The Catholic League is afraid parents might see The Golden Compass…and then buy the books for a Christmas gift. Horrors! You can't give books by atheists on Christmas! Watch the video from Fox News to witness the outrage. Also, I have to love this quote from a Christian who opposes the movie fervently, despite never having seen it or even reading the books. But he has his reasons.
I don't have to read the book, I've never been bitten by a snake either, but I, you know, it's not something that I have to do to know that it's not going to, that it's not necessarily going to be a good thing for me.
In related news, snakebite victim's family sues. Would you believe a religious snake-handler was bitten by the snake she was playing with to demonstrate her faith, and it bit her? And now her family is upset because she died at the hospital. Shouldn't they be suing God instead, because he promised that those strong in their faith would be unharmed by poison? Or maybe they ought to find fault in the woman, who clearly was not faithful enough.
Hey, maybe the Bible was actually prophesying The Golden Compass — the snakes in Mark 16:17-18 are actually metaphors for Philip Pullman, promising that the faithful will be unharmed if they watch this movie.
- Log in to post comments
Waddya!?! Waddaya!?! You mean that you actually should know( read watch etc. ) what you're talking about before you open your blow hole to make an informed opinion? Ya know, if the jebus lovers followed that line of thinking, there would be a lot less of them. Maybe that's not such a bad thing!
hehehehe. They are complaining BECAUSE the anti-religious elements have been played down. They are worried that parents will see the film, and due to he lack of god-bashing filth buy the books. They want "truth in advertising". No part of that could be funnier.
What's amazing is that the Archbishop of St. Louis would not comment--he hadn't read the book or seen the movie. That's got to be a first.
Donahue:
"These books denigrate Christianity, thrash the Catholic Church and sell the virtues of atheism..."
Woohoo! More, more, more!
Does he have any other recommendations?
We just bought the book. Actually, the first three. I don't know if there are more.
Hopefully Lyra will grow up to be a radical, hairy-legged, man-hating lesbian with a turkey-baster and Donohue will have a stroke on national TV denouncing the author, Pullman. Unfortunately, if I read the book right, she's going to be unquestionably heterosexual.
I think Pullman deals with homosexuality in the "Golden Compass" book in an explicit, yet subtle manner and endorses the 'you're born gay' argument. Simply put "straights" get Daemon's of the opposite sex, while gays get one of the same sex. Lyra, I don't think, has clued in on it yet. But she's noticed that the cook is 'one of those rare people that have a same-sex daemon.'
I love the slogan that emerges (later, as I recall) in Pullman's series-- "the republic of heaven." It reminds me of Erdos' phrase for the monotheists' god: The great fascist.
In other news, optometrists everywhere are outraged that the evil force in Lord of the Rings is called the "Eye of Sauron."
When I was younger The Golden Compass and the other two books were some of my favorite books. I didn't know anything about Pullman's religious views. As a kid I just thought it was so cool that this little girl got to go into a strange new world and she had a little familiar following her around who was her pet and friend. The freaking out over this movie/book reminds me of when Harry Potter first became popular. It seems kind of silly.
Interesting. According to the linked article, it sounds as if the snakebit woman may have a case. Obviously none of us were there but, if it happened as described, I would say its possible that the hospital physician made some errors in her treatment. Negligence may be a stretch, especially given the the flat out stupidity of handling poisonous snakes if you don't intend to die. But it doesn't seem beyond the realm of possibility that the doctor seriously screwed up here. I will be curious to see how it plays out.
"These books denigrate Christianity, thrash the Catholic Church and sell the virtues of atheism..."
Woohoo! More, more, more!
You said it! And that gives me an idea! We should goad the nutters into pointing and screaming "atheist!" as much as possible, at as many popular things as possible. Whenever a popular book, movie, or CD comes out that is palatable to atheists, we should extoll this item as "atheist" on our blogs and websites to get the nutjobs all aflutter. Pretty soon, "atheist, ahhh, atheist!" will become as tiresome to hear as "communist!" once did.
All this alarmism about atheism can be turned on its head if the crazies can be manipulated into making fools of themselves (which they are doing anyway) over atheism, about things that most people find inoffensive.
