Christian Group Objects to Film With Gay Jesus

Originally posted by rickymouse
I don't think a film with a gay jesus should have ever been made. It does not fit in with anything in the bible. In a case like this the Christians ought to be able to sue the filmmaker for slandering their faith. There is freedom of religion in this country, not freedom to slander religion.

Wouldn't it be up to God to sue the film maker, not his sheep? If someone slanders a song, the listeners don't sue, the Singer does, and that sounds absurd right, being sued over slander of a song. From what you said I can sue anybody for slandering make believe as well. Just saying.

Not only that people who send messages of violent intent are not Christians. If these god fearing people get angry and violent about the movie and cannot contain their hunger for revenge, maybe being Christian is dangerous. Sounds almost like a cult when threats of death come into play.

Think about it.

reply to post by Strainz


Well said! I think I just said something very similar in this improv-song I just uploaded. "Taking Offense is OFFENSIVE!"

He had a wife, so he's not gay. Or maybe he was just hiding behind a marriage

This is a great example of the tolerance religion has for mockery of its idols.

The Muslims were recently "out in the streets" over the caricature of their idol, with threats of violence
and beheading, just for drawing a cartoon.

I wonder how the Christians will react about a gay Jesus. I expect they are fuming mad, but will they
gather in the streets and call for heads like their Muslim brethren? Interesting

reply to post by MegasAlexandros


it's 2012, I had no idea there was anyone that could still be defended. Of course, leave it to religious/insane people to fill the gap.

Theres a saying we'v all heard, it goes like .... whats old is new, or there's nothing under the sun that hasn't been already done.... or something of that nature, I think you all know what I mean or have heard that one. In that vein it seems that the public is so jaded that in order to provide something out of the ordinary, especially in movies, one must make it as vile and vulgar and unusual as possible. Shock factor. But even shock factor had been done to death. So how to create interest? Go to the extremes even further, pulling all the plugs. This is just another example of the perverse individuals in Hollywood selling anything. If Horse raping pedophile, cross dressing, cannibal serial killer bondage freaks were what could get attention in this jaded world, then thats what they would use...... You just have to refuse to let these perverse individuals into your life, not allow them access to anything in your daily lives. It's simple, participate in this filth, or remove it from your daily lives.

The film sounds quite stupid, but I think we need more hateful and insulting movies to expose those who think their ideology is somehow above criticism or ridicule. Too many people around who mistakenly think that they are somehow entitled to not have their feelings hurt. Real christians will just shrug it off.

reply to post by alienreality


Alien reality I could not agree with you more!!!! I was watching the movie the sitter the other day and that movie had a young 11 year old boy being a homosexual, I get some are born that way ,but having our children brainwashed into thinking that is the way to go ,thats awesome, what a great life ! Total crap!! I don't see heterosexuals with pride stickers on their cars, and really a Gay Jesus ,Do we really wanna go down that road! Our society is going to hell in a handbasket QUICKLY!!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by alienreality
Films and propaganda like this are all part of the gay agenda to promote their perversion onto society... it's been ongoing for a long time.. There is no going lower than this though... the militant gay community is desperate to have the world accept everything they represent as normal and moral, but it isn't ever going to happen, even after repeated attempts at perverting the children in every country using absolutely foul and vile school curriculum, they are still in the tiny minority, but always attempt to paint themselves to appear as a growing majority of the population..

People are against this even without being Christian, but the gay community also tries to make everyone against them out to be Christians only, because of so much anti Christian rhetoric being popularized in every type of propaganda medium..

Making a film saying Christ is gay is the last straw which will destroy those who made it happen... Those who have contributed to this film, and those who will offer support for it, have no personal integrity, nor honor, nor respect for anything or anyone except their own desire to force their lifestyle choices on the whole of the human race and get everyone rolling their way. pathetic

Hey, the Dark Ages called, they want you back and to stop time traveling to troll the future.

Thanks, sweetie buns.

Originally posted by rival
This is a great example of the tolerance religion has for mockery of its idols.

The Muslims were recently "out in the streets" over the caricature of their idol, with threats of violence
and beheading, just for drawing a cartoon.

I wonder how the Christians will react about a gay Jesus. I expect they are fuming mad, but will they
gather in the streets and call for heads like their Muslim brethren? Interesting

I really cant' stand the whole "Christians are more peaceful than Muslims" argument (not saying you're using it, just pointing it out in general).

Bombing women's health clinics and shooting doctors isn't exactly Christ like.

Originally posted by reitze

Originally posted by Flint2011
reply to post by samsamm9

 

Okay, if someone burns the Koran all hell breaks loose. If someone objectifies Muhammad in a cartoonish or humorous manner all hell breaks loose. But if the pinnacle of the Christian faith is made fun of or demoralized in a film then Christians just have to lay down and take it? I think not. I don't support violent behavior of any kind but when you do stupid and disrespectful let alone blatant crap like this then you should expect Eye for an Eye and all that.

If I were a Christian I would be greatly insulted by this. I find it insulting that people abuse there freedom of speech and expression at the expense of others in such ways anyways. Just my 2 cents.

Everything is indeed a two way street of course. That does not always make it right though.

edit on 4-28-2012 by Flint2011 because: Typos

I think Southpark won that Blasphemous issue, and I think I represented it fairly well here on ATS... BTW, Draw Mohammed day is pretty soon... hmmm funny now that I think of it its late may when they've got all those things going on in the Chicago area.

