Lord's Prayer cinema ad thankfully banned

[Crimson Dynamo]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34891928

The Church of England has said it is "disappointed and bewildered" by the refusal of leading UK cinemas to show an advert featuring the Lord's Prayer.

The Church called the decision "plain silly" and warned it could have a "chilling" effect on free speech.:laugh2:

It had hoped the 60-second film would be screened UK-wide before Christmas ahead of the new Star Wars film.

The agency that handles adverts for the cinemas said it could offend those of "differing faiths and no faith".

However, the Digital Cinema Media (DCM) agency, which handles British film advertising for the major cinema chains, Odeon, Cineworld and Vue, refused to show the advert because it believed it would risk upsetting or offending audiences.

In a statement, DCM said it had a policy of not accepting political or religious advertising content in its cinemas.

It said that "some advertisements - unintentionally or otherwise - could cause offence to those of differing political persuasions, as well as to those of differing faiths and indeed of no faith," and that "in this regard, DCM treats all political or religious beliefs equally".




What a shame, the silly cinema chain have a policy and they are sticking to it. Perhaps God should have foreseen this?

[Kizzy]

vlUXh4mx4gI&feature=youtu.be

Now I'm no fan of the church of England.... But I don't hate it.
I wouldn't call it an advertisement, that would suggest faith is for sale and that's silly.

[Benjamin]

I don't get who this may upset?

[Crimson Dynamo]

I don't get who this may upset?

me and other people who dont like children being lied to by adults

[bots]

i would walk out of a cinema if it showed that before the film

[Benjamin]

i would walk out of a cinema if it showed that before the film

That's just ridiculous and an overrection to be honest.

[bots]

That's just ridiculous and an overrection to be honest.

no its not, i don't go to the cinema to get religion rammed down my throat. I choose the content I want to watch and it doesn't include religious propaganda

[Tom4784]

Good.

[Benjamin]

no its not, i don't go to the cinema to get religion rammed down my throat. I choose the content I want to watch and it doesn't include religious propaganda

Fair enough, but still an absolute overreaction to walk out of the cinema over a 60 second advert (especially after paying to get into the cinema).

[Crimson Dynamo]

That's just ridiculous and an overrection to be honest.

brainwashing kids with lies about gods is the number 1 problem we are facing in this lifetime

suicide bombers dont do it as a career move

[Benjamin]

brainwashing kids with lies about gods is the number 1 problem we are facing in this lifetime

suicide bombers dont do it as a career move

I never said it should not have been banned. I just asked who it upset and then said walking out of the cinema over it would be an overreaction.

[bots]

I never said it should not have been banned. I just asked who it upset and then said walking out of the cinema over it would be an overreaction.

There are many in this country now that detest all mention of religion, and terrorism in the name of religion sure doesn't help. Clearly the cinemas recognise this, hence their reaction.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I never said it should not have been banned. I just asked who it upset and then said walking out of the cinema over it would be an overreaction.

who is walking out, it wont be shown?

[arista]

"Lord's Prayer cinema ad thankfully banned"


Bang On Right LT


Church's should be made into Gay Discos
that will teach them

[Benjamin]

who is walking out, it wont be shown?

bitontheside said he/she would walk out if it had been shown

[Mystic Mock]

I'm all for freedom of speech I'm afraid and being allowed to express yourself, so I don't get why Religious Adverts are banned? It's not like it's going to convert you unless you're easily swayed anyway.:laugh:

[Kizzy]

Should've had someone swigging a can of coke in the background then it'd be fine...

*other beverages are available.

[Kazanne]

Bang goes our freedom of speech again!

[arista]

I'm all for freedom of speech I'm afraid and being allowed to express yourself, so I don't get why Religious Adverts are banned? It's not like it's going to convert you unless you're easily swayed anyway.:laugh:



Because its a Insult
Make Me and LT Very Angry

[Crimson Dynamo]

Bang goes our freedom of speech again!

telling lies to children is not freedom of speech

it is telling lies to children

[arista]

http://media.oxfam.org.uk/images/products/HighStDonated/Zoom/hd_100468299_01.jpg?v=1


A Great Book

[Crimson Dynamo]

If the advert finished like this

Now there is no evidence whatsoever that praying does anygood nor is their any evidence that gods exist, on the contrary the evidence clearly says they do not

but some people like to do it as it makes them feel like their lives have meaning and that someone is looking out for them - sadly this in not applicable to the 20,000 children who died today of hunger and disease


enjoy the film



then we have an advert suitable for all

[Kazanne]

telling lies to children is not freedom of speech

it is telling lies to children

Not everyone believes it's lies,I take it you don't do Christmas at yours then LT ?

[Kazanne]

If the advert finished like this

Now there is no evidence whatsoever that praying does anygood nor is their any evidence that gods exist, on the contrary the evidence clearly says they do not

but some people like to do it as it makes them feel like their lives have meaning and that someone is looking out for them - sadly this in not applicable to the 20,000 children who died today of hunger and disease


enjoy the film



then we have an advert suitable for all

Maybe those children died due to lack of humanity and greed.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Not everyone believes it's lies,I take it you don't do Christmas at yours then LT ?

christmas is nothing to do with religion it is an amalgam of historic and pagan tradition and with 95% of the population religion will play no part

[Kazanne]

Because its a Insult
Make Me and LT Very Angry

But now you and LT are taking YOUR beliefs to the extreme ,the very same as you accuse believers to do.

[Kazanne]

christmas is nothing to do with religion it is an amalgam of historic and pagan tradition and with 95% of the population religion will play no part

To a lot of people it is everything to do with religion ,and of course you will believe that description of it being pagan etc,as it makes you feel better,it's just greed at the end of the day,you just cant let the people who believe in it and celebrate it as such,have their big day without wanting a slice and joining in.:laugh:

[kirklancaster]

There are many in this country now that detest all mention of religion, and terrorism in the name of religion sure doesn't help. Clearly the cinemas recognise this, hence their reaction.

And there are many in this country still - among them, Christians, Jews and Muslims - who do NOT detest all mention of Religion, so what is your point?

I FULLY understand Benjamin's valid point abourt 'over-reaction' but not yours, and for your information those 'many' to which you refer are still in the minority in this country - which is still predominantly CHRISTIAN according to all the latest polls -- despite what atheists and those of other faiths proclaim.

In addition, the phrase; "Terrorism in the name of Religion" is nothing more than a euphemism for IS, so it's pretty shady to use such a phrase in the same sentence as 'ALL RELIGION'.

'Blaming God for MAN's evil, and orthodox Religions for evil men's cynical interpretation of those Religion's 'Holy Books' is as stupid as blaming The Beatles for the cretins who went out and murdered innocent people because they 'discerned' hidden lyrics commanding them to in 'Helter Skelter'.

This decision is just another example of the erosion of yet more of all that which defines us as 'British' by bowing to 'Political Correctness' or those acting from more sinister motives.

Soldiers in military uniform were once looked upon with extra respect by the rest of us - now they are being forced into side rooms by hospital staff for fear of 'upsetting some of our Muslim patients and visitors.

Nurses - themselves surely worthy of our highest respect and admiration - are now threatened with dissmissal by their bosses for wearing the tiniest of gold crucifix pendants.

The traditional Nativity Play banned in schools for fear of offending Muslim pupils and their parents - even though one such school in my own DIRECT experience had hundreds of non Muslim predominantly Christian pupils and only ONE Muslim child.

'Blackboard' has now become 'Chalkboard' or 'Whiteboards' (We can say Whiteboard but not blackboard??? )

Midgets and Dwarfs are now 'Vertically Challenged', 'Short-sighted and Blind people 'Optically Challenged'.

What utter madness.

I do not believe that ANYONE in their right minds would find this advert offensive or would walkout of a cinema because of it - only those who have a an irrational deep hatred of Christianity beause of some very painful reason known only to themselves.

As Benjamin so rightluy suggests, this redefines the word; 'Overreaction'.

[bots]

And there are many in this country still - among them, Christians, Jews and Muslims - who do NOT detest all mention of Religion, so what is your point?

I FULLY understand Benjamin's valid point abourt 'over-reaction' but not yours, and for your information those 'many' to which you refer are still in the minority in this country - which is still predominantly CHRISTIAN according to all the latest polls -- despite what atheists and those of other faiths proclaim.

In addition, the phrase; "Terrorism in the name of Religion" is nothing more than a euphemism for IS, so it's pretty shady to use such a phrase in the same sentence as 'ALL RELIGION'.

'Blaming God for MAN's evil, and orthodox Religions for evil men's cynical interpretation of those Religion's 'Holy Books' is as stupid as blaming The Beatles for the cretins who went out and murdered innocent people because they 'discerned' hidden lyrics commanding them to in 'Helter Skelter'.

This decision is just another example of the erosion of yet more of all that which defines us as 'British' by bowing to 'Political Correctness' or those acting from more sinister motives.

Soldiers in military uniform were once looked upon with extra respect by the rest of us - now they are being forced into side rooms by hospital staff for fear of 'upsetting some of our Muslim patients and visitors.

Nurses - themselves surely worthy of our highest respect and admiration - are now threatened with dissmissal by their bosses for wearing the tiniest of gold crucifix pendants.

The traditional Nativity Play banned in schools for fear of offending Muslim pupils and their parents - even though one such school in my own DIRECT experience had hundreds of non Muslim predominantly Christian pupils and only ONE Muslim child.

'Blackboard' has now become 'Chalkboard' or 'Whiteboards' (We can say Whiteboard but not blackboard??? )

Midgets and Dwarfs are now 'Vertically Challenged', 'Short-sighted and Blind people 'Optically Challenged'.

What utter madness.

I do not believe that ANYONE in their right minds would find this advert offensive or would walkout of a cinema because of it - only those who have a an irrational deep hatred of Christianity beause of some very painful reason known only to themselves.

As Benjamin so rightluy suggests, this redefines the word; 'Overreaction'.

You missed my rather clear point, if I were to see that in a cinema, I would walk out. Its a personal choice of mine. I'm not stopping others watching it if that what they want to do.

You say religious people are in the majority. I would say that is unlikely to be correct given that the cinema owners have chosen not to show the advert. They would not take that approach if the vast majority were religious and approved of it.

[Cherie]

So people will sit through adverts for things they don't need or will never buy, not to mention trailers for awful movies they will never watch, but would walk out over a religious advert :joker:

[Cherie]

You missed my rather clear point, if I were to see that in a cinema, I would walk out. Its a personal choice of mine. I'm not stopping others watching it if that what they want to do.

You say religious people are in the majority. I would say that is unlikely to be correct given that the cinema owners have chosen not to show the advert. They would not take that approach if the vast majority were religious and approved of it.

By the time you had edged yourself to the end of the row and fumbled your way in the dark to the door the advert would be over :hehe:

[kirklancaster]

christmas is nothing to do with religion it is an amalgam of historic and pagan tradition and with 95% of the population religion will play no part

:laugh::shrug: Every year as Christmas approches we share the same old 'chestnut' - no matter how many times we discuss, debate, or argue.

Online Dictionary:

Christməs/
noun
1.
the annual Christian festival celebrating Christ's birth, held on 25 December in the Western Church.