Of course, it helps that the Catholic League has once again complied so nicely with another boycott call. That's a sure way to pack the theatres. I sat through Last Temptation of Christ and the interminable Hail Mary largely out of curiosity due to their hand-wringing (and thanks for that, by the way, Catholic League! Arrg).
After all the hubbub, I definitely plan to go see the movie and buy the books. It would be interesting to know how the ticket and book sales will be affected. Controversy brings me out.
It occured to me the other day that if I hear anyone complain about how The Golden Compass is bad and anti-Christian, I should simply ask, "How?" And only settle for a detailed answer. Should be a good way to catch them with their pants down. Not that they'd likely care about the intellectual dishonesty that they'd be accused of.
Yeah, I'm definitely going to see the movie; all the press is only making me more curious. I still need to get ahold of a copy of the books, but that will come in due course ;-)
And Brent, I agree; as ridiculous as the whole snake story is, if the allegations against the hospital staff have any truth to them, then the woman's husband and daughter do have something of a case.
And that was the extent of my thoughts while reading through the article (well, that and the fact that handling poisonous snakes if you're not a trained professional is just begging for a Darwin Award) until the very last paragraph that cites the verses in Mark. At that point I automatically thought of Russell's Teapot: http://russellsteapot.com/comics/2007/always-check-their-credentials.ht…
The Golden Compass? I gather it is a fictional series of books of some sort. Not seeing why anyone much less Catholics should care. Thousands or millions of books are published every year.
Maybe they should have a Book Burning. After Harry Potter came out, a few fundies here and there had public book burnings of those books. The fundies are so cute when they are being primitive and superstitious fascists.
Just like with Harry Potter, if the Pullman series becomes successful, the fundies will co-opt it. Wild popularity will prompt them to claim that they knew it had a strong underlying christian message all along. They've had a lot of practice convoluting the textual meaning of the bible to meet their needs, so contorting the symbolism of The Golden Compass will not pose much of a challenge.
@Ex-drone: they are already doing it. The arch-bishop of Canterbury approves, and the video clip in the OP has a professor of religion describing the christian values of the books
I read the article on the snakebitten fundie. Looks like the medical care was pretty sloppy and substandard. It is hard to say if better treatment would have made any difference. Looks like the women died pretty quickly. There is a reason why people are advised not to play with rattlesnakes.
Even today, treatment for snakebite isn't very good. Antivenom is an old preparation from the mid 20th century. It can be hazardous to administer all by itself. Using modern drug development it should be possible to come up with something better. But the number of cases is so low, no one is spending much time on it.
As far as I can tell, the only thing the lawsuit about the snakebite has going for it is the "derogatory comments" bit.
I work at a hospital (disclaimer: not a doctor/nurse), and I've seen a lot of what goes on there. The description of how they were brought in sounds like the normal triage/registration process: you assess the symptoms, decide how critical the patient is, and get their personal & insurance information. 90% of patients don't get rushed straight back to a bed, and those that do are mostly coming in by ambulance.
As for the breathing tube & fan, it doesn't sound like a tube would have helped. The doctor was right in that it's not her airway that was a problem. Most snake poisons work by paralysis, meaning her lungs would have been the problem, not her airway. A tube wouldn't have helped. And an ER is not equipped with a breathing machine, nor would the helicopter transport have been. Further, her death was because her heart stopped, not due to her shortness of breath.
And the lag time for the helicopter's arrival isn't abnormal, as the helicopters aren't normally kept on-site. 12 minutes is pretty quick, from what I've seen.
In short, the "derogatory comments" sound like the only real lawsuit material.
There is one novel that I know of in which god is sued or, more specifically The Corpus Dei is sued for the sufferings that humans have endured under his rule. That is James Morrow's "Blameless in Abaddon". It is the second book of the great "Godhead Trilogy".
http://jamesmorrow.net/towing.html
I will not even begin to try to describe this series except to say it was one of the funniest things I ever read.
Even misguided, deluded faith-heads deserve quality medical care. If the facts reported in the news article are accurate -- which cannot be assumed; remember, the article just recites the plaintiffs' version of the facts that may well be, shall we say, slanted -- I think the dead woman's family has a good claim.
