that is different, then that's your problem. Attempting to Censor others who see things differently isn't going to solve that problem and doing so is nothing more than a poor attempt to shove your own insecurities onto others.

It also shows a distinct lack of faith or respect for your kids since I also believe that once you do your best to educate them... it's their right to choose whether or not they keep said beliefs. So attempting to get rid of something that is fictional and not even a true story because it "might" influence them just seems laughable to me.[/QUOTE]

I totally agree. And I think that's exactly why the whole scenario is so laughable. Censoring something because it goes against Christian theology. Seems a bit hipocritical to me. There wouldn't be a problem if they showed some evil witch or wizard (But they [I]have[/I] to be evil or else it's wrong) die. However, there are some real Wiccans out there, (Although the representation of a witch in movies is way different than reality) who would find that offensive. I don't see them running around, protesting the movie or aiming for a ban.

The Author's athiest, [spoiler]"God" dies in the third book,[/spoiler] however all the connections to religion have been cut out, (Besides the obvious references to the "Magisterium" aka: the church) so I don't see the big deal. The catholic church says that if a child sees the movie and likes it, they might want to read the books. However, if the child likes the movie. (which I highly doubt, because the movie was pretty much crap) the parents should be happy that they're picking up a book in today's age. And even if the child reads the entire series without losing interest, (because keep in mind, the really heretical stuff doesn't even occur until late in the second book. And it isn't even clarified until late in the third) they probably wouldn't understand it. (I've read the series twice, and I still don't understand every aspect Pullman was trying to relate)

Summary: Censorship to movies based on religious texts is WRONG. This isn't the dark ages. We are allowed to think and worship (Or not worship) however we want.

However Censorship based on actual content should is necessary. Hence, the rating system. (G, PG, PG-13, R, NC-17, X) You know, instead of aiming for a ban, maybe the church should have aimed for a different rating of the movie.

[songsofsorrow]

[quote name='The13thMan'][COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]

Churches pushing to ban movies is just plain out silly. Don't these churches have enough faith in their own members and their own faiths not to let some works of fiction shake them? Anybody that tries to control anything that directly contradicts them gives me the impression that they are insecure of their own beliefs and the validity of them. I mean... if you knew with all your heart 2+2=4 then why would you care if there were people out there saying it was 5 to the point of trying to get them not to say it? Instead, you should show how they are wrong. Same goes for churches banning movies. [/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

i have to agree with him on this one, i know this is a deal about censorship and all, but people in general have gone to scool and only in advanced mathematics does 2+2 =5
if christians don't like the movie because it's anti-christian with trying to kill god, why don't they just ban tales of symphonia while they're at it because in that game there are angels and a god and playing as the main characters you are trying to kill so called "god".


but as for censorship the fcc got created to catch all of the crap that people say (Freekin Crap Catchers) so when people want to complain because america is not japanese enough, and american parents don't watch the cartoons their kids do they complain when kids show violence. that's why american cartoons are watered down (sounds like another thread on OB)but back to the point only in tv does censorship exist,(I think) take one piece as an example in america they don't show a full indented fist in belamy's face,maybe because they figure american parents aren't as responsible as japanese parents(not trying to diss, my parents were te same way)

i think stuff, such as cartoons in america need to be censored or regulated to the standards of the F.C.C. so they don't catch more crap from parents.

[Udon]

[FONT="Verdana"]I believe that censorship is good, but up to a certain point. For example, I happed to walk into my living room where I saw my sister watching Naruto on cartoon network. It was also one of my favorite episodes. Where Rock Lee accidentaly drinks sake, starts using the drunkin fists, and totaly kicks a**.

Anyways, I was wondering how they were going to censor it because it was on cartoon network. Unfortunately they censored it. But they censored it in such a way where it made my soul cry. When some of the characters look at the cup of sake, theres usualy a sake symbol on it. But the erased it. They also replaced the word wine or sake with "elixer" and instead of calling the drunkin fist its name, they called it "The Loopy Fist".