Mirriam Webster Dictionary:
Christmas
noun, Christ·mas often attributive \ˈkris-məs\
: a Christian holiday that is celebrated on December 25 in honor of the birth of Jesus Christ or the period of time that comes before and after this holiday

The Free Dictionary:

Christ·mas (krĭs′məs)
n.
1. A Christian feast commemorating the birth of Jesus.
2. December 25, the day on which this feast is observed as a public holiday in many countries.
3. Christmastide.

Oxford Dictionary
Christ|mas
Pronunciation: /ˈkrɪsməs/
Definition of Christmas in English:
noun (plural Christmases)

1The annual Christian festival celebrating Christ’s birth, held on 25 December in the Westerna celebrati bybthe WESTERN Churcjh Church:

Search EVERY dictionary, reerence ANY academic work, and you will see that CHRISTMAS is a celebratation of the birth of Jesus Christ.

Irrespective of December the 25th ONCE being of pagan origins, or Rudolph, or Santa Claus, or decorated trees.

Christ Mas means Christ's Birthday.

[kirklancaster]

By the time you had edged yourself to the end of the row and fumbled your way in the dark to the door the advert would be over :hehe:

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2: :clap1::clap1::clap1: BOOM - Get in.

[bots]

By the time you had edged yourself to the end of the row and fumbled your way in the dark to the door the advert would be over :hehe:

its a principle I have. I was forced to attend sunday school and go to church as a child by my parents. I will not suffer what is in my opinion a load of crap, one second longer. I also attended a non religious primary school and was belted 3 times for not reciting a chapter of the bible i was given to learn the day before.

[Suze]

I don't mind the ad, there are worse trying to shove things down your throat and play on heart strings.

[arista]

But now you and LT are taking YOUR beliefs to the extreme ,the very same as you accuse believers to do.


For Sure

[Northern Monkey]

So now you can't have a Christian advert at Christmas in a Christian country.Seems legit.I wonder if all mention of Islam is banned in Pakistan for fear of upsetting other faiths or people of no faith....

[arista]

:laugh: What about us who don't believe in Dawkins when you keep advertising him on here Arista? :laugh:


Thats Fine
Its a great Book Cover
worth posting


I have that on T-Shirts

[kirklancaster]

Thats Fine
Its a great Book Cover
worth posting


I have that on T-Shirts

I want one. :laugh:

[smudgie]

It wouldn't bother me on a personal level, however, all religion and politics should be kept away from cinema adverts, seems a good policy to me.

[arista]

I want one. :laugh:


Custom Made


T-Shirt Printers
you take a photo in
They Print it

So you could Photo Print the Cover
go to a Color Printers

[Kizzy]

It wouldn't bother me on a personal level, however, all religion and politics should be kept away from cinema adverts, seems a good policy to me.

Maybe that's a good point, if this is allowed then we could see an avalanche of religious and political messages shoehorned into advertising space.
I wonder how much the production and ad time that message cost...
It begs the question with all the social inequality,suffering and need both in the UK and worldwide how is this spend justified?

[JoshBB]

The advert should be allowed imo, along with any other religion that wishes to make an advert - so long as there is nothing political or hateful in it.

It may be worth reminding that we are 'officially' a christian country, although since striving towards being more secular seems to be more popular nowadays.. and that means having all religions (and non-religions) on an equal status, not banning religion from display like france has. That would be state-atheism.

[kirklancaster]

The advert should be allowed imo, along with any other religion that wishes to make an advert - so long as there is nothing political or hateful in it.

It may be worth reminding that we are 'officially' a christian country, although since striving towards being more secular seems to be more popular nowadays.. and that means having all religions (and non-religions) on an equal status, not banning religion from display like france has. That would be state-atheism.

:clap1::clap1::clap1: Superb post.

[kirklancaster]

Maybe that's a good point, if this is allowed then we could see an avalanche of religious and political messages shoehorned into advertising space.
I wonder how much the production and ad time that message cost...
It begs the question with all the social inequality,suffering and need both in the UK and worldwide how is this spend justified?


The same way the Labour Party justifies spending tens of millions on advertising, which COULD be spent on alleviating the hardship and suffering of all those it purports to represent, but the question is frankly ridiculous.

The Christian church DOES carry out numerous and diverse good works of direct charity - from 'soup' kitchens in every town and city to various home and foreign charity projects.

I don't think I've ever seen a Labour Party 'soup' kitchen or any other specific charity projects paid for out of party funds -- which are collected from donations in the same exact manner which church funds are.

Apart from this, what is the difference?

[Johnnyuk123]

christmas is nothing to do with religion it is an amalgam of historic and pagan tradition and with 95% of the population religion will play no part

:clap1::clap1::clap1:

[JoshBB]

The way some of you are treating your own atheism is the same way countries like Saudi Arabia treat Islam - forcing it upon everyone, and denying others the opportunity to display their own religion in a way that they feel comfortable, which should be allowed and encouraged in a modern democracy such as our own. It's the same people who criticise religious oppression in these countries who seem to have no problem doing it here so long as it's supportive of atheism, is that not hugely hypocritical?

[kirklancaster]

The way some of you are treating your own atheism is the same way countries like Saudi Arabia treat Islam - forcing it upon everyone, and denying others the opportunity to display their own religion in a way that they feel comfortable, which should be allowed and encouraged in a modern democracy such as our own. It's the same people who criticise religious oppression in these countries who seem to have no problem doing it here so long as it's supportive of atheism, is that not hugely hypocritical?

:worship: I wish I'd said this. :laugh:

[arista]

"own atheism is the same way countries like Saudi Arabia treat "


Rubbish
This is a Thread
I have No Machine Gun pointing at anyone

[JoshBB]

:worship: I wish I'd said this. :laugh:

:laugh:

[Kazanne]

The way some of you are treating your own atheism is the same way countries like Saudi Arabia treat Islam - forcing it upon everyone, and denying others the opportunity to display their own religion in a way that they feel comfortable, which should be allowed and encouraged in a modern democracy such as our own. It's the same people who criticise religious oppression in these countries who seem to have no problem doing it here so long as it's supportive of atheism, is that not hugely hypocritical?


Excellently put JoshBB :clap1::clap1:

[Tom4784]

Bang goes our freedom of speech again!

It's literally got nothing to do with Freedom of Speech but okay. The advert hasn't been banned, it just won't be shown in cinemas. Good thing too, religion based advertising shouldn't be a thing.

Not everyone believes it's lies,I take it you don't do Christmas at yours then LT ?

Only a small percentage of people in the UK actually celebrate the holiday for religious reasons and most of them lie about it for a chance to be self righteous and to look down on others.

Christmas day is an excuse from presents, overeating, getting pissed and ruining relationships.

Jesus Christ has nothing to do with it anymore.

[armand.kay]

Jesus what a massive overreaction I really don't see much wrong with that advert.

[armand.kay]

The way some of you are treating your own atheism is the same way countries like Saudi Arabia treat Islam - forcing it upon everyone, and denying others the opportunity to display their own religion in a way that they feel comfortable, which should be allowed and encouraged in a modern democracy such as our own. It's the same people who criticise religious oppression in these countries who seem to have no problem doing it here so long as it's supportive of atheism, is that not hugely hypocritical?

This tbh.

[AProducer'sWetDream]

Agree totally with JoshBB. I'm an atheist, and have no problem with this advert being shown. Should all Richard Dawkins programmes be banned? What about Stephen Hawking? Or Brian Cox? Or anybody else who states that the Universe is older than 6000 years, juts to avoid offending the theists of the world?

[Kazanne]

It's literally got nothing to do with Freedom of Speech but okay. The advert hasn't been banned, it just won't be shown in cinemas. Good thing too, religion based advertising shouldn't be a thing.



Only a small percentage of people in the UK actually celebrate the holiday for religious reasons and most of them lie about it for a chance to be self righteous and to look down on others.

Christmas day is an excuse from presents, overeating, getting pissed and ruining relationships.

Jesus Christ has nothing to do with it anymore.

Yes he does to a vast amount of people,and to call some of them liars is low,but no need for people to feel inferior,we are all entitalled to our beliefs without malice !!

[Ninastar]

Beautifully said, Josh. You have a brilliant way with words :)

[Dollface]

The advert should be allowed imo, along with any other religion that wishes to make an advert - so long as there is nothing political or hateful in it.

It may be worth reminding that we are 'officially' a christian country, although since striving towards being more secular seems to be more popular nowadays.. and that means having all religions (and non-religions) on an equal status, not banning religion from display like france has. That would be state-atheism.

The way some of you are treating your own atheism is the same way countries like Saudi Arabia treat Islam - forcing it upon everyone, and denying others the opportunity to display their own religion in a way that they feel comfortable, which should be allowed and encouraged in a modern democracy such as our own. It's the same people who criticise religious oppression in these countries who seem to have no problem doing it here so long as it's supportive of atheism, is that not hugely hypocritical?


:clap1:

[GiRTh]

The ad isnt too bad but IMO right decision to ban it, imagine the outcry if it was a similar ad promoting Islam. We must not advertise religion. None of them. If you want reigion then go and find it. Isnt that the whole point of religion? That you find your spirituality and not that you saw an ad at your local cinema.

[Johnnyuk123]

Absolutely right to ban it. Please ban Christmas next.:devil:

[smudgie]

Absolutely right to ban it. Please ban Christmas next.:devil:

Now now Johnny..I want my cuddle off Santa, leave Christmas alone.:joker:

[Dollface]

Absolutely right to ban it. Please ban Christmas next.:devil:

Your sig is kinda Christmasy for someone who wants to ban Christmas :omgno:

[Marsh.]

"Offend people of no faith"

:joker:

Yeah because I'm sure someone who doesn't believe is offended by a 30 second ad with a priest and a prayer.

And here was me thinking the religious were supposed to be the intolerant ones. :think:

[Marsh.]

The way some of you are treating your own atheism is the same way countries like Saudi Arabia treat Islam - forcing it upon everyone, and denying others the opportunity to display their own religion in a way that they feel comfortable, which should be allowed and encouraged in a modern democracy such as our own. It's the same people who criticise religious oppression in these countries who seem to have no problem doing it here so long as it's supportive of atheism, is that not hugely hypocritical?

:clap1:

[user104658]

Errr... yeah... let's not have cult-y brainwashing propaganda playing before family films, thanks.

Only a "believer" (i.e. a cult member) could watch that video and think it's OK. To a non-believer, I'm going to be blunt, it's creepy as ****. If you want to get on your knees and say special words to men in the sky then by all means go for it, but please, keep it in your own home where it belongs.

I enjoy the cinema. I go on my own, on weekdays when school is in, so that the place is almost empty. It's one of my few hobbies that I have to unwind. I do NOT want the experience ruined by being forced to remember that religion exists just before the bloody film starts.

[user104658]

The way some of you are treating your own atheism is the same way countries like Saudi Arabia treat Islam - forcing it upon everyone, and denying others the opportunity to display their own religion in a way that they feel comfortable, which should be allowed and encouraged in a modern democracy such as our own. It's the same people who criticise religious oppression in these countries who seem to have no problem doing it here so long as it's supportive of atheism, is that not hugely hypocritical?

So you would support an "atheism advert" in cinemas pointing out that not not everyone feels the need to pray and that not everyone believes in God? That it's OK to go against your family and your elders and say "No, actually I don't think any of this is true"? THAT would be the anti-religious parallel to this... but I very much doubt you would support it.

(Even though it's something that many children raised in religious environments desperately need to hear)

[AProducer'sWetDream]

Errr... yeah... let's not have cult-y brainwashing propaganda playing before family films, thanks.