When the victim arrived at the hospital, the only information the doctor, nurse and hospital needed was when the bite occurred, how big the snake was (which is relevant to the amount of venom the victim may have gotten), and what had already been done for the victim after the bite. The woman's recklessness in choosing to handle a poisonous snake will be no defense. Health care providers' duty is to provide care appropriate to the illness or injury that brought their patient to them, regardless of how the patient developed her disease or suffered her injury.
The lecture and comments on the astounding stupidity of the victim's family's religious practices could, and should, have waited until after appropriate treatment had been given. Instead of helping some folks come to their senses, those comments could wind up putting the medical care providers on the wrong end of an award of punitive damages.
It should be noted that the very last part of the Gospel of Mark was TACKED ON in the 4th century. Originally, the Gospel of Mark ended at Chapter 16, Verse 8 ("Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid." New International Version, your version may vary). The problem was, this left Mark without a resurrection ending, and so they edited it in when the Roman Catholic Church was putting the Bible together.
In this snakebite story, a couple of questions I wish I could know the answers to:
Have the friends and family of that woman stopped handling snakes?
Are there members of that group who are even now saying "She died because her faith wasn't strong enough?"
Are those people's children being taught proper respect for poisonous snakes?
Is it legal in that state to keep poisonous reptiles, and if not, does the state make special allowances for religious groups?
If this case inspired the legislature of that state to try to pass a low banning the handling of snakes without some sort of certification, would it be opposed by religious groups?
Might be really good publicity for the film
All over what the author chose to name the evil force? How shallow can they get?
I note that the Catholic League has put up a feminine spokesperson now. What ever happened to Bill Donohue, was he not pulling the numbers they thought he should?
I'd also say that if the story is reasonably accurate, the family has a good case. It doesn't appear that the patient was given routine emergency treatment for snakebite. Lots of people who have done stupid things end up in emergency rooms.
Hard to second guess the medical staff without all the info.
To figure it out, one really needs to know the general health condition of the woman. She is a 48 year old fundie in Kentucky. Many of those are way overweight and are smokers, although I have zero information on this particular individual. That she died quickly implies that available treatments might not have made any difference.
The comments on her religious peculiarities were uncalled for, especially at that time. Many people show up in the ER after doing something stupid and they need treatment not judgement. But the comments per se shouldn't have any effect on her treatment or outcome.
It is illegal in Kentucky to handle snakes. But as the article states, no one is prosecuted because they will probably beat the rap by claiming religious freedom. Much as I dislike creos, they do have a point.
Have the friends and family of that woman stopped handling snakes?
Are there members of that group who are even now saying "She died because her faith wasn't strong enough?"
Are those people's children being taught proper respect for poisonous snakes?
Is it legal in that state to keep poisonous reptiles, and if not, does the state make special allowances for religious groups?
If this case inspired the legislature of that state to try to pass a low banning the handling of snakes without some sort of certification, would it be opposed by religious groups?
Well, I can guess the answers to all of those. No, yes, no, yes, yes.
But that's just the pessimist in me.
For the record, the religious fanatics do seem to have a point in that the books are based on an atheistic worldview. I haven't read them in a long time, but IIRC, they show the journey from an assumption that there is a God to the revelation that, in fact, it's all bunk.
This means that the religious fanatics are being assholes as usual, but at least their assholish behavior is not based on tissue-thin excuses this time, as it was with the Harry Potter series.
The shame is that, whether or not the hospital was rude, she was likely doomed for three reasons:
1. During the quoted time above, it seems that she didn't get proper care during the best window of opportunity for successful treatment. I have doubts that London paramedics get a lot of calls, or may even have training, in dealing with pit-viper bites. After all, pit-viper bites are incredibly RARE even when you live in the country. The most important thing to do when a rattlesnake bites is keep the venom localized. There's nothing in the article that makes me think anyone gave good first aid.
2. Reading what happened in the article, it seems that she was severely envenomed. I say this because it appears she went into cardiac arrest and died within an hour. That is extremely fast for a rattlesnake bite.