Drawing Mohammed: Idolatry or Blasphemy? + FAITH Expression possible w/o Free Speach (DMD = May 20th)

I am not familiar with what you are speaking of. I read the OPs post only and replied with my very basic opinion.

Originally posted by samsamm9
Could you imagine Jesus Christ as a gay man? Filmmakers can, but many Christians can't.

And let's not forget, the Christian extremist and their violent contribution.(It's not just Muslim extremist who make bomb threats)

Such artistic expression has not come easy: actors and producers have endured bomb threats, harassing emails and comments on YouTube, and harassment of the director’s mother, according to the newspaper.

State Sen. Mark Leno and Supervisor Scott Wiener, both of whom are LGBT, said they supported both the film and the protesters' First Amendment rights, but that bomb threats and hate mail crossed the line.

I think it is a shame to use freedom of expression in this manner.
By knowing you will offend a great deal of people, I say you should find a different way on how
you express your views.
We all are in this together, we should all respect one another.

Link

edit on 26-4-2012 by samsamm9 because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-4-2012 by samsamm9 because: (no reason given)

no offence but:
no free speach here?
after listening to all the christians putting down the Muslims over the salmon Rushdie affair, then finding out the police faked the death threats and then reading about the death threats here in the OP all I can say is:
It is to laff...

where was the respect for the indiginous people, pagans, witches, heretics, Cathars, Muslims, Iraqis, Afghanis, Iranians, and Jews (germany was 98 plus percent christian..in both wars.....)..?

oh no, no need for respecting them, and their Icons at all...
they are in the large part, all d e a d




I wonder what Mel Gibson thinks about this?

reply to post by rickymouse


Really, it doesn't fit with anything in the bible?

Jesus, never married, hung out with 12 guys.....I mean that alone screams that jesus could have been gay.

The name Mary Magdelan comes to mind..
some christians freak out at the mention of the thought that maybe jesus might have been herterosexual...

reply to post by samsamm9

Well, let's look at this. In Ancient Biblical times, people were married in early youth, and marriages were usually contracted within the narrow circle of the clan and the family. It was undesirable to marry a woman from a foreign clan, lest she introduce foreign beliefs and practices. As a rule, the fathers would arrange the match. In those days a father was more concerned about the marriage of his sons than about the marriage of his daughters. The minimum age for marriage under Jewish law is 13 for boys, 12 for girls. The Talmud recommends that a man marry at age 18, or somewhere between 16 and 24. This is History, and can be researched by anyone.

There we have it. Christians swear by all that is Holy that Jesus was not married at age 33. So, the question is, if a man in those time, under that form of Jewish Law, did not marry a woman as was the Custom, that what did that make that man?

I say there are but two choices: Either Jesus was married and had a family, after all, the wedding where the wine was molecularly changed was in fact his own wedding, as it was the Custom for the Groom to provide the wine after all....or, second choice, Jesus was a flaming Homosexual, and that is why he only hung around with men. I would say that in those days, an unmarried man, keeping company with a bunch of other men, would be stoned to death, and would never have reached the age of 33.

reply to post by reitze


I cannot account for your lack of education or reading comprehension but I can help you from this day forward.
The 1'st amendment keeps government out of religion.
It does not keep the people free FROM religion as you espouse.
You simply have it all wrong.
Glean and learn something today and go forward from here with more knowledge and facts to help you understand more in your new life.
And yes Saul was a pharisee among pharisee's.
His life changed on the way to Dimascus.
When will yours change?
I think reading the Constitution and the Bill of Rights for yourself might help, as well as the Bible.
If all you do is read other peoples opinions you find yourself in the boat you are in now, paddiling with an anchor.

reply to post by autowrench


sounds like a pharisee talking.
The talmud? Really?
Did Yashayah ever quote the talmud?
REALLY?
You are seriously trying to sell this?
How about the third choice, by your own admission in another thread.
He was the ONLY begotten son of Hayah Hayah? Is is the great I AM.
He was the lamb of Yah, the redeemer of all mankind.
The sacrifice for sin, unblemished without spot.


Or, he is the manifestation of your pre-supposed and dogmatic gnostic wishes. NOT!
The more I listen to your diatribe the more it resembles a simple gossip.

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
reply to post by rickymouse

 

Really, it doesn't fit with anything in the bible?

Jesus, never married, hung out with 12 guys.....I mean that alone screams that jesus could have been gay.

I here ya. Are you saying all athletes are probably gay? The yankees, Alex Rodriguez? Babe Ruth?
Ted Williams?
Or are you making it up?

reply to post by Danbones


that is the most confusing post of the morning.
And I have almost had all my coffee.
You simply make no sense.
Maybe you meant to reply to somebody elses post and used this one you replied to by mistake, eh?
Or you just trailed off into some netherworld adressing a make believe scenario that existed in your mind at the time.
Or is salmon Rushdie gay..or made gay movies, or maybe he produced the film in discussion...orwell, I am at a loss. My imagination isn't as good as yours and others in this thread so I feel I am at a disadvantage sometimes.

reply to post by SeventhSeal


So, you equate this all to the Dark ages where Reformists were persecuted by the church of Rome?
Good for you! But you would be agreeing with the reply and not denigrating your sweety buns.
You at least have a sweety buns though. That's nice.