Only a "believer" (i.e. a cult member) could watch that video and think it's OK. To a non-believer, I'm going to be blunt, it's creepy as ****. If you want to get on your knees and say special words to men in the sky then by all means go for it, but please, keep it in your own home where it belongs.


When were you elected spokesperson for every non-believer? I'm an atheist, and I think it's fine, so please don't try and speak for us all...

[GiRTh]

The way some of you are treating your own atheism is the same way countries like Saudi Arabia treat Islam - forcing it upon everyone, and denying others the opportunity to display their own religion in a way that they feel comfortable, which should be allowed and encouraged in a modern democracy such as our own. It's the same people who criticise religious oppression in these countries who seem to have no problem doing it here so long as it's supportive of atheism, is that not hugely hypocritical?
Its hardly a level playing field. The promotion of religion around the world is hardly comparable to to the promotion of atheism,. There are TV channels in some countries entirely devoted to religious teaching, I dont see such similar promotion for atheism

[JoshBB]

When were you elected spokesperson for every non-believer? I'm an atheist, and I think it's fine, so please don't try and speak for us all...

I'm also agnostic and think it's fine.

[Marsh.]

So people will sit through adverts for things they don't need or will never buy, not to mention trailers for awful movies they will never watch, but would walk out over a religious advert :joker:

Laughable isn't it?

[JoshBB]

Its hardly a level playing field. The promotion of religion around the world is hardly comparable to to the promotion of atheism,. There are TV channels in some countries entirely devoted to religious teaching, I dont see such similar promotion for atheism

That's because religions tend to have teachings and stories, whereas atheism does not because of the nature of it being that you have nothing set-out to follow.

[Marsh.]

Maybe that's a good point, if this is allowed then we could see an avalanche of religious and political messages shoehorned into advertising space.
I wonder how much the production and ad time that message cost...
It begs the question with all the social inequality,suffering and need both in the UK and worldwide how is this spend justified?

Yeah I am disgusted by the Hollywood movie budget used in this one advert.

And the nice clean clothes the priest is wearing. He could've cured world hunger with those, damn it.

[GiRTh]

That's because religions tend to have teachings and stories, whereas atheism does not because of the nature of it being that you have nothing set-out to follow.Buit the teachings and stories maybe false,

[Marsh.]

telling lies to children is not freedom of speech

it is telling lies to children

So I take it you never told your kids Santa crept into their house on Christmas Eve and left them presents? LIAR! :laugh:

[Dollface]

Errr... yeah... let's not have cult-y brainwashing propaganda playing before family films, thanks.

Only a "believer" (i.e. a cult member) could watch that video and think it's OK. To a non-believer, I'm going to be blunt, it's creepy as ****. If you want to get on your knees and say special words to men in the sky then by all means go for it, but please, keep it in your own home where it belongs.

I enjoy the cinema. I go on my own, on weekdays when school is in, so that the place is almost empty. It's one of my few hobbies that I have to unwind. I do NOT want the experience ruined by being forced to remember that religion exists just before the bloody film starts.

so much hate :sad:

[Marsh.]

Buit the teachings and stories maybe false,

Just as they may be true. Your point?

[Dollface]

Marsh :worship:

[Liam-]

I'm an atheist, I don't believe in God or all that mumbo jumbo and while religion doesn't necessarily bother me, I'd rather not have it shoved down my throat.

[GiRTh]

Just as they may be true. Your point?My point it they are not advertised as 'maybe' true. There are whole channels dedicated to science fiction but we are aware up front that what we are seeing is entirely made up.

[Marsh.]

It's fine for advertisers to bombard you with commercials for things you don't want or need but a priest saying a prayer takes it too far? :joker:

[GiRTh]

It's fine for advertisers to bombard you with commercials for things you don't want or need but a priest saying a prayer takes it too far? :joker:
No its not fine for advertisers to bombard us. I'm not aware of where that was said in the thread.

[Marsh.]

My point it they are not advertised as 'maybe' true. There are whole channels dedicated to science fiction but we are aware up front that what we are seeing is entirely made up.

They're not "advertised" as anything. It is there for people who believe.

Much like any other channel is there for people who are into it, a target audience, everyone else won't bother.

[Marsh.]

No its not fine for advertisers to bombard us. I'm not aware of where that was said in the thread.

I was responding to Liam.

[user104658]

so much hate :sad:
The vast majority of the true hatred in the world is perpetrated in the name of various religions.

What I have is despair, not hatred.

[Lostie!]

The vast majority of the true hatred in the world is perpetrated in the name of various religions.

What I have is despair, not hatred.

Disparagingly referring to anyone who subscribes to this religion as part of a "cult" and "creepy" says otherwise.

I find it rather laughable that people insist on claiming that religion is the source of hatred and ignorance while being guilty of those very attitudes themselves.

[GiRTh]

They're not "advertised" as anything. It is there for people who believe.

Much like any other channel is there for people who are into it, a target audience, everyone else won't bother.People who believe in something that may not be true but is given as fact. My point was to Josh about the promotion of religion around the world and it not being comparable to the promotion of atheism.

[Marsh.]

Not to mention people like terrorists who use religion as justification aren't actually following the religions you know? They're acting against it.

ISIS is not representative of Islam.

[Johnnyuk123]

I think this guy is a legend.:cheer2:
6RT6rL2UroE

[Lostie!]

Not to mention people like terrorists who use religion as justification aren't actually following the religions you know? They're acting against it.

ISIS is not representative of Islam.

:clap1:

[Liam-]

It's fine for advertisers to bombard you with commercials for things you don't want or need but a priest saying a prayer takes it too far? :joker:

I was responding to Liam.

No, I hate all adverts in the cinema and everywhere else, but I cant really argue with the fact that Iphones and My Little Pony exists, whereas it's my belief that all things 'holy' don't exist and I don't think that people who share my view should have religion forced upon them, much like I don't believe religious people should have to put up with people ramming atheist views down their throat, it's a two way street imo.

[user104658]

Disparagingly referring to anyone who subscribes to this religion as part of a "cult" and "creepy" says otherwise.

I find it rather laughable that people insist on claiming that religion is the source of hatred and ignorance while being guilty of those very attitudes themselves.
You think that pointing out that organised religion is similar to a cult, and commenting that I find it creepy, demonstrates hatred?

All I can say is, your experience of anything resembling actual hatred must be very limited. Lucky you.

[JoshBB]

People who believe in something that may not be true. My point was to Josh about the promotion of religion around the world and it not being comparable to the promotion of atheism.

It is comparable though. Religion has beliefs that may be either true or false, just as atheism does. Atheism especially so, considering there is no guidelines for truth and many theories can pop up - many of which will be false.

I am a person who tends to trust science more than religion, but at the same time, science is something that is fluid. Theories change and develop over time. So for that reason, it's wrong to ban religious adverts because you think they are false. You're entitled to that belief, just as everyone else is entitled to think they are true. We live in a multicultural democracy, so respect others beliefs as you respect your own.

[GiRTh]

Not to mention people like terrorists who use religion as justification aren't actually following the religions you know? They're acting against it.

ISIS is not representative of Islam.Right wing evangelical Christians are also not representative of the religion.

[Marsh.]

Right wing evangelical Christians are also not representative of the religion.

Well done.

[Lostie!]

You think that pointing out that organised religion is similar to a cult, and commenting that I find it creepy, demonstrates hatred?

I absolutely do. :thumbs:

All I can say is, your experience of anything resembling actual hatred must be very limited. Lucky you.

Oh, okay then. You evidently know more about my life experiences than I do so I'll take your wise word for it. :hee:

[GiRTh]

It is comparable though. Religion has beliefs that may be either true or false, just as atheism does. Atheism especially so, considering there is no guidelines for truth and many theories can pop up - many of which will be false.

I am a person who tends to trust science more than religion, but at the same time, science is something that is fluid. Theories change and develop over time. So for that reason, it's wrong to ban religious adverts because you think they are false. You're entitled to that belief, just as everyone else is entitled to think they are true. We live in a multicultural democracy, so respect others beliefs as you respect your own.I respect everyone right to faith and if that person given faith is right for them and helps them live their life then religion definitely works but I object to the teaching being given as true to all and the promotion of religion through mainstream media.

[kirklancaster]

so much hate :sad:

:clap1::clap1::clap1: You have hit the nail squarely on the head Doll.face

What is it that these people FEAR so much about someone else's harmless and innocent beliefs, that they rant and rave and attack with such ferocity? And what is it that convinces them so totally that THEY are right and all believers wrong, when NO ONE can PROVE the matter ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?

[GiRTh]

Well done.Why the praise? I;d have thought my comment was so obvious that I'm stunned you didnt also mention other religious fringe groups?

Dont give me sarcasm we're having a decent discussion here.

[JoshBB]

I respect everyone right to faith and if that person given faith is right for them and helps them live their life then religion definitely works but I object to the teaching being given as true to all and the promotion of religion through mainstream media.

'Mainstream media' doesn't promote religion as far as I am aware.. everything is shown from a secular viewpoint, which is how it should be.

[Marsh.]

Why the praise? I;d have thought my comment was so obvious that I'm stunned you didnt also mention other religious fringe groups?

I gave a point and accompanied it with an example.

I didn't realise I'd have to list every person/group in history who have twisted a religion or anything else in this world to suit their own evil ends. I think I'll need a sub forum.

[GiRTh]

'Mainstream media' doesn't promote religion as far as I am aware.. everything is shown from a secular viewpoint, which is how it should be.
Songs of Praise is still on BBC one

[Marsh.]

Dont give me sarcasm we're having a decent discussion here.

I always respond to sarcasm with sarcasm. It's a reflex.

[GiRTh]

I gave a point and accompanied it with an example.

I didn't realise I'd have to list every person/group in history who have twisted a religion or anything else in this world to suit their own evil ends. I think I'll need a sub forum.
Its always a good idea to list more than one if you're making an example.

Shall we both drop the sarcasm? Up to you?

[GiRTh]

I always respond to sarcasm with sarcasm. It's a reflex.
WHen was I being sarcasitc?

[Marsh.]

Songs of Praise is still on BBC one

Songs of praise doesn't promote religion.

In that vein I suppose Eastenders promotes criminality?

[GiRTh]

Songs of praise doesn't promote religion.

In that vein I suppose Eastenders promotes criminality?WHo are they praising?

[JoshBB]

Songs of Praise is still on BBC one

Again, anything religious is shown from a secular viewpoint. They don't 'promote' christianity so to speak, only air the program for those who are interested. I don't see the problem? :shrug:

[Marsh.]

WHo are they praising?

It's a televised mass/hymns for people interested in it. Why shouldn't they be able to have TV shows made for them? TV shows are made for every other section of audience.

[JoshBB]

WHo are they praising?

Loaded question there.. I wouldn't expect an answer.

[GiRTh]

It's a televised mass/hymns for people interested in it. Why shouldn't they be able to have TV shows made for them? TV shows are made for every other section of audience.There are no other Tv programmes made where a persons beliefs are at the centre of the show.

Again, anything religious is shown from a secular viewpoint. They don't 'promote' christianity so to speak, only air the program for those who are interested. I don't see the problem? :shrug:
I suppose its just a coincidence it airs on a Sunday. I'd like to believe what you are saying but I dont agree. I think it is promoting Christianity.