3. Given the time between becoming envenomed and being treated, by the time she got to the hospital, chances are they'd not be able to save her unless they had the proper anti-venom. And I'm just not sure they would have the proper anti-venom for a US pit-viper in England because Anti-Venom is specific to a narrow range of closely-related toxins. I would find it incredulous for anyone in their right mind to truly believe there should be an expectation that a hospital in London would have US-rattlesnake anti-venom in stock.
But beyond that, if the comments made by the staff are true, then they were callous. And I have little doubt that the family will fail to prevail in at least some of their suit because, it seems to me, the sob story usually wins in court, unless the victim is very unsympathetic to the jury. But I also think she was an idiot. I don't have any sympathy for her, or her family because, while I don't play the "XYZ person 'deserves' to die" game, I'm not very sympathetic to suicide-by-stupidity.
Oh. London KENTUCKY. Invalidates point #3.
The best part of the video is the woman saying they are pushing an atheist agenda on kids in a mock outrage voice. I mean, the hypocrisy is astounding. Pushing agendas on kids? Isn't religion, in general and all flavors, notorious for this? I think so.
I am definitely getting these books for my niece, and I'll take her to see the movie...
This is one book. Christians of whatever stripe do not have to buy it, go see the movie version of it, or take their kids.
With all of the stuff that's put out with a Christian slant, turnabout's fair play. It's a big world, with all kinds, and it ain't getting any smaller.
Is the Golden Compass atheist? If I remember the Northern Lights books rightly, they did indeed have angels and supernatural ghosties and a creator-God, it was just that this God was evil and insane.
It was essentially a warmed-over fantasy version of the Gnostic heresy, and Pullman mainly seemed to be working out some personal "issues" with a Catholic upbringing. A bit run-of-the-mill, I thought, but not a bad book. If the Golden Compass is "atheist", is is only because the religious people demanded that they take God out of it.
But yes, I imagine it would be highly annoying to the religious. :)
It' sad to see a mother die so horribly, but is even sadder to see that children are being indoctrinated into this crap.
How would it sound if I started a church of "Russian Roulette". "Sure li'l Jimmy put the gun to your head and pull the trigger, if you've been good no harm will come to you."
I can hear the Kentucky Church now, "snakes don't kill people, people kill people."
Also the consistency of the religionists amazes me. If this was a test of faith then the lady, according to their own standards, was found lacking; and the fact that the congregation couldn't heal her via prayer indicates that they are somewhat deficient in the eyes of their "maker" too. Really they should putting their hands up and accepting their god's will.
Tragically this is an example of people being lied to in a systematic and fearful manner until they cannot imagine any truth outside this world view. Then ensuring that this fear and narrow world view is perpetuated through those to young to be allowed to question it.
Arrow Quivershaft:
First of all, I don't think there's evidence that the ending of Mark's Gospel was added "when the Roman Catholic Church was putting the Bible together." It was surely added at some point and the oldest manuscripts don't contain it. But I don't think anyone knows when or by whom it was added. I am of course willing to be corrected by those who know better.
But second, in Mark's Gospel Jesus predicts his resurrection several times (8:31, 9:9, 9:31, 10:34, 14:28) and in the genuine ending the women come to the tomb, find the stone rolled away, and are greeted by a young man dressed in white who tells them that Jesus is risen. In response to this -- not surprisingly! -- the women are put into a state of fear and trembling and flee.
This continues a basic theme in Mark's Gospel, which is the disciples' inability to understand Jesus's mission and his proclamation that he must suffer, die, and then rise. There are no resurrection appearances, but the message that Jesus is risen is proclaimed repeatedly by the Gospel. So the added-on ending isn't really necessary.
The entire congregation is a potential darwin award winner.
Don't they sometimes drink chemicals and poisons to show their faith too?
I just wish the snakes got pissed off more often.
Well, reading the text of Mark, maybe it is just wrong. I know of no evidence after 2,000 years that faithful Xians can drink poisons and walk away. Or that faith healing works at all. The demon theory of mental illness is still common but not well accepted in medical circles these days.
The smart thing to do would be to just shrug and move on. In fact, most Xian religions just ignore this verse for reasons that they don't bother to explain.
I have to admit, I bought the first Golden Compass book for my son just recently and read it, and...I don't really see it. Do they get better? I just didn't find it that great, to be honest, and that genre's usually my thing.
