It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NBC's christian show is anything but

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2005 @ 09:58 AM
link   
I am looking forward to the show. First of all it is a TV show so my expectations are appropriately set for its value in society.

With that said it should be interesting to see the portrayal of a man struggling with challenges in life and how they contradict his religious belief. This is not so far out there. Anyone remember a preachers kid from high school? How many times did you hear that as an excuse for excessive behavior. They say he is a self medicating man, more common than you might think.

His gay son is also an interesting angle. How does a minister deal with his own child if their life contradicts his beliefs? This fictional character is certainly not the first to deal with such a thing, it should spark some decent debate on the subject. Will he still love the child? Try to convert him? Or will he accept him?

The sister in law story line seems to be for fun more than anything. A lesbian relationship with her dead husbands secretary/mistress.

Overall the show will live or die on it's own merits. The AFA wants it banned. That alone should get it more viewers. They have become the American Fundamentalist Association of late. The concept of free speech is lost on these people. They want free Christian speech only. They have crossed into the James Dobson world, fortunately as we have seen recently these groups are losing their hold. Just let adults make up their own minds. The show is on late, it is not for kids and if you don't like it, use the remote.




posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 10:16 PM
link   
Another assault on the walls, I think of this show.
Recently, Christianity has come under intense assault. The openly Christian - or actually - religious person is rapidly becoming one who must be inured to criticism. Mass merchandisers have eschewed Christmas in favor for a more secular 'holidays'. It is acceptable to erect some religious symbols but not others; In Florida, menorahs are ok, nativity scenes are not. The DaVinci Code is just one of a number of literary and other media assaults. The Book of Daniel is just the latest.

Why? Christianity is often not very conducive to commercialism. In recent years, religious families have been breaking away more and more from the overly commericalized Christmas. Consumerism needs people to pray at their altar. Shows like the Book of Daniel allow secular humanists to appear clever and sophisticated. It encourages children to cleave to the 'anything goes' philosophy that mass merchandisers need to thrive.

Just think about the effect media has had on children. hundreds of channels, the internet, chat rooms, and video games that push the boundries of acceptable behavior - coffee break anyone? - is warping the young.

Conspiracy is the name of this game - and the goal is to topple the moral foundations of this country by mocking those people and institutions that advocate basic moral values. This show is the latest salvo in this war.



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 10:35 PM
link   
As a filmmaker who is making a film about a Christian parable from the Bible,
I have to say that this series sounds interesting for a very simple reason
that should define the essence of Christianity to everyone, believer or not...

The essence of Christianity- all forms- is the idea that we are all sinful,
and that only Jesus Christ can redeem us.

So therefore, telling a story about imperfect people- imperfect people within the Church
context moreso- is right on target for being both a) realistic as to the reality of all people (that we all are flawed and imperfect, regardless of religion) and b) relevant to the central message of Christianity- the idea of forgiveness, the redemption of sin.

I am married to a Hindu woman who has shown me how great that religion is,
so know, for the record, that I am hardly a Christian apologist, yet I am not a critic either.

I celebrate that aspect of Christianity- the idea we are flawed and forgivable- and hopefully,
if this show is done with some restraint, talent and taste, the central message I mentioned will somehow come across as sincere and not sensationalistic.

Scrubs was funny tonight, by the way.

TPM



posted on Jan, 4 2006 @ 05:04 PM
link   


Just think about the effect media has had on children.

You mean how it expands our views, and teaches us alot of things, that we otherwise would not learn about?




hundreds of channels, the internet, chat rooms, and video games that push the boundries of acceptable behavior

What exactly do you mean by "acceptable behavior, what do you define that as?





and the goal is to topple the moral foundations of this country by mocking those people and institutions that advocate basic moral values

There is no such thing as moral firstly, it's all a concept in peoples head, and different people consider different things to be moral or immoral.
I'm assuming you mean the U.S when you say "this country"; The foundation of the United States is freedom, justice, liberty and equality, not "morality".


Thats all I really have to say right this moment.



posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 10:11 PM
link   
Hehehe, well guys you know why they were watching the tape slowly in the Lion King? Because Disney for some INEXPLICABLE reason sometimes has pornography in it's cartoons. I'm not joking. I am absolutely serious. Watch the rescuers (you know- that boring little ditty with the two mice searching for someone or what not)- a guy actually put his naked girlfriend having sex or something like that in the cartoon. Here:

www.snopes.com...

Now I myself don't care about this, but some people got angry after they invested in Disney thinking it was a family company and it then released Pulp Fiction with anal rape.

[edit on 6-1-2006 by Nakash]



posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 10:36 PM
link   
Turns out the show was well written in good taste. They could have reduced the amount of risque subjects but then again it's a comedy. I'm pretty sure it's going to get ripped but it's most certain to recieve the honors of most watched show. For the record: After watching the show, I still love my wife, believe in The Lord, don't smoke or drink beyond the occasional glass of wine or rare hiball and support a Democracy.
The local TV station (WSFA.com) attempted to conduct a phone in poll on the show but a special interest group jammed the phones. Of the calls recieved the yeas were kneck and kneck with the neas. The station still wants to hear comments. WSFA did air the show in it entirety unlike some stations around the country that decided to CENSOR the show and did not air it.
"Wheres my freedom, I know it's here some where". Do you know where you freedom is?



posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei



Just think about the effect media has had on children.