[Kizzy]

[/B]

The same way the Labour Party justifies spending tens of millions on advertising, which COULD be spent on alleviating the hardship and suffering of all those it purports to represent, but the question is frankly ridiculous.

The Christian church DOES carry out numerous and diverse good works of direct charity - from 'soup' kitchens in every town and city to various home and foreign charity projects.

I don't think I've ever seen a Labour Party 'soup' kitchen or any other specific charity projects paid for out of party funds -- which are collected from donations in the same exact manner which church funds are.

Apart from this, what is the difference?

So are you suggesting that as the Labour party spends money on campaigning then they shouldn't advocate aiding those in poverty?
By not mentioning the money spent by the conservatives are you admitting they couldn't care less about anyone in need?...
Not sure why you have chosen to take this topic and apply it to labour in response to my query, this is an ecumenical matter ( I've always wanted to say that)

[Ammi]

..it seems like a perfectly logical thing to me, that some cinemas have decided to not show the ad...Digital Cinema media have a policy to not run any advertising which is connected to personal beliefs, specifically those related to politics or religion because it carries the risk of upsetting or offending cinema audiences...(who have paid quite a bit of money to watch a chosen movie and with online streaming etc..cinemas need more than anything, to keep their audiences..)...I read in the Guardian that there was a lot of negative feedback from cinema goers to both sides being shown in the lead up to the Scottish independence referendum..so that would also I imagine, be something that was highly considered in making this decision...and they do have to consider audiences if considering the screening of anything deemed as controversial, which religion is thought of by many..

[user104658]

:clap1::clap1::clap1: You have hit the nail squarely on the head Doll.face

What is it that these people FEAR so much about someone else's harmless and innocent beliefs, that they rant and rave and attack with such ferocity? And what is it that convinces them so totally that THEY are right and all believers wrong, when NO ONE can PROVE the matter ONE WAY OR THE OTHER?
I quite clearly said Kirk, believe what you want in your own living room but refrain from advertising it on cinema screens. :)

[kirklancaster]

The vast majority of the true hatred in the world is perpetrated in the name of various religions.

What I have is despair, not hatred.

And what I have is despair of HATRED driven by IGNORANCE and RANTED as irrefutable TRUTH.

Despite the claim by Atheists and secular humanists that religion is the number cause of violence and war throughout the history of mankind, it is UTTER FALLACY and B.S.

Of 1,763 wars that have been waged in human history, only 123 - 6.98% - have been fought in the name of Religion. Deduct the 66 wars waged in the name of Islam, and the percentage fals by more than half to 3.23%.

https://carm.org/images/religious-wars-bar-chart.jpg

https://carm.org/images/wars-pie-chart.jpg

Even taking into account the atrocities being perperated right now by IS, NON-RELIGIOUS motivated causes are responsible for nearly all human lives lost at the hands of Fanatics:

Non-Religious Dictator Lives Lost

Joseph Stalin - 42,672,000
Mao Zedong - 37,828,000
Adolf Hitler - 20,946,000
Chiang Kai-shek - 10,214,000
Vladimir Lenin - 4,017,000
Hideki Tojo - 3,990,000
Pol Pot - 2,397,0003

Almost 170 million men, women and children have been shot, beaten, tortured, knifed, burned, starved, frozen, crushed or worked to death; buried alive, drowned, hung, bombed or killed in any other of a myriad of ways governments have inflicted death on unarmed, helpless citizens and foreigners. The dead could conceivably be nearly 360 million people."

Source: 'Lethal Politics and Death by GovernmentR. J. Rummel.

I love unsubstantiated propaganda.

[Ammi]

I quite clearly said Kirk, believe what you want in your own living room but refrain from advertising it on cinema screens. :)

...yep, it's purely a business decision surely..to decide not to show something that could offend the very audience that you're striving for..

[DemolitionRed]

The advert should be allowed imo, along with any other religion that wishes to make an advert - so long as there is nothing political or hateful in it.

It may be worth reminding that we are 'officially' a christian country, although since striving towards being more secular seems to be more popular nowadays.. and that means having all religions (and non-religions) on an equal status, not banning religion from display like france has. That would be state-atheism.

France banned the burka (facial veil) for security reasons. The burka isn't part of the Islamic religion, just something that was added later.

Such an add wouldn't bother me. It would certainly surprise me but that's about it.

I'm not at all religious but enjoy the Christian/Pagan element of Christmas. I also enjoy being amongst the French who tend to be a lot more religious than we are; perhaps it has something to do with a close community spirit that we seem to lack here. I also love the sound of church bells ringing or going to a Christian wedding or christening. Sometimes I even wish I was part of that religion.

Perhaps I'm just a hypocrite :conf:

[Vicky.]

Don't really understand why

But also do not care either way

The less religion rubbish bandied about the better for me.

[kirklancaster]

I quite clearly said Kirk, believe what you want in your own living room but refrain from advertising it on cinema screens. :)

That WAS the original OP subject T.S, but as usual, the thread has descended into 'Religious Bashing' and your posts are greatly responsible and bear little to do with the advertising of The Lord's Prayer in Cinemas.

It is this aspect to which I am rightfully replying. I am firm in MY beliefs and the reasons FOR my beliefs, and I do not try to convert anyone else, nor hold their lack of belief against them, but I fail to understand the hysterical and , vitriolic over-reaction on here to this subject.

Less passionate comments have been made on the IS atrocities threads by some of the very people who are so vitriolic on here about this subject, and it is worrying.

[Cherie]

I find it all a little bit precious, the ad was going to run for a limited time in the lead up to Christmas, people are being shot in the streets, blown up in that air and a major European city is in lockdown but all we have to worry about is how offended we are by a 60 second advert, God help us if we ever do end up in a war situation

[kirklancaster]

France hasn't banned any religion, it banned the burka (facial veil) for security reasons. The burka isn't part of the Islamic religion, just something that was added later.

Such an add wouldn't bother me. It would certainly surprise me but that's about it.

I'm not at all religious but enjoy the Christian/Pagan element of Christmas. I also enjoy being amongst the French who tend to be a lot more religious than we are; perhaps it has something to do with a close community spirit that we seem to lack here. I also love the sound of church bells ringing or going to a Christian wedding or christening. Sometimes I even wish I was part of that religion.

Perhaps I'm just a hypocrite :conf:

Not at all - you are just being human and normal. And I agree with what you write about enjoying the Christian/Pagan element and about the French.

[Johnnyuk123]

See what happens on here when religion is brought up.:joker:

[Kizzy]

I find it all a little bit precious, the ad was going to run for a limited time in the lead up to Christmas, people are being shot in the streets, blown up in that air and a major European city is in lockdown but all we have to worry about is how offended we are by a 60 second advert, God help us if we ever do end up in a war situation

I have a theory... this human fellowship isn't de rigueur atm is it?
Maybe that's the overarching message, we don't want hands around the world...we want to blow the bejesus out of the world.

[Marsh.]

There are no other Tv programmes made where a persons beliefs are at the centre of the show.

Exactly. So they have ONE show. Why not?

[Marsh.]

Its always a good idea to list more than one if you're making an example.

I'll take that advice into consideration in the future, thank you.

But as my previous post stands, it was responding to a post making a general point about "terrorists" and "religion". Two very broad and non specific terms, so providing one example is apt.

[Kazanne]

See what happens on here when religion is brought up.:joker:


No, Johnny,not because religion was brought up,because people can't accept that some people believe in something they don't.

[Cherie]

I have a theory... this human fellowship isn't de rigueur atm is it?
Maybe that's the overarching message, we don't want hands around the world...we want to blow the bejesus out of the world.

Seems like it Kizzy

[Marsh.]

See what happens on here when religion is brought up.:joker:

The joker smileys and the mocking comes out in full force.

I agree johnny, it gets so tiring after a while.

[Cherie]

The joker smileys and the mocking comes out in full force.

I agree johnny, it gets so tiring after a while.

It is extremely tiresome I agree

[GiRTh]

Exactly. So they have ONE show. Why not?So you admit Songs of Praise promotes Christianity?

[Kizzy]

Is that only funny when you're the one posting the mocking smiles marsh? :joker:

[GiRTh]

I'll take that advice into consideration in the future, thank you.
.
No problem. You're welcome :thumbs:

[Marsh.]

Is that only funny when you're the one posting the mocking smiles marsh? :joker:

Oh here she is.

I love the joker smiley. When it's used primarily to come into a thread and mock someone it tends to be against the rules. :thumbs: Glad I could clear that up for you honey.

[Marsh.]

So you admit Songs of Praise promotes Christianity?

No. Broadcasting a television show about Christianity = / = promotion.

As I said earlier, that means all television is about promotion. I suppose Broadchurch promotes child murder?

[GiRTh]

No. Broadcasting a television show about Christianity = / = promotion.

As I said earlier, that means all television is about promotion. I suppose Broadchurch promotes child murder?The show is a full broadcast of a religious ceremony. How is that not a show about Christianity?

[kirklancaster]

So are you suggesting that as the Labour party spends money on campaigning then they shouldn't advocate aiding those in poverty?
By not mentioning the money spent by the conservatives are you admitting they couldn't care less about anyone in need?...
Not sure why you have chosen to take this topic and apply it to labour in response to my query, this is an ecumenical matter ( I've always wanted to say that)

Look, I really do not want to be dragged into futile argument with you again, or suffer further warnings and infractions as a result, but you are 'moving the goalposts' again, and I surely have a right to answer you.

No I am NOT suggesting that; "as the Labour party spends money on campaigning then they shouldn't advocate aiding those in poverty" and NOWHERE in my response to your post do I state ANYTHING which could cause any reasonable person to educe that.

I NEVER mentioned anything about 'the Labour Party advocating aiding those in poverty' or otherwise. SHOW ME WHERE I used any of those words or anything REMOTELY like them.

I DID NOT.

I was specifically responding to the question you posed in your post which I reproduce here:

"I wonder how much the production and ad time that message cost...
It begs the question with all the social inequality,suffering and need both in the UK and worldwide how is this spend justified?"


Which means to me, that you were criticising the Christian Church and saying they could not justify spending that money on advertising when there was "so much social inequality,suffering and need both in the UK and worldwide".

Now, I am a well advertised Christian, and you are a well advertised Labour supporter, so I simply answered your - pretty obviously rhetorical - question based on these two facts - which is why I confined my remarks to the Labour Party and no other parties. Here is my post in its entirety:

"The same way the Labour Party justifies spending tens of millions on advertising, which COULD be spent on alleviating the hardship and suffering of all those it purports to represent, but the question is frankly ridiculous.

The Christian church DOES carry out numerous and diverse good works of direct charity - from 'soup' kitchens in every town and city to various home and foreign charity projects.

I don't think I've ever seen a Labour Party 'soup' kitchen or any other specific charity projects paid for out of party funds -- which are collected from donations in the same exact manner which church funds are.

Apart from this, what is the difference?"

Now if you re-read my post you will see it is quite lucidly written and nowhere does it justify ANY of your summisations above. NOWHERE.

[Marsh.]

The show is a full broadcast of a religious ceremony. How is that not a show about Christianity?

I never said it wasn't a show ABOUT christianity.

That's not promotion.

We also have shows about property buying and about music and about politics and about almost everything else in the world. Television has one television show that features a church and hymns and suddenly it's a huge trailer to lure people into a cult?