I think it would be a huge stretch to say that the His Dark Materials trilogy is not anti-religious, given that the main institutional baddy is the Catholic Church, and one of the main protagonists says (in the final novel), "The Christian religion is a very powerful and convincing mistake, that's all."
That said, the story is not actually anti-spiritual, at least in ontological terms, as supernatural entities do indeed exist in the books. As GallileoWasADenier says, the world presented is roughly gnostic.
However, the main plot centres on the issue of whether it makes sense for humanity to actually worship these entities, or whether there should indeed be a "Republic of Heaven". The theme of the book isn't so much anti-supernatural as anti-authoritarian.
This brings back a lot of tedious memories. Many Christian sects are devoted to cultivating that kind of belief. They gather together in church and pray and pray, concentrating reeeeeeel hard on having the faith of a grain of mustard seed. You can see them glow at the very thought of being able to move a mountain by just having enough faith. And every positive thing that happens--down to just getting a good parking space at the store--is proof of a divine and beneficent Lord. (Really, the parking angel is one of the perks of being a Christian!)
The mental energy expended in praying for sick people and, well, everything else, is an amazing thing to behold. Imagine if all that energy was directed towards the real world.
I can tell you as a fact: Greed for heavenly rewards and divine experiences is not spiritual, it's just greed.
Mark just says that the faithful will pick up snakes with their hands -- it doesn't say they won't get bitten and die.
I am glad to see how sympathetic people here are to the snakebite victim's plight. Compassion should be promoted whenever possible, even to the deranged and deluded folks that bring on their own extinction.
Having said that; with the scanty facts in the article, I don't see any grounds to sue except possibly emotional distress-if they can prove that there really were hateful comments made for the purpose of causing emotional distress. Furthermore, in a situation like this where an extraordinary self-inflicted wound is the problem, a doctor, nurse, or any other employee would be perfectly justified in saying something like "Hey! What are you, crazy? Rattlesnakes can kill you!" I would like to hear what was supposedly said, because while it may be unprofessional to lecture during treatment, telling a person with self-inflicted wounds to discontinue their behavior is NOT harrassment. If you come in dying of a failing whiskey liver, they are not required to respect your life-choices. If the comments didn't affect treatment, whatever they were, they were no more than unprofessional.
I'm NOT a medical professional at all, but from the article, the treatment sounded like business as usual from what I've read before.(except the shit-talking, of course) I've lived near Mojave where there are usually 0-2 rattlesnake bites a year, and local hospitals still only carry one anti-venom at a time because of the cost. And if they aren't yet sure about the type of snake or symptoms, it's guesswork before they can treat you.
As I said, I really do appreciate the compassion from others, because I myself would have serious problems refraining from extensive shit-talking if I were around that particular situation, now matter how offensive some soft-heads percieved it to be. While I really do feel sorry for their loss, there is still a nagging voice in my head that says it is only natural selection at work. People who take risks for a living, from soldiers to animal trainers, know that there is a risk, and take precautions. People who fuck around with poisonous snakes, inviting disaster and taking no precautions in order to prove their faith shouldn't feel entitled to any more respect than heroin addicts who spurn treatment or people who come in with gunshot wounds from playing Russian roulette.
They're suing because the hospital staff made comments about her idiotic means of committing suicide?
Man, I would give quite a lot to be on that jury. I'd find for the defendants and issue a Darwin award to the stupid dead prat.
-jcr
Pah, snakes. They ignore the bit about deadly poisons in the same chapter. Go on, have a slug of strychnine to show your faith...
I don't have to read the book, I've never been bitten by a snake either, but I, you know, it's not something that I have to do to know that it's not going to, that it's not necessarily going to be a good thing for me.
Damn.
That's good writing. That lad has a book in him.
I have a working title.
I'm Stupid And My Mother Dresses Me Funny
"Supreme Fascist", SF for short.
What an amazing coincidence! I have the exact same feeling about the scriptures!
Weren't Pullman's books the subject of wailing and gnashing of teeth by hysterical SuperChristians two or three years ago? Longer than that? I seem to recall buying books from the series to see what all the noise was about. I remember that the main character was better drawn than some and the story was okay, for the genre, but was it worth all of this noise? No. But then I haven't read fiction regularly for many years.