I can see why they censored it, becasue if they didnt, they would have some complaint that some kid got drunk off of wine and tryed to use the drunkin fist. But I also think that they went a lttle overboard. They might of censored it good, but they've also ruined that particular fight in the series.[/FONT]

[TheShinje]

Killing a movie wil not stop people dissenting against religion, nor will allowing the movie to screen end the world. The sun will still rise, people of the faith will still go to church, and life as we know it will continue onward. It's just film, it's just entertainment.

It's time we put things into perspective.

[Roxie Faye]

[color=#9933ff]The Catholic Church consistently condemns any movies that challenge the authority of the Church or promotes witchcraft or "blasphemy" or what-have-you, so I've learned to ignore their opinions on books and movies... and a lot of the time in general, even though I'm Catholic (yeah, that doesn't make sense, I'm aware, thank you). I mean, I'd be missing out on Harry Potter if I listened to what they said. =)

Censorship is sad, silly, and makes me angry!

I believe one of the most important aspects of the free world is the availability of intellectual freedom. The fact that it is rarely available in the (so called) free world frustrates me a lot.

I mean, even newspapers and TV broadcasts, to a large extent, have the information altered or given on a slant as to decieve the viewer or reader.

Those against the Golden Compass are the same kind who continually challenge books, and in some places, succeed in banning them because some arrogant piece of shite thinks they have the right to tell others what they can and cannot read. Celebrating Banned Books week makes me smile.[/color]

[TheShinje]

[quote name='MistressRoxie'][color=#9933ff]The Catholic Church consistently condemns any movies that challenge the authority of the Church or promotes witchcraft or "blasphemy" or what-have-you, [/quote]

Well, of course they would. They believe that that stuff is bad for you, and what kind of organisation would they be if they allowed themselves to be ripped to shreds and didn't do something about it?

The books are the polar opposite to Narnia's quasi-religious fantasy, and in these books, God is killed, and the people set up what is regarded in the last line of the third book as the "republic of Heaven." While I don't necessarily think that these books will end the world, yeah, I can see why the church is getting hissy about them.

Free speech allows for lobby groups to push for a books ban. If it is unreasonable, like trying to ban Harry Potter or the Golden Compass, it will simply be shrugged off.

Wanna see real restriction of free speech? Try publishing an anti-Islam book in Tehran.

[Yookie1]

I can censor myself thank you very much. I dont need to be protected from bad words or, god forbid, nudity, because seeing a naked person is so much more damaging than seeing somebody getting their head kicked in or blown off! Yes that was sarcasm. Sure kids should be protected from growing up too fast, but then parents would have to take responsibility for their actions and not be able to blame all the kids misdeeds on GTA or M&M, and no God fearing money grubbing republican wants that, do we?

[[Sound_Nin]]

[COLOR=Navy][FONT=Book Antiqua]In my town, I was extremely pissed off when they wouldn't show Brokeback Mountain. They did the same thing with Fahrenheit 9/11.
And I was the only one angry about this!
I mean, there was no protest, no rating, they just flat-out WOULDN'T SHOW IT.

Do they really think watching a movie about gay cowboys (and we live in a cowboy town) is going to make all the guys in town gay?
Or that watching an anti-Bush film is really a threat to their political views (well, it is. Maybe they just don't want to risk that.)

It happens. I mean, I waited until the DVDs came out and bought them. But it's the principle.
[/FONT][/COLOR]

[timotheus]

Talk about good timing; I just read all three books of the 'His Dark Materials' Trilogy (Of which 'The Golden Compass' is the first book) last week. A good read, incidentally. I don't know how they compare to the movie, but I'm sure the books are better, heh.

I recalled all the discord that the first movie brought about, and when I was reading it, I was like "Oh well they're stupid, I don't see any super anti-religious themes here". Then I read book two and, "Oh ok, I see how a diehard zealot could find this offensive".

However, like everyone has said on here, it IS a work of fiction. [spoiler]Also, the people weren't trying to overthrow God because they were satanist heathens, but because God had pretty much been usurped by a young upstart, and he was preparing to go to war with the humans.They don't kill him as much as release him from a crystal prison, which allows him to dissipate into happy spirit particles.[/spoiler]

If I had one, I wouldn't want my child exposed to violence, profanity or sexual acts until they were at an age I thought they could handle it. I see that as the parents responsibility to determine what their child sees, not the governments.