[GiRTh]

I never said it wasn't a show ABOUT christianity.

That's not promotion.

We also have shows about property buying and about music and about politics and about almost everything else in the world. Television has one television show that features a church and hymns and suddenly it's a huge trailer to lure people into a cult?Thats not what you said your previous post.

The other shows mentioned all give counter coverage to the topics they promote. They are not just a celebration of a ceremony.

[Tom4784]

The ad isnt too bad but IMO right decision to ban it, imagine the outcry if it was a similar ad promoting Islam. We must not advertise religion. None of them. If you want reigion then go and find it. Isnt that the whole point of religion? That you find your spirituality and not that you saw an ad at your local cinema.

Very true, if it was Islam there'd be petitions and people screaming bloody murder. It's Christianity though so that's okay for some reason.

Religion has no place in advertising.

[Marsh.]

Thats not what you said your previous post.

That's EXACTLY what I said in my previous post...

No. Broadcasting a television show about Christianity = / = promotion.

A show simply being about something does not automatically make it "promotion".

The other shows mentioned all give counter coverage to the topics they promote. They are not just a celebration of a ceremony.

Do they? "Adele at the BBC" featured sections dedicated to other available music to buy did it?

What "counter coverage" would you have Songs of Praise feature? A lecture by an atheist about why they don't follow Christianity? :conf: What would that achieve. The show is made FOR Christians. Are they not allowed to have a show for them to enjoy?

[Kizzy]

Oh here she is.

I love the joker smiley. When it's used primarily to come into a thread and mock someone it tends to be against the rules. :thumbs: Glad I could clear that up for you honey.

Oh here you are..... I was the first to comment on the thread honey.
I'll be sure to bear that in mind should anyone need that advice on SD :thumbs:

[Marsh.]

Oh here you are..... I was the first to comment on the thread honey.
I'll be sure to bear that in mind should anyone need that advice on SD :thumbs:

Were you? That's nice. My point was more that you only ever seem to reply to me when you want to be pedantic or snide. :thumbs:

[kirklancaster]

There are no other Tv programmes made where a persons beliefs are at the centre of the show.


I suppose its just a coincidence it airs on a Sunday. I'd like to believe what you are saying but I dont agree. I think it is promoting Christianity.

How is it PROMOTING' Christianity? It is providing a TV program for Christians - in the same fashion that Football matches are screened for football fans or Soaps are screened for soap fans or Question Time and Andrew Marr are screened for those interested in politics.

Further; what is so wrong if a program DID promote Christianity in a STILL predominantly Christian country?

We are not under the Great Caliphate yet.

[kirklancaster]

Were you? That's nice. My point was more that you only ever seem to reply to me when you want to be pedantic or snide. :thumbs:

NO!!! I WON'T HAVE THAT - there's me as well. :laugh:

[Ninastar]

take em down marsh!!!!

[GiRTh]

That's EXACTLY what I said in my previous post...
Then you proceed to contradict your own quote . I'm confused by your stance. TBH

Do they? "Adele at the BBC" featured sections dedicated to other available music to buy did it?Of course it didn't but you mentioned music, that is not the only music program on TV and when was the last time a show like that was on? Not the best example. I see you didnt take my advice to heart and only listed one example.

[GiRTh]

Further; what is so wrong if a program DID promote Christianity in a STILL predominantly Christian country?

We are not under the Great Caliphate yet.OK. :thumbs:

[Marsh.]

Then you proceed to contradict your own quote . I'm confused by your stance. TBH

I didn't contradict. SOP is about Christianity but is not promoting it.

In the same way Crimewatch is about crime but is not promoting it.

Very simple.


Of course it didn't but you mentioned music, that is not the only music program on TV

No it isn't. I don't see your point?
TV is filled with science based documentaries/shows that don't follow any religious/christian ideology and discuss things from scientific viewpoints.

Or do you require a TV show that is SPECIFICALLY and obviously anti-Christian to address the balance of Songs of Praise's shameless promotion?

[kirklancaster]

I have a theory... this human fellowship isn't de rigueur atm is it?
Maybe that's the overarching message, we don't want hands around the world...we want to blow the bejesus out of the world.

No - 'This Human Fellowship is not De Rigeur' among the Islamic terrorists.

And NO again - 'WE' do not 'WANT' to blow anyone up - that is a 'NEED' forced upon us by the said Islamic murdering bastard terrorists.

Read a little dear. Watch more TV news progs.

[Niamh.]

What's with the "dears" and "honeys"? all very condescending :nono:

[GiRTh]

I didn't contradict. SOP is about Christianity but is not promoting it.

In the same way Crimewatch is about crime but is not promoting it.

Very simple. Lets go over this again as I say I'm confused by your stance. Is SOP a broadcast of a religious ceremony? How is that not promoting that religion?

No it isn't. I don't see your point?
TV is filled with science based documentaries/shows that don't follow any religious/christian ideology.

Or do you require a TV show that SPECIFICALLY and obviously anti-Christian to address the balance of Songs of Praise's shameless promotion?No. I require no religious programming of any kind. That was the point I made in my very first post in this thread.

[Marsh.]

Lets go over this again as I say I'm confused by your stance. Is SOP a broadcast of a religious ceremony? How is that not promoting that religion?

Because it's broadcasting a ceremony FOR Christians.

Anyone who is not a Christian or religious of any kind would likely not understand the majority of the mass and its meaning.

If it was means of advertising the religion in order to try and convert people to Christianity it would take a very different form.

[Tom4784]

I didn't contradict. SOP is about Christianity but is not promoting it.

In the same way Crimewatch is about crime but is not promoting it.

Very simple.



No it isn't. I don't see your point?
TV is filled with science based documentaries/shows that don't follow any religious/christian ideology and discuss things from scientific viewpoints.

Or do you require a TV show that is SPECIFICALLY and obviously anti-Christian to address the balance of Songs of Praise's shameless promotion?

I don't think you can compare Science shows to religion based shows. Science is based on facts, it's tangible and real. Religion is indoctrination. You can decide not to believe in Science but it exists regardless and is a vital part of our existence.

[GiRTh]

Because it's broadcasting a ceremony FOR Christians.

Anyone who is not a Christian or religious of any kind would likely not understand the majority of the mass and its meaning.

If it was means of advertising the religion in order to try and convert people it would take a very different form.Here is where we have to respectfully agree to disagree. I think it is a promotion of that religion and I dont want to see any kind of religious programming on my screen.

[Marsh.]

I don't think you can compare Science shows to religion based shows. Science is based on facts, it's tangible and real. Religion is indoctrination. You can decide not to believe in Science but it exists regardless and is a vital part of our existence.

But that's not the point being made in my post?

I'm talking about the balance of religious and science based shows on television. Regardless of how one feels about either, it's hardly as though the BBC are promoting Christianity and not providing any programming which may contradict Christian teachings within science or other based shows is it?

[Marsh.]

Here is where we have to respectfully agree to disagree. I think it is a promotion of that religion and I dont want to see any kind of religious programming on my screen.

How many times have you sat and watched Songs of Praise, out of interest?

I don't wish to see any kind of scripted reality programming on my television, so I simply do not put those programmes on. I have that freedom of choice. Leaving those who do like it to enjoy it at their will.

Why should Christians not be able to have such shows on TV simply because some people don't want to watch it?

[GiRTh]

How many times have you sat and watched Songs of Praise, out of interest?I went to Sunday School till I was sixteen and my parents are quite religious. So more times than you think.

[GiRTh]

Why should Christians not be able to have such shows on TV simply because some people don't want to watch it?Why stop at Christians. Lets show all religious ceremonies on their respective Sabbaths or you don't show any.

[Kizzy]

Look, I really do not want to be dragged into futile argument with you again, or suffer further warnings and infractions as a result, but you are 'moving the goalposts' again, and I surely have a right to answer you.

No I am NOT suggesting that; "as the Labour party spends money on campaigning then they shouldn't advocate aiding those in poverty" and NOWHERE in my response to your post do I state ANYTHING which could cause any reasonable person to educe that.

I NEVER mentioned anything about 'the Labour Party advocating aiding those in poverty' or otherwise. SHOW ME WHERE I used any of those words or anything REMOTELY like them.

I DID NOT.

I was specifically responding to the question you posed in your post which I reproduce here:

"I wonder how much the production and ad time that message cost...
It begs the question with all the social inequality,suffering and need both in the UK and worldwide how is this spend justified?"


Which means to me, that you were criticising the Christian Church and saying they could not justify spending that money on advertising when there was "so much social inequality,suffering and need both in the UK and worldwide".

Now, I am a well advertised Christian, and you are a well advertised Labour supporter, so I simply answered your - pretty obviously rhetorical - question based on these two facts - which is why I confined my remarks to the Labour Party and no other parties. Here is my post in its entirety:

"The same way the Labour Party justifies spending tens of millions on advertising, which COULD be spent on alleviating the hardship and suffering of all those it purports to represent, but the question is frankly ridiculous.

The Christian church DOES carry out numerous and diverse good works of direct charity - from 'soup' kitchens in every town and city to various home and foreign charity projects.

I don't think I've ever seen a Labour Party 'soup' kitchen or any other specific charity projects paid for out of party funds -- which are collected from donations in the same exact manner which church funds are.

Apart from this, what is the difference?"

Now if you re-read my post you will see it is quite lucidly written and nowhere does it justify ANY of your summisations above. NOWHERE.

'I am a well advertised Christian, and you are a well advertised Labour supporter,'

So what.... I posed the question simply reapplying it to Labour does not answer me does it?
Can you compare a religious group to a political party too in fairness, what is it that makes them comparable?

[kirklancaster]

How many times have you sat and watched Songs of Praise, out of interest?

I don't wish to see any kind of scripted reality programming on my television, so I simply do not put those programmes on. I have that freedom of choice. Leaving those who do like it to enjoy it at their will.

Why should Christians not be able to have such shows on TV simply because some people don't want to watch it?

:clap1::clap1::clap1: No more to be said really Marsh and neither you nor Girth are ever going to agree, so better off scooting (as I'm now doing :laugh:) before this thread turns vinegar.

[Marsh.]

Why stop at Christians. Lets show all religious ceremonies on their respective Sabbaths or you don't show any.

Why all or nothing?

Are you operating under the assumption that they allow Songs of Praise but any other religions are banned?

Ask them why those places of worship don't film their own show.

The likeliest answer is probably that Christianity is the predominant religion of this country and shows about other religions would likely not have as many followers who would want to watch it in the UK.

[kirklancaster]

'I am a well advertised Christian, and you are a well advertised Labour supporter,'

So what.... I posed the question simply reapplying it to Labour does not answer me does it?
Can you compare a religious group to a political party too in fairness, what is it that makes them comparable?

:facepalm: I think my posts are clear. Bye.

[Marsh.]

I went to Sunday School till I was sixteen and my parents are quite religious. So more times than you think.

So you think broadcasting a choir singing hymns is akin to an infomercial asking for new followers? :laugh:

[GiRTh]

Why all or nothing?

Are you operating under the assumption that they allow Songs of Praise but any other religions are banned? Neither me or you know but I would imagine they could show other religious shows but I'd imagine there being some opposition to certain religious ceremonies being shown

Ask them why those places of worship don't film their own show.

The likeliest answer is probably that Christianity is the predominant religion of this country and shows about other religions would likely not have as many followers who would want to watch it in the UK.And heres why.