Gosh thats a weak excuse. No appearances = no problem. We can proclaim it anyway! We'll just keep saying it despite the added ending. No problem at all.
Sounds about right for the RCC which has simply got to be the most brain dead organization on planet earth.
It is something to ponder if anyone asks me why atheists are angry. Well let's see, we have these noise-making organizations that make a bunch of noise when they think some book or movie is going to lead children away from their churches. If atheists were to have made similar institutional noise about, say, the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe movie*, not that we necessarily would, people would just sneer at us and think, justifiably, that we're a bunch of wankers. Yet the media beats a path to the door of all these Catholic and Protestant wankers. The books, I would hope, encourage kids to use their brains. And there ain't nothing wrong with that. But the wankers just have to wank and get in the way of our enjoying of entertainment.
And, you know, that's just the tip of the icerberg, really.
* And I have to say that I'm annoyed with the way that the first films in these series always get tagged with the name of the series. When I read the book, it was The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe, not the god damned Chronicles of Narnia. It's only one of the chronicles. So get the damned name right.
Carlie wrote:
No, they don't get better. If the first book doesn't grab you, don't bother with the rest.
I thought that the first one had interesting worldbuilding, and an intriguing plot. The second one started out OK, but trailed off into something less interesting, and the third one was a chaotic mess, because I think Pullman lost track of what he was trying to do, and was putting in all sorts of random crap. Yes, we see the death of the old, decrepit, senile, useless figurehead Gnostic Demiurge (it's mostly the subordinates (archangels) who are running the show even before this death occurs). It's not worth wading through everything else in the books to read that part, though.
I'm hoping that the movie will focus on the "good parts" version of the story. It certainly looks shiny enough.
Criminy! True old-fashioned brush-arbor Holiness loonies wouldn't bother with going to the hospital, much less sue the hospital because they weren't successful in undoing the judgement of God. They'd just accept God's judgement as expressed through the snake. Ah, these are dark days indeed -- everything's been corrupted through modernism.
This post contains spoilers for His Dark Materials, so if you care about that sort of thing, skip it now.
I would definitely say that His Dark Materials are athiest, or at least anti-religious. The book portrays the Catholic Church (and I think, though I haven't read the books recently, that the Magisterium is actually the legislative/governing arm of the Church in Lyra's world) as almost entirely evil (and definitely baby-killing), and the "God" of the Christian religion is a fraud and almost entirely evil (other posters have painted this as Gnostic, but the books say that "God" isn't the creator, just the first angel, if I recall correctly)
Of course, the biggie is that in order to save the multiverse, the main character has to (HERE BE SPOILERS FOR THE VERY VERY END) become Eve so that she can "fall" and restore the flow of Dust. I figure this is what is bothering the Christians, since the event that they see as the source of all evil in the world is portrayed as necessary to save the world.
Of course, as some have pointed out, the presence of Witches and other such "supernatural" things don't fit in with the type of "athiest" that PZ is, (rejecting all supernatural things, that is) but rather with some sort of paganism, but the overall outlook of the series is very naturalistic, just not entirely limited to things we understand (see, for example, the continued exploration of the nature of Dust, and the prominence of scientist characters (Asriel, Mary Malone) who are almost always portrayed as good, or at least good-intentioned (with the exception of the scientists employed by the church, who are, as previously mentioned, evil and baby-killing).
I sure wouldn't call Asriel "good" in the usual sense of the word, unless one is of the "ends justify the means" persuasion.
"Uh, well, I read somewhere that the author was an atheist and that he hated the religion in the Chronicles of Narnia and I heard someone else call it 'Narnia for Atheists'... so..."
Thing is, it's anti-religion is *very* explicit in the third book:
An ex-nun describes the moment she realized she didn't believe in god (not the moment she stopped believing but the moment she realized she didn't believe) and remembers it being when of the best moments of her life. She has been instructed by "the cosmos" (dark matter) to "play the serpent" and that eating of the tree of knowledge (played out literally, metaphorically, fruedian, and iteratively) is the greatest gift and triumph of man-kind. There's even a tour of the afterlife, a very grim, Greek-like Hades, where *all* souls of the dead are kept in grim grey eternal pointlessness and an escape is led where the break-out and the dead ask what will happen to them they are told point-blank that they will simply cease to exist. They all accept this as a good thing. The patriarch, the god of the old testament, who popped in about 10,000 years ago and refused to leave and clearly the God of the old testament, is portrayed as senile and petty and he eventually just dies as he really should have done several thousand years ago. And he is *not* replaced. etc. etc.