You mean how it expands our views, and teaches us alot of things, that we otherwise would not learn about?



Sure - like 4th graders doing the booty grinds, popular music video channels glorifying drug use, illegal activities, treating women like sex toys...yeah, all those things that 'expand our views'. There was a time when one expanded their views by READING or - even better - get out into the world and experience it firsthand. This is what people used to do. I was a part of a forum on the use of the 'N' word. One of the teenage panelists told me "You grew up on Sesame St, I grew up on BET." point made?



hundreds of channels, the internet, chat rooms, and video games that push the boundries of acceptable behavior

What exactly do you mean by "acceptable behavior, what do you define that as?



acceptable behavior can be defined as what is considered to be appropriate for the majority of the people in a given milieu. I was a soldier - what was acceptable in the field or in cantonment was certainly different than what is acceptable at my mother's house. In public areas, the conventions of acceptable behavior are those who are set by those who own or control the area. The acceptable behavior of a patron of a strip club is certainly different from that of a patron of a strip mall. By this time, I am hearing that o-so-familiar whine 'freedom of speech'. Please. This 'freedom' is a privilege that has been bought with the blood and sacrifice of others, most who have used this power wisely. One of the most lamentable events of this current generation is the abrogation of power without authority. Expression can be speech, dress, or behavior - and all need to be exercised with the consideration of those around you.




and the goal is to topple the moral foundations of this country by mocking those people and institutions that advocate basic moral values

There is no such thing as moral firstly, it's all a concept in peoples head, and different people consider different things to be moral or immoral.
I'm assuming you mean the U.S when you say "this country"; The foundation of the United States is freedom, justice, liberty and equality, not "morality".

If you are going to engage in pseudo-intellectualism, please refrain from some quasi-existential claim like this. Of course there are such things as morals. Morals are defined as acceptable codes of conduct or behavior considered to be proper by right teachings. Please consult a dictionary of your choice for a more detailed definition. Who determines morals? Why, the dominant culture in a given culture or society. While we have long considered cannibalism to be repugnant, there were - are still are - cultures where ritual consumption of the dead are considered to be not only good manners but moral behavior. Incest is considered to be taboo here in the United States, but there are still a number of cultures where this is considered to be acceptable. I do hope that these rather obvious examples suffice.

If you were to argue that I am imposing MY morals on a greater community that doesn't share my values, I may have been willing to take you seriously. Unfortunately, it's the sophomoric 'there are no morals'. Leave the bubble-gum zen at home, please.

Once again, the problem I have with this show - and with an awful lot in today's media - is that my beliefs are consistently berated, ridiculed, and under almost constant assault. It has become trendy to push the thresholds of the shared moral values that have developed in this country for three hundred years to breaking and beyond. If I were to air a show ridiculing wiccans, homosexuals, and drug users I would be branded as narrow-minded, cruel, insensitive, and intolerant. If some Hollywood git with an admitted beef with Christianity spews forth his invective and I complain, I am narrow-minded, cruel, insensitive, and intolerant. Now, is that fair? O - I forgot; it's not about fair, is it?



posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
I thought that the show was crap when I thought it was some silly Christian values show, now it looks interesting.


Tell me about it . . . I got so interested after seen our local news interviewing our "Standing Christan ladies of the community" boycotting it.

I actually want to see it.


I bet is better than the crap they got on TV, like "Reality shows" and "Desperate housewives" something that our standing Christian ladies of the community are very fond of.



posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
lighten up, its tv. i bet you wouldn't be quite as angry if it was about muslims. for all you know there are christians that fit that exact bill, and would feel insulted that you think their situation is ridiculous and untrue.

tv is tv, reality is reality, documentaries are about reality, sitcoms are situational comedy.


Hmm. You will NEVER see a docuDrama about Mulsims or any other Belief on National TV in a NEGATIVE light.....count it down.



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 11:01 AM
link   
The network blew money on another failed project...

www.cnn.com...



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 05:14 PM
link   
One thing I forgot to add nearly a month ago that Tamahu said.





Actually, the term "queer" is considered to be politically correct in the 'gay community'.

I can't say that is totally correct, of the gay people I know, none of them consider queer to be politically correct as a term, nor do I myself, I consider it a rude derogetory term, and I am gay myself by the way.
However, I have witnessed on more than a handfull of occasions, one gay person saying another was queer, now I still do not aprove of it, but I figure it's like how black people can call other black people the "N" word.



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
I consider it a rude derogetory term, and I am gay myself by the way.


The dictionary agrees with you:

Main Entry: 1queer
Pronunciation: 'kwir
Function: adjective
2...(1) often disparaging : HOMOSEXUAL
www.m-w.com...

I think even the word "gay" is an overgeneralization. I am happy, does that mean I'm gay? It causes confusion. It's like saying Christians are joyous. Are they? Wish they were, but don't think it's the case across the board. I'm not a fan of attributing attitudinal adjectives to entire groups of people.

[edit on 26-1-2006 by saint4God]



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Thank you for posting that little, or maybe not so little fact Saint.
And I agree with you.


Oh yes and,


You have voted saint4God for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join