[Tom4784]

But that's not the point being made in my post?

I'm talking about the balance of religious and science based shows on television. Regardless of how one feels about either, it's hardly as though the BBC are promoting Christianity and not providing any programming which may contradict Christian teachings within science or other based shows is it?

I'm just taking issue with the idea of the balance between the two. It never made much sense to me.

[GiRTh]

So you think broadcasting a choir singing hymns is akin to an infomercial asking for new followers? :laugh:I've no idea how you got that from my post. :shrug:

[Kizzy]

Were you? That's nice. My point was more that you only ever seem to reply to me when you want to be pedantic or snide. :thumbs:

Not at all, I don't appreciate of being accused of being pedantic or snide for pointing out a double standard.... you have yourself used smiles in the way you objected to, you're doing it now.

[Marsh.]

I'm just taking issue with the idea of the balance between the two. It never made much sense to me.

There isn't. But IMO there doesn't need to be.

[Marsh.]

Not at all, I don't appreciate of being accused of being pedantic or snide for pointing out a double standard.... you have yourself used smiles in the way you objected to, you're doing it now.

I'm not getting into another debate with you about assumptions made about what people post. It's repetitive and it's tiring.

You posted a thumb smiley and me responding with one is suddenly off limits? Ok Kizzy.

[Kizzy]

:facepalm: I think my posts are clear. Bye.

You're using the fact I'm a Labour supporter as a stick to beat me with, a political party can't be compared to a religion, it's really that simple.

[Marsh.]

I've no idea how you got that from my post. :shrug:

Well if Songs of Praise is promoting Christianity then the link is obvious? Why else would it be promoted?

[Marsh.]

Neither me or you know but I would imagine they could show other religious shows but I'd imagine there being some opposition to certain religious ceremonies being shown

And heres why.

Personally, I don't think there'd be any opposition apart from extremists who don't represent the majority.

Not making a show because there's no audience for it is not really the same thing.

[GiRTh]

Well if Songs of Praise is promoting Christianity then the link is obvious? Why else would it be promoted?The post you quoted was about how often I watched SOP. I'm certain SOP is no ratings winner :shrug:

[Kizzy]

I'm not getting into another debate with you about assumptions made about what people post. It's repetitive and it's tiring.

You posted a thumb smiley and me responding with one is suddenly off limits? Ok Kizzy.

You posted the thumbs smile, I responded back with it to reinforce my point is all Marsh.

[Marsh.]

The post you quoted was about how often I watched SOP. I'm certain SOP is no ratings winner :shrug:

Yes, because I asked you how much of it you had watched to come to your views about how Songs of Praise is promo for Christianity.

I take it that it was your own viewing of the programme that led you to your conclusion? Therefore I was questioning what it was about the show that fell into "promotion".

I never said it was a "ratings winner" but it clearly has a loyal audience of Christians in this predominantly Christian country. Will there be many viewers for a show broadcasting a Buddhist mass in the UK, as an example? Doubtful.

[GiRTh]

Personally, I don't think there'd be any opposition apart from extremists who don't represent the majority.

Not making a show because there's no audience for it is not really the same thing.I think if they moved SOP to say Wednesday night after the football highlights as opposed to Sunday there would be a huge outcry. I think there is a reasons why the show comes on a Sunday at about the same time as most churches do evening mass

[Marsh.]

You posted the thumbs smile, I responded back with it to reinforce my point is all Marsh.

Right, which is entirely different to the comment I made about Johnny's use of the joker.

I'm sticking to the topic in my debate with Girth so I'll leave this off topic conversation here.

[Johnnyuk123]

No, Johnny,not because religion was brought up,because people can't accept that some people believe in something they don't.

Well for me personally i am all for people believing in whatever it is that they want to believe in Kaz. I have no problem with any of it. The OP was stating their own preference on that video clip. Some agreed with it and some didn't agree but just because people hold different points of view to one another it should not get in the way of their friendship especially on here etc.
Live and let live...

I've been on the other end of it simply for being an athiest.:joker: Let me explain...
Many religious people in my experience of them hold the belief that athiests hate religion with a vengance. This is simply not true. Being athiest is a lack of belief of any religion. So you cannot actually hate someone or something that you don't believe existed in the first place.
I've seen many things on this forum about athiests not having a purpose in life or that they don't believe in anything at all. I've even had people of faith offer to pray for me! lol Silly i know but people take that path when the reality for me here as an athiest is that i am living right now in this world in realtime. I also believe that i have real purpose in my life and yes i do not pray or believe in any gods. I do not ask for their permission to be a good person through prayer. I can be and am a good person without it as are many others. I also don't feel the need to sit in anykind of church to feel loved either cos i have that in abundance from my family and friends all around me and especially from those two cute little dogs that i walk in the park. :wavey:

[GiRTh]

Yes, because I asked you how much of it you had watched to come to your views about how Songs of Praise is promo for Christianity. I didnt need to watch too much to conclude that a broadcast of a religious ceremony was a celebration of Christianity.

I take it that it was your own viewing of the programme that led you to your conclusion? Therefore I was questioning what it was about the show that fell into "promotion". The fact that it was a Christian ceremony.

I never said it was a "ratings winner" but it clearly has a loyal audience of Christians in this predominantly Christian country. Will there be many viewers for a show broadcasting a Buddhist mass in the UK, as an example? Doubtful.I also doubt there are many Buddhists who converted after watching an advert in a cinema.

If you want religion go and find it. I dont think people should expect any religious coverage on Tv or in cinemas.

[Marsh.]

I didnt need to watch too much to conclude that a broadcast of a religious ceremony was a celebration of Christianity.

The fact that it was a Christian ceremony.

I also doubt there are too many Buddhists who converted after watching an advert in a cinema.

An advert being entirely different to a "celebration of christianity".

The advert posted in the OP for commercial purposes is entirely different to a programme intended to be about christianity.

People tend to know what Songs of Praise is about so either are interested, watch it or don't bother with it. If its purpose is promotion then it's failed.

If its purpose is to provide a once a week show for people who enjoy it then it's done great for the last 54 years.

[Marsh.]

If you want religion go and find it. I dont think people should expect any religious coverage on Tv or in cinemas.

In that vein, if people want to enjoy a murder mystery they should go and find it. Why should it be covered on TV or in cinemas for people to choose to enjoy it?

Again, I always thought religious people were the intolerant ones. :think:

[GiRTh]

An advert being entirely different to a "celebration of christianity".

The advert posted in the OP for commercial purposes is entirely different to a programme intended to be about christianity.

People tend to know what Songs of Praise is about so either are interested, watch it or don't bother with it. If its purpose is promotion then it's failed.

If its purpose is to provide a once a week show for people who enjoy it then it's done great for the last 54 years.
A celebration of a belief system is promotion of that belief system IMO

[Marsh.]

A celebration of a belief system is promotion of that belief system IMO

Well, we'll agree to disagree. :laugh:

However, if you believe that, it wouldn't even be intrusive promotion like the cinema ad proposed in the OP. So, what's wrong with it?

People still have the choice to watch it or not. SOP is not forced on anyone.

[GiRTh]

In that vein, if people want to enjoy a murder mystery they should go and find it. Why should it be covered on TV or in cinemas for people to choose to enjoy it?

Again, I always thought religious people were the intolerant ones. :think:We're now right back to where we started. Murder mystery is definitely fiction and is never promoted as true, religious teachings are promoted as true.

[Marsh.]

We're now right back to where we started. Murder mystery is definitely fiction and is never promoted as true, religious teachings are promoted as true.

Yeah, I'm always seeing trailers on BBC One advertising the "truth" on SOP every Sunday. Telling everyone who thinks any differently they are wrong.

Oh wait, they don't. :laugh:

[GiRTh]

Yeah, I'm always seeing trailers on BBC One advertising the "truth" on SOP every Sunday. Telling everyone who thinks any differently they are wrong.

Oh wait, they don't. :laugh:Again, not sure how you got there :shrug:

[GiRTh]

Well, we'll agree to disagree. :laugh:

However, if you believe that, it wouldn't even be intrusive promotion like the cinema ad proposed in the OP. So, what's wrong with it?

People still have the choice to watch it or not. SOP is not forced on anyone.It kind of is, as its on terrestial TV in a decent spot.

[Marsh.]

Again, not sure how you got there :shrug:

Songs of Praise is promoting Christianity as true and real? :conf:

[Kazanne]

It kind of is, as its on terrestial TV in a decent spot.

I don't agree with that,there are hundreds of TV channels,plus a off and on switch,so how is that anyway 'forced'?

[Marsh.]

It kind of is, as its on terrestial TV in a decent spot.

Because the only option for anyone to do at 4pm on a Sunday is watch BBC One?

When they could watch any of the hundreds of other channels or take part in anything in their life that may not involve television? :laugh:

I suppose Eastenders being given a decent spot four times a week is forcing people to watch soap operas too?

[GiRTh]

Songs of Praise is promoting Christianity as true and real? :conf::shrug: You made the Murder Mystery analogy. :conf:

[Marsh.]

:shrug: You made the Murder Mystery analogy. :conf:

Right, because murder mystery shows don't preach to people who don't enjoy them anymore than Songs of Praise focuses on advertising themselves to non believers.

Both types of programmes tend to focus on people who already enjoy it.

"Preaching to the converted" I think they call it. :laugh:

[GiRTh]

Because the only option for anyone to do at 4pm on a Sunday is watch BBC One?

When they could watch any of the hundreds of other channels or take part in anything in their life that may not involve television? :laugh:

I suppose Eastenders being given a decent spot four times a week is forcing people to watch soap operas too?People have loads of options but on the main terrestrial channels at around the time of evening mass is a religious ceremony. I'm sure its just a a coincidence.

[Marsh.]

People have loads of options but on the main terrestrial channels at around the time of evening mass is a religious ceremony. I'm sure its just a a coincidence.

A religious mass broadcast at the actual time a religious mass would be taking place? Surely not? :laugh:

But, I still don't see what that's got to do with it? Many shows covering many subjects have regular prime slots in the TV schedules. Why single this show out?

If any person of a different religion or an atheist finds their Sundays spoiled by watching Songs of Praise every week then they have no one but themselves to blame. TURN IT OFF. Free will and all that. :laugh:

[Kizzy]

Right, which is entirely different to the comment I made about Johnny's use of the joker.

I'm sticking to the topic in my debate with Girth so I'll leave this off topic conversation here.

Different, him using a joker to make a point and you using thumbs to mock me?
I see your point.

[Marsh.]

Different, him using a joker to make a point and you using thumbs to mock me?
I see your point.

I didn't use the thumbs to mock you.

But as I said I have no interest in entering yet another debate about the way in which you have interpreted my posts. That's your problem, not mine.

[GiRTh]

anymore than Songs of Praise focuses on advertising themselves to non believers. Both types of programmes tend to focus on people who already enjoy it.
Again I think we will have to agree to disagree. It not in your face marketing but as I've said before there is a reason why its on at about the same time as evening mass.

[Marsh.]

Again I think we will have to agree to disagree. It not in your face marketing but as I've said before there is a reason why its on at about the same time as evening mass.

Would you like to elaborate on this reason?

[Kizzy]

I didn't use the thumbs to mock you.

But as I said I have no interest in entering yet another debate about the way in which you have interpreted my posts. That's your problem, not mine.