But I like asking people point blank "Why?" It's not that they think it is anti-religeous, that gets me. That they think anti-religeous is by definition underhanded, is almost but not quite what gets me. It's that they don't know *why* it is anti-religion but have some vague idea that it is.
*sigh* Books are *goooood*! Knowledge and thought-- *gooood*!
Well, I can't speak for PZ of course, but I'd like to believe that he understands the concept of fiction and doesn't have a problem with it. Otherwise, I'd hate to think of his children being deprived of Babar, Earthsea, Beatrix Potter, the Hobbit, and (*hint* *hint*) The Patchwork Girl of Oz.
Actually, I kind of thought he was a son of a bitch.
Don't these people have heretics to burn or something?
I hear what people are saying, but I'd say the book still argues for a materialist mindset -- yes, there are daemons and angels and such, but you can actually walk up and talk to them and poke them and observe them and test and measure them. If such things were pokable and observable and testable and measureable, materialists would believe in them -- and they'd resist the myth-making woo that surrounds them, as Lyra does.
Carlie-
Just so you have another viewpoint-The Golden Compass was my least favorite of the three and I thought the last two were much better. Check the next one out of the library instead of buying it and see what you think. Pullman is a not the best writer, in my opinion, but sometimes his writing does sing and the imagery could make some entertaining movies.
As for the Catholic League I had never heard of Philip Pullman or the books until they raised their objections.
@56:
I meant that the book contains people with supernatural abilities, and that most of the athiests on this blog (and PZ, from his attitudes toward non-christian kookery) don't believe in witches either. I'm sure everyone here understands the concept of fiction.
@54
Well, you've got a point. He was far less evil than the Church, though. (And I do have a soft spot for anyone who thinks that it'd be a great idea to overthrow the Kingdom of Heaven and set up a republic)
Mandolin,
Yeah, but you can in the Bible too.
@61:
Yeah, but no one is saying that His Dark Materials are true and inerrant.
Speaking of the presence of gay folks in HDM, I'm surprised nobody mentioned the pair of gay angels in the second and third books yet. Who wants to bet that that'll be one of the things that gets sanitized for the movie, should sequels be made?
Huh? Asriel is positively Nietzschean--at the end of the first book, he commits an unforgivable act because his will to power is just that strong. Hardly good-intentioned.
The moral ambiguity around many of the characters was one of the things I liked best about the story. Asriel is, as woozy put it, a son of a bitch.
Right, but in a work of fiction it's perfectly acceptable to have things that don't/can't exist in actuality.
We were using "The Golden Compass" as a read-aloud to our fifth and sixth grade students and intended to take them to see the movie as a Christmas present. A campaign to prevent this was launched. It originated with home-schoolers and people who had their kids in the parochial schools who then recruited a few of our parents. A storm of emails and phone calls calling for censorship ensued. Our principal ordered us to table the book and film. (Insert here a long rant about how ridiculous the objections to the book were.)
Two years ago, we had taken the students to see "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe." For those who aren't familiar with this book, it's unabashed Christian allegory by C.S. Lewis. No one had a problem with that, including myself. Public schools are secular; I interpret that to mean we present students with many viewpoints.
We were all disgusted by the censorship, but we didn't have the energy to fight it. If we were better people, we would have. I just hope that this was a one-time event and not the opening shot in some sort of battle. If they have any ideas about coming after my Science curricula, I'll have to find my guts and fight the good fight.
I try to ignore the Catholic League as much as possible. Their entire purpose seems to be to get outraged about stupid stuff.
HDM seemed to be materialist to me, and a decent read, but it doesn't really offend me as a christian. It's a fantasy series, for goodness sake! It'd be like me getting offended by there being no God in Star Wars, only the Force.