Incidentally, I would never let my kid see any TV until they are at least five. Those early stages are when the brain is doing all its low level formatting, and setting partitions. :) I'd rather play with him, talk to him, stimulate the little tykes mind; not see him zone out on Telletubbies.

[Morpheus]

[quote name='timotheus']Incidentally, I would never let my kid see any TV until they are at least five. Those early stages are when the brain is doing all its low level formatting, and setting partitions. :) I'd rather play with him, talk to him, stimulate the little tykes mind; not see him zone out on Telletubbies.[/QUOTE]

There are literally hundreds of shows that can be used to stimulate a child's mind; what you're saying is a rash generalization.

[timotheus]

[quote name='Morpheus']There are literally hundreds of shows that can be used to stimulate a child's mind; what you're saying is a rash generalization.[/QUOTE]

I agree there are hundreds of shows that claim to stimulate a childs mind. However, to me it is a choice between artificial stimulation via the TV, or human interaction. I think human interaction is a better choice, but that's me.

I also think the TV stunts the growth of childrens imaginations. Instead of being read to and then visualize what is happening, or listening to the radio, all the work is done for them on the TV. But, I'm also very bias towards reading for recreation.

Regardless, this has nothing to do with Censorship, so I apologize for that, just wanted to clarify my meaning in the previous post. :)

[Inculta_Bellum]

Gotta love the internet. Virtually, VIRTUALLY, no censorship except where appropriate. You can honestly say things like #$&^ and ^%@# with a little %$#@, not to mention actual words with letters.

Censoring isn't a bad thing unless done poorly. If you try to cover up every little thing that you think might cause a child to go psycho, you're gonna create more problems for yourself when they are finally exposed to it and can't handle it.

[URL="http://www.elgoonishshive.com/d/20080118.html"]Perfect Example[/URL]

And then the reverse is obviously also bad. You don't want your kids to grow up believing in the values they learned from Manhunt. I believe that it takes moderation in order to make censorship work. Thank you Tony Sinclair.

As for The Golden Compass, I love the book. The Church could have saved themselves a lot of trouble if instead of protesting the movie, they praised it as a trilogy where people overthrow a false god. At least that's what I got out of it. Looking back, Phillip Pullman had a good point about how the Narnia books ended. Every major character dies. That's disturbing.

[Twilight Fire]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"][SIZE="2"][COLOR="RoyalBlue"]Ah yes. I do recall when The Golden Compass came out and there were so many who tried to persuade you to not see it. Here's my opinion...

The Golden Compass is actually part of a trilogy written Philip Pullman, an acclaimed atheist. From what I heard, he wrote this series to combat, for lack of a better term, C.S. Lewis's The Chronicles of Narnia series, which has a lot of Biblical/Christian symbolism within them. The Golden Compass is actually the first part of the trilogy as well as the "cleanest." Again from what I have heard and read of commentaries, Pullman gets more aggressive as the series progresses, and in the end, the boy and girl (symbols of Adam and Eve) kill God to do their own thing.

Now, I'm a Christian myself, yet I wasn't on the streets to keep people from seeing the movie. In fact, even before I heard about all of that "kill God" stuff, I wanted to see the movie since it appeared nothing more than a fantasy flick. And even after hearing what I heard about it, I still wanted to see it. *gasp* Does that make me a sinner? Lol No. If I can't stand in my faith and my beliefs because of a simple movie, then my faith in God must be very weak.

Ok, so moving on to your REAL question about censorship... I think, as you said, that some censorship is good and beneficial. As you pointed out, movie ratings are good form of censorship: they let people know what is appropriate for this age group, etc. I guess it boils down to balance: some people take some censorship way out of proportion, with either TOO MUCH or TOO LITTLE. If we can find that balance, maybe it would work better for everybody.

Oh geez, what a lengthy answer... Sorry! Interesting topic though.
[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]