You accused him of mocking and they balk at someone accusing you?
That's a bit rich.
How can you act so shocked at me interpreting your comments the way I have when you insist on using the most mocking smiles to reinforce whatever you say?

[GiRTh]

Would you like to elaborate on this reason?Why not broadcast it on a different day when it was easier to miss?

[Marsh.]

You accused him of mocking and they balk at someone accusing you?
That's a bit rich.

It's not rich at all. Johnny had every right to respond to me and refute my accusation, just like I did with yours.

Is that all kizzy or can I get back to the topic?

[GiRTh]

I don't agree with that,there are hundreds of TV channels,plus a off and on switch,so how is that anyway 'forced'?Its on the countires main channel for entertainment.

[Marsh.]

Why not broadcast it on a different day when it was easier to miss.

Easier for you to miss? :laugh: Do you assume the whole country has no other option but to watch BBC 1 at 4pm on a Sunday?

Personally, I've seen about 5 minutes of Songs of Praise within the last 10 years that I can remember when I visited my nan briefly one Sunday afternoon. And even then it was what she'd recorded. I don't force myself to watch things I'm not interested in, goodness knows why the rest of the population are struggling with that.

Why would it be broadcast on a different day? That's like asking why X Factor doesn't air on Mondays or The Queen's Speech/Christmas Mass airs on a day OTHER than Christmas. Kind of pointless really.

[Johnnyuk123]

It's not rich at all. Johnny had every right to respond to me and refute my accusation, just like I did with yours.

Is that all kizzy or can I get back to the topic?

Respond to what? :shrug: what have i missed?

[Kizzy]

It's not rich at all. Johnny had every right to respond to me and refute my accusation, just like I did with yours.

Is that all kizzy or can I get back to the topic?

He did, just as you refute mine, I feel your smiles mock sometimes like today, I hear you disagree but I still feel the same.
I'm not keeping you from responding to the topic.

[GiRTh]

Why would it be broadcast on a different day? That's like asking why X Factor doesn't air on Mondays or The Queen's Speech/Christmas Mass airs on a day OTHER than Christmas. Kind of pointless really.The Queens speech is broadcast at Xmas cuz it the Xmas Queens speech, The one on her birthday is broadcast, amazingly, on her birthday. As for X factor? What? It cannot be a coincidence that SOP is broadcast on the Sabbath day for that religion but apparently its still not a show promoting Christianity.

I think we're going over the same ground again and again here. If you want to continue then by all means but I propose we agree to disagree. :thumbs:

[Marsh.]

He did, just as you refute mine

No he didn't. He hasn't made one response to me and just posted to say he has no idea what we're talking about.

But that's between me and him.

[Marsh.]

The Queens speech is broadcast at Xmas cuz it the Xmas Queens speech, The one on her birthday is broadcast, amazingly, on her birthday. As for X factor? What? It cannot be a coincidence that SOP is broadcast on the Sabbath day for that religion but apparently its still not a show promoting Christianity.

I think we're going over the same ground again and again here. If you want to continue the by all means but I propose we agree to disagree. :thumbs:

So the Queen's Christmas speech is unsurprisingly broadcast at Christmas but a show broadcasting Sunday Mass being broadcast ON A SUNDAY is a problem? Ok. Masses in churches take place throughout the week and Sunday masses vary from very early in the morning to way into the evening within different parishes so no matter when it's broadcast it would coincide with something on the church's schedule. Ie. they can't win.

Meanwhile, everyone else either watches it or does something else.

[GiRTh]

So the Queen's Christmas speech is unsurprisingly broadcast a Christmas but a show broadcasting Sunday Mass being broadcast ON A SUNDAY is a problem? Ok.

Meanwhile, everyone else either watches it or does something else.
The discussion was whether it promotes Christianity. The fact it airs on the Sabbath is one reason why.

[bots]

The BBC is a public broadcast channel. This country is a Christian country. I don't see a problem with SoP being broadcast, its not like an advert forced before a film, which is my gripe with the cinema example.

Many older people who would visit church and now cannot get out rely on such public broadcasting.

[Marsh.]

The discussion was whether it promotes Christianity. The fact it airs on the Sabbath is one reason why.

So if they aired it at 4pm on a Friday it suddenly is not promotion?

Ok.

[GiRTh]

So if they aired it at 4pm on a Friday it suddenly is not promotion?

Ok.It would lend weight to your argument.

[Marsh.]

The discussion was whether it promotes Christianity. The fact it airs on the Sabbath is one reason why.

The discussion also turned to how much it can be said this programming is "forced" on the viewing audience.

[Marsh.]

It would lend weight to your argument.

No it wouldn't. Churches hold masses throughout the week.

So no doubt if they aired on a Wednesday you'd accuse them of promoting Benediction?

[GiRTh]

The discussion also turned to how much it can be said this programming is "forced" on the viewing audience.To which I said it kind of is. Do I need to explain kind of? after all as you said its not on 4pm on a Friday it airs on the Sabbath.

[Marsh.]

To which I said it kind of is. Do I need to explain kind of? after all as you said its not on 4pm on a Friday it airs on the Sabbath.

Hence me explaining how the scheduling works when you told me we're discussing whether it's promotion. I was explaining how my post on scheduling fit into our discussion.

[GiRTh]

No it wouldn't. Churches hold masses throughout the week.

So no doubt if they aired on a Wednesday you'd accuse them of promoting Benediction?No churches near me hold masses in the week that anyone turns up to.

[Marsh.]

No churches near me hold masses in the week that anyone turns up to.

Hardly anyone turns up to Sunday mass in the church closest to where I live.

But that's not really the point.

[GiRTh]

Hence me explaining how the scheduling works when you told me we're discussing whether it's promotion. I was explaining how my post on scheduling fit into our discussion.I see you've changed the post.

[GiRTh]

Hardly anyone turns up to Sunday mass in the church closest to where I live.
.Its a good job there's a TV show that can help them out.

[Marsh.]

Isee you've changed the post.

I haven't changed it. I added another sentence to it not long after posting. The part you quoted is still in there.

[GiRTh]

I haven't changed it. I added another sentence to it not long after posting.OK

[Marsh.]

Its a good job there's a TV show that can help them out.

Yeah, clearly all that free promo the BBC gives them is working wonders.

[GiRTh]

Yeah, clearly all that free promo the BBC gives them is working wonders.any promo is better than none.

[Johnnyuk123]

I'd have asked for my money back and simply gone to another theatre that were not showing it. Problem solved.:cheer2:

[Johnnyuk123]

What movie was it that was being shown?

[Cherie]

What movie was it that was being shown?

Star Wars ...the irony :joker:

[Johnnyuk123]

Star Wars ...the irony :joker:

Really? all this because of Star Wars? :joker:

[Marsh.]

Star Wars ...the irony :joker:

Wasn't the ad first starting to be shown during a screening of Star Wars?

I doubt it was made for Star Wars viewings only. :laugh:

[Kizzy]

Yes, I'm aware. I didn't need the recap.

I also don't have a problem with posting smilies. That's not what I said. Context is everything.

Yeah, I don't know why I'm shrugging either. Something about this off topic discussion is boring me I think.

You did insist I explain.
On topic the 10pm news glossed over it a little I thought.

[Marsh.]

I'd have asked for my money back and simply gone to another theatre that were not showing it. Problem solved.:cheer2:

You'd have gone to the trouble of leaving the screen, getting a refund and travelling to a new theatre because of one advert that is over before you even have a chance to stand up?

[Cherie]

Wasn't the ad first starting to be shown during a screening of Star Wars?

I doubt it was made for Star Wars viewings only. :laugh:

Well yes that is what i meant :hmph:

[Johnnyuk123]

You'd have gone to the trouble of leaving the screen, getting a refund and travelling to a new theatre because of one advert that is over before you even have a chance to stand up?

Yes i would have. I didn't pay to see that. Simple choice. Go somewhere else.

[Marsh.]

Yes i would have. I didn't pay to see that. Simple choice. Go somewhere else.

I'm sure you didn't pay specifically to see any of the adverts that hit the screen before a movie begins.

But, oh no, a priest and the word "God" OH MY.

[Johnnyuk123]

I'm sure you didn't pay specifically to see any of the adverts that hit the screen before a movie begins.

But, oh no, a priest and the word "God" OH MY.

The topic is specifically about that movie advert being played in the cinema. Usually other adverts are showing new movies to checkout.
:joker: No Athiests don't even do the.. Oh No thing when the word (god) pops up. It's impossible for athiest to do that because they don't believe in any religion/gods at all. To me they don't exist so we don't even have hate towards something that to us simply does not exsist. So it's not something that i want to see on my movie screen before the main film after having paid good money to see that specific film. So no.

[Kizzy]

I don't mind it as such, but yet if everyone had to sit through several religious/political infomercials and it's not the first time a decision has been made like this...

Cinemas in Scotland are to stop showing adverts from both sides of the referendum campaign following complaints from customers.
Both the "Yes" and "No" campaigns have been running high-profile adverts in cinemas over the past month.
Vue cinemas said it had decided to drop the ads from 5 June onwards following "customer feedback".
Other major cinema chains, including Odeon and Cineworld, will follow suit.
The independent Glasgow Film Theatre (GFT) has already stopped running referendum adverts, after film fans told cinema managers they wanted to "retreat from the real world"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27602601

[Kizzy]

'Forget the glitzy PR campaigns, how about some action?
A rabbi and an imam walk into a kitchen and each picks up a knife. It sounds the like the start of a bad standup routine. In fact, it was leaders of British Jews and Muslims joining forces to help prepare a meal for the homeless and hungry as part of a nationwide day of social action on Sunday.

Up to 40,000 people took part in Mitzvah Day, organised by the Jewish community in hundreds of synagogues and schools around the country, and involving volunteers from neighbouring mosques and churches. Mitzvah literally means commandment, but is generally interpreted as good deed.

The chief rabbi, Ephraim Mirvis, and imam Ibrahim Mogra, assistant general secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain, peeled and chopped vegetables in the chaotic kitchen of Edgware United synagogue in north-west London. Amid vats of potatoes, piles of apple skin and eggshells, dozens of volunteers – including the Labour MP Luciana Berger – worked to create a three-course meal for the nearby Barnet Winter Shelter.'

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/nov/22/mitzvah-day-jewish-muslim-leaders-kitchen

[Marsh.]

[/B]

The topic is specifically about that movie advert being played in the cinema. Usually other adverts are showing new movies to checkout.
:joker: No Athiests don't even do the.. Oh No thing when the word (god) pops up. It's impossible for athiest to do that because they don't believe in any religion/gods at all. To me they don't exist so we don't even have hate towards something that to us simply does not exsist. So it's not something that i want to see on my movie screen before the main film after having paid good money to see that specific film. So no.

So you go to the trouble over leaving a screening of a movie, demanding a refund and going to another cinema over a 50 second advert because you are indifferent towards it? Ok.

I never said atheists do or don't say anything in regards to "Oh my god" or any other phrase.

Adverts shown before a movie in a cinema include a batch of trailers for other movies AND a bunch of product/service adverts. So, if adverts not relating to movies is a problem you have then it's a wonder you don't walk out before every film you go to see at the cinema.

[Kizzy]

'The Church of England has received unlikely backing from the biologist and prominent atheist Richard Dawkins after the UK’s three leading cinema chains refused to screen its advert featuring the Lord’s Prayer.