Regarding the ending of Mark, the fact that someone tacked on resurrection appearances (which are a mishmash of those in Matt and Luke) shows that the original ending caused some problems, but I highly doubt that the added ending was an official church-imposed addition. There are three or four variants that are attested to in the manuscript tradition. It seems much more likely that overly ambitious scribes 'fixed' the book in a number of ways at a number of times. And if you are worried about early stories of resurrection appearances, Paul has them about 20 years before Mark.
The Catholic League was once known as the The Catholic Purity League. It's not an official church organization, but seems to be a bizarre mix of Opus Dei and the Westboro Baptist Church.
It's run by a bozo named Bill Donohue. Donohue is a world-class ignoramus and ironic poster child for euthanasia and/or retroactive abortion.
I don't have a real point other than to say I hate these f***ers.
I'd just like to point out that the plenty atheist Ian McEwan has a movie made from his book, "Atonement," opening the same day, and not a peep about that one. It's not atheists they hate. It's polar bears. Which is why these same people promote global warming.
Wait till the fundies adopt it as a pro-christian tome espousing the virtues of right-wing religion to children, and then find out Mr Pullman intended the heroic ice-bear to be a gay furry cos-play enthusiast in his spare time. They'll argue the toss with the author if Dumbledore was anything to go by :-)
Just as a little note: this controversy drew my attention to the books and me and my heathen girlfriend (who likes that awful Harry Potter stuff) started reading it. We just finished the first book and it really is good! Original sin, an evil Church in total control, religious control of scientific pursuit... it's just like our world, only with witches and "daemons".
Go see the movie and read the book. Give a copy to kids and adults alike. Spread the good word (pun intended).
Read all of the books about 6 or so months ago, and liked them. It's not surprising that the religious nutjobs out there are yelling about the movie, although it has been announced for some time before now. I just hope it doesn't turn out to be a terrible movie because of all the overlying themes the production company is saying have "been removed". (Like Eragon, poor Paolini, I hope he didn't really think that movie was anything CLOSE to his book)
Also, perhaps more uber-religious crazies should try the snake handling bit? Seems like their almighty and of course benevolent (but only to them, right?) God wouldn't want them ALL to die of poison. Unless he missed them that much, right?
#55, it's more like the Babylonian afterlife than Hell. As Ged says in _A Wizard of Earthsea_, which features a very similar afterlife, `Here they drink dust.'
(That sort of afterlife has always chilled me far more than the pathetically overdone flames-and-screaming Christian hell would. After all, you *always* go there, no matter who you are or what you've done, and it's sort of like a boring Sunday afternoon when there's nothing to do, only you can't even stuff yourself with food, watch TV, or talk to anyone, and it goes on *forever*.)
[Spoilers below for _His Dark Materials_]
There were several comments above to the effect that the Authority (-> God) in the Dark Materials books is evil at the time of the books. I see no sign of that: at one point he may have been an authoritarian bastard, yes, but for millennia he's been decrepit to some degree, and his underlings have been doing the dirty work, probably far more inventively than he ever did.
Indeed, when the Authority finally appears he's an object of pity, completely under the thumb of Metatron, sighing in relief as he dissolves at last.
The Dec issue of The Atlantic Monthly has a large article about the Golden Compass. (Unless you're a subscriber, that page only gives a teaser.)
Takeaway from the article: Hollywood watered down the anti-religious aspects big-time, and Pullman - who's still very alive (unlike, e.g. Tolkien) and actively collaborating with New Line for this - is quoted to the effect of "I have differences with the studio... but for now my priority is to see the next film(s) get into production".
The article notes that the script assignment was first given to playwright Tom Stoppard, but his result was far too, um, laced with ideas for New Line's taste.
I found this in a news article about the books: "When his books were released in Australia in 2003, Pullman told The Sydney Morning Herald that his "books are about killing God." "I'm trying to undermine the basis of Christian belief," said Pullman in an article by The Washington Post."
The author admits he has an agenda. So why shouldn't Catholics and other Christians point it out? To all of you here who are saying you support the Golden Compass books and movie in the interests of free thought, would you bring your children, nieces and nephews to a movie that is avowedly Christian? If not, because you don't want them "poisoned" by religious ideas, why object when Christians do the same for anti-religious movies?