The 60-second advert was due to be shown before Star Wars: the Force Awakens, released on 18 December, which would have guaranteed it a huge cinema audience in the run-up to Christmas.

But the Odeon Cineworld and Vue chains, which control 80% of screens around the country, have refused to allow it because of a policy not to allow political or religious advertising.

The decision prompted an angry response from the church, which warned of a chilling effect on free speech. Many expressed support for its position including Dawkins, the evolutionary biologist best known for excoriating religions.'

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/22/richard-dawkins-says-uk-cinemas-should-screen-the-lords-prayer

[Mitchell]

Religion should be something that people themselves can have their own say on in their own time when they're older (I personally don't believe in allocating a child a religion, I feel it should be up to the child in later life what they identify with rather than it being shoved down their throats), anyway, shouldn't the Church of England use their funds for something more worthwhile than trying to hire out ad space during Star Wars?

[Johnnyuk123]

So you go to the trouble over leaving a screening of a movie, demanding a refund and going to another cinema over a 50 second advert because you are indifferent towards it? Ok.

I never said atheists do or don't say anything in regards to "Oh my god" or any other phrase.

Adverts shown before a movie in a cinema include a batch of trailers for other movies AND a bunch of product/service adverts. So, if adverts not relating to movies is a problem you have then it's a wonder you don't walk out before every film you go to see at the cinema.

It's no trouble at all.:wavey:

[lostalex]

The theaters are right. The lord's prayer is not appropriate to a secular audience.

[kirklancaster]

You're using the fact I'm a Labour supporter as a stick to beat me with, a political party can't be compared to a religion, it's really that simple.

:facepalm:

NO - YOU were using the fact that the Church spent money on this advertising when it could have used it to help the poor and needy as a 'stick' to beat those of us who are Christians with.

You constantly use a number of unfair methods to 'beat' people who you do not agree with, then ALWAYS use the same tactics of trying to be the 'victim' when you are out debated or out argued as a result. :shrug:

But, anyway:

NO - I was using the fact that you are a Labour supporter to try to illustrate how utterly ridiculous and hypocritical your loaded rhetorical question was. Here is your post again:

"I wonder how much the production and ad time that message cost...
It begs the question with all the social inequality,suffering and need both in the UK and worldwide how is this spend justified?"


Now, to anyone with a brain, you are criticising the Church for spending money on advertising when that money could be better spent on alleviating the plight of some of the suffering and needy - in the UK and abroad.

Now, all I was doing is pointing out to you:

1) That the political party which you so fervently support - Labour - spends hundreds of times more money on advertising than does the Church.

2) And because Labour is supposedly THE party which represents the causes of 'the poor, the suffering and the needy' - isn't it a bit hypocritical of you to pose your question, when all those tens of millions which your party spends on advertising could ALSO then be better spent on helping those causes instead.

In addition, the Church DOES spend huge sums of money feeding the poor and on charitable causes both here and abroad, but I have yet to see a 'Labour Party' Soup Kitchen or witness specific Labour charity aid missions - here or abroad.

As for your contention that: "a political party can't be compared to a religion, it's really that simple" -- well, this is a frankly ridiculous statement and not 'that simple' at all.

a) Both are organisations which have distinct ideologies.
b) Both have supporters who BELIEVE in those ideologies.
c) Both rely on donations from supporters to function.
d) Both need to allocate a portion of those collected funds to promote themselves.
e) Both need to be seen to put the interests of those whom they purport to serve, first.
f) Both often fail in their intentions.
g) The Labour Party - now, more than any other time in its recent history, is under attack and needs ALL the promotion it can get.
h) The Christian Church - now, more than at any time in its recent history is under attack and needs ALL the promotion it can get.
i) Both have faithful supporters who would be devastated by the demise of either.

Anyway, my point IS, that you cannot afford to be sniping at the Church for using allocated money from their funds to promote itsef and its message, when it DOES also use huge amounts of its funds on good causes to alleviate the plight of the poor, the needy, the homeless and downtrodden, when you find no problem with the Labour Party using MUCH huger sums of money from its funds to promote itself and its message, when it does not use ZILCH from its funds on good causes to alleviate the plight of the poor, the needy, the homeless and downtrodden -- the VERY class of society which it purports to champion and represent.

[kirklancaster]

Religion should be something that people themselves can have their own say on in their own time when they're older (I personally don't believe in allocating a child a religion, I feel it should be up to the child in later life what they identify with rather than it being shoved down their throats), anyway, shouldn't the Church of England use their funds for something more worthwhile than trying to hire out ad space during Star Wars?

I take it that you have not read all the preceding posts Mitchell?

[user104658]

So you go to the trouble over leaving a screening of a movie, demanding a refund and going to another cinema over a 50 second advert because you are indifferent towards it? Ok.

I never said atheists do or don't say anything in regards to "Oh my god" or any other phrase.

Adverts shown before a movie in a cinema include a batch of trailers for other movies AND a bunch of product/service adverts. So, if adverts not relating to movies is a problem you have then it's a wonder you don't walk out before every film you go to see at the cinema.

Well I'm pretty sure it's not a movie trailer so, by deduction, religious indoctrination now falls under the heading of "product/service advertisement"? I suppose that's accurate... In a way...

[Kizzy]

:facepalm:

NO - YOU were using the fact that the Church spent money on this advertising when it could have used it to help the poor and needy as a 'stick' to beat those of us who are Christians with.

You constantly use a number of unfair methods to 'beat' people who you do not agree with, then ALWAYS use the same tactics of trying to be the 'victim' when you are out debated or out argued as a result. :shrug:

But, anyway:

NO - I was using the fact that you are a Labour supporter to try to illustrate how utterly ridiculous and hypocritical your loaded rhetorical question was. Here is your post again:

"I wonder how much the production and ad time that message cost...
It begs the question with all the social inequality,suffering and need both in the UK and worldwide how is this spend justified?"


Now, to anyone with a brain, you are criticising the Church for spending money on advertising when that money could be better spent on alleviating the plight of some of the suffering and needy - in the UK and abroad.

Now, all I was doing is pointing out to you:

1) That the political party which you so fervently support - Labour - spends hundreds of times more money on advertising than does the Church.

2) And because Labour is supposedly THE party which represents the causes of 'the poor, the suffering and the needy' - isn't it a bit hypocritical of you to pose your question, when all those tens of millions which your party spends on advertising could ALSO then be better spent on helping those causes instead.

In addition, the Church DOES spend huge sums of money feeding the poor and on charitable causes both here and abroad, but I have yet to see a 'Labour Party' Soup Kitchen or witness specific Labour charity aid missions - here or abroad.

As for your contention that: "a political party can't be compared to a religion, it's really that simple" -- well, this is a frankly ridiculous statement and not 'that simple' at all.

a) Both are organisations which have distinct ideologies.
b) Both have supporters who BELIEVE in those ideologies.
c) Both rely on donations from supporters to function.
d) Both need to allocate a portion of those collected funds to promote themselves.
e) Both need to be seen to put the interests of those whom they purport to serve, first.
f) Both often fail in their intentions.
g) The Labour Party - now, more than any other time in its recent history, is under attack and needs ALL the promotion it can get.
h) The Christian Church - now, more than at any time in its recent history is under attack and needs ALL the promotion it can get.
i) Both have faithful supporters who would be devastated by the demise of either.

Anyway, my point IS, that you cannot afford to be sniping at the Church for using allocated money from their funds to promote itsef and its message, when it DOES also use huge amounts of its funds on good causes to alleviate the plight of the poor, the needy, the homeless and downtrodden, when you find no problem with the Labour Party using MUCH huger sums of money from its funds to promote itself and its message, when it does not use ZILCH from its funds on good causes to alleviate the plight of the poor, the needy, the homeless and downtrodden -- the VERY class of society which it purports to champion and represent.

My post was directed at the two religious bodies responsible for the ad only, it was not personal, you have chosen to take offence as per. Again religious and political organisations are not comparable, therefore I feel my questioning the church and their methods here are a valid and a fair point. I'm not responding to the rest of your monologue.

[user104658]

'The Church of England has received unlikely backing from the biologist and prominent atheist Richard Dawkins after the UK’s three leading cinema chains refused to screen its advert featuring the Lord’s Prayer.

The 60-second advert was due to be shown before Star Wars: the Force Awakens, released on 18 December, which would have guaranteed it a huge cinema audience in the run-up to Christmas.

But the Odeon Cineworld and Vue chains, which control 80% of screens around the country, have refused to allow it because of a policy not to allow political or religious advertising.

The decision prompted an angry response from the church, which warned of a chilling effect on free speech. Many expressed support for its position including Dawkins, the evolutionary biologist best known for excoriating religions.'

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/22/richard-dawkins-says-uk-cinemas-should-screen-the-lords-prayer
It's utter nonsense, Cinema chains are private enterprise and they can show or refuse to show whatever they want to show based on what they think is best for their business. They want to take a payment to only advertise Pepsi and never Coke? That's fine. They refuse to show nescafe adverts because they think Nestlé is evil? Also their business.

It has absolutely nothing at all to do with "free speech". It is not a public space, not by any description.

[Kizzy]

True and to say the organisation were paying for said space it is admirable they are listening to their patrons and keeping all social, political and religious messages out of their cinemas.

* flashes a vote Corbyn subliminal message *

[kirklancaster]

My post was directed at the two religious bodies responsible for the ad only, it was not personal, you have chosen to take offence as per. Again religious and political organisations are not comparable, therefore I feel my questioning the church and their methods here are a valid and a fair point. I'm not responding to the rest of your monologue.

My 'MONOLOGUES' are written with far more clarity, and with a far greater command of the English Language, and with a far greater knowledge of the subject matter, and with far greater fairness and objectivity than any skewed far left confused propaganda written by you.

YOU posed a question - ridiculous as it was - now you are being personally insulting and ignorant because the responses expose the flaws in your views.

Again, you stick to your - glaringly wrong - contentions no matter how many times they are SHOWN to be wrong, but that is par for the course with you.

Now I will put you on permanent ignore because you do not seek debate, you seek a platform where all other views are none forthcoming because by guile and stealth and deviousness, you have frightened away all other posters who do not agree with your ridiculous views lest they be infracted and banned.

YOU get personal AND offensive and falsely accuse, but then how are us lesser Tibb members to answer your continual rubbish accusations and defend ourselves and our viewpoint if we are to be continually blamed and infracted for doing so?

[kirklancaster]

It's utter nonsense, Cinema chains are private enterprise and they can show or refuse to show whatever they want to show based on what they think is best for their business. They want to take a payment to only advertise Pepsi and never Coke? That's fine. They refuse to show nescafe adverts because they think Nestlé is evil? Also their business.

It has absolutely nothing at all to do with "free speech". It is not a public space, not by any description.

T.S - if you look back at this thread, you will see that I do not give a Rat's Ass wether this ad is shown in Cinemas or not -- my arguments are against the other anti-Religious views aired.

I actually agree with what you are saying above, but it is motive for the ban which I question.

[arista]

It's utter nonsense, Cinema chains are private enterprise and they can show or refuse to show whatever they want to show based on what they think is best for their business. They want to take a payment to only advertise Pepsi and never Coke? That's fine. They refuse to show nescafe adverts because they think Nestlé is evil? Also their business.

It has absolutely nothing at all to do with "free speech". It is not a public space, not by any description.


Bang On Right TS