CHRISTIANS CRY HUE OVER DA VINCI CODE; FILM MAKERS LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK
Every once in a blue moon, a work of art is deemed so provocative, members of the "elitist" fundamentalist groups are lured out of their filthy dens in full force to condemn "secular blasphemy".
And so it was, that the da Vinci code has been at the centre of a minor maelstrom (compared to the Danish cartoon furore, that is), with Christians from all corners of the globe condemning the novel-cum-movie.
NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES OF SINGAPORE: DA VINCI CODE IS A THREAT TO RELIGIOUS HARMONY!!!
Not surprisingly, Christian groups in Singapore have voiced their unhappiness over the Da Vinci mania.
One particular Christian group, National Council of Churches of Singapore (Jeez, sounds like a group in the mould of Opus Dei. Do these loonies practice self-flagellation?), had written to the overwhelming patriachal and conservative media watchdog, Media Development Authority of Singapore (MDA), requesting that the movie be banned:
THE NEWPAPER, 16th May 2006:
Last month, the National Council of Churches of Singapore (NCCS) wrote a letter to the Media Development Authority (MDA) asking it to ban the movie.
It was the first time that the NCCS had asked for a movie to be banned.
'In our multi-racial and multi-religious society, movies that offend the sensitivities of any religious group should not be allowed,' argued NCCS general secretary Lim K Tham.
Offensive, huh? Why then, did these loonies not voice their disproval when the "Passion of the Christ" was aired? Not to mention the excessive use of fake blood to make that X-rated porn freak-show, there were elements of anti-Semitism plastered all over it. Why didn't the Jews complain?
Clearly, narrow-minded buffoons are attempting to stifle the minds of the masses here by attempting a blanket coup on the movie. Tough luck.
The MDA allowed the movie to pass with an NC-16 rating (Those under the age of 16 not allowed to watch).
Clearly, the MDA has obviously picked potential profitability over religious conservatism. Clearly, money speaks louder than God's fragile ego.
Try harder next time, morons.
PHILIPPINES: BAN ON DA VINCI CODE URGED BY POLITICIAN, CLAIMS IT IS AFFRONT TO AVERAGE "PINOY"
In a predominantly Catholic nation of the Philippines, talk of a ban on the controversial movie has received explicit disproval from a politician:
From Malaya News, 11th May 2006
Ban on Da Vinci Code urged BY JOCELYN MONTEMAYOR
EXCUTIVE Secretary Eduardo Ermita yesterday said the controversial film Da Vinci Code should be banned as it is blasphemous and might imprint wrong ideas on Catholics, particularly the young. Ermita urged the Movie Television Regulatory and Classification Board (MTRCB) to take a look at its rules. "They should be able to take a look at their own guidelines on whether such a movie with such a story line should be allowed to be shown in the Philippines, especially as we are a Catholic country," he said. "And if you are to ask me, personally, I think if we know that indeed it will offend the sensibilities of the Filipinos, we being a Catholic country, we should do everything not to allow it to be shown at the least," he added.
Judging by the fact that politicians ought to keep themselves busy with bettering the lives of the common folk, meddling with religious affairs is simply not appropriate for an "executive secretary" (whatever that title means).
In any case, if Mr Eduardo has too much time in his hands, he might as well try and find out, and maybe eradicate the state of corruption and improve the welfare of his people. Trying to rally common gullible folks to ban movies is the job of priests, whose prime occupation of molesting altar boys place them in good stead with such a dastardly, dirty job.
COMMON ARGUMENTS FOR CALL ON DA VINCI BAN
Having read and heard comments from hard-core fundies advocating the voices of censorship, their arguments, when explored in full view of unbridled logic, becomes as flimsy as a house of cards:
Lame Argument 1: The da Vinci code is full of errors.
The da Vinci code is primarily written as a novel. It basically explores the possibilities of the live of Jesus through a detective-style novel. As such, it cannot be taken seriously as a historical book.
Critics may judge the contents of the book in the context of story narration, writing style and so on. But to judge the book based on grounds of historical authenticity is certainly a futile exercise, since this is not one of the main criteria for judging novels.
Lame Argument 2: The da Vinci code is a dangerous book, as it might deceive believers of the faith.
Another pathetic argument from the religious right. If this argument is deemed valid, I can scarely imagine the degree of "faith" Christians have misplaced on their supposedly infallable superhero. If, indeed, a mere novel can strike such a non-sensical fear into the hearts of fundies, we atheists ought to write books of this nature, hopefully to scare all of them to death.
Lame Argument 3: The book claims Jesus married Mary Magdalene. This is blasphemous to the Christian deity.
This argument, I suspect, is partly due to the fall-out from the Muhammad cartoon fracas.
By borrowing a leaf out of the standard Muslim fundie, these Christians are placing the unblamable crime of heresy against the author and the film makers of da Vinci.
Blasphemy or no, the movie is a ligitimate work. The tenets of standard, secular law has allowed citizens of free nations to produce such works. However indignant these fundies may be, they must understand that the freedom to allow such "unpleasing" works to be released also guarantees religiously-slanted art the same degree of freedom as well.
DA VINCI FUROR: WHO STANDS TO PROFIT
Here comes the ultimate bombshell:
By constantly egging and haranguing for the ban of the movie, these extremists may have unwittingly aided the film makers into enticing more audiences.
After all, negative publicity is definitely better than no publicity. By constantly complaining about the contents of the heretic nature of the book, these naysayers have unwittingly given the film-makers of da Vinci code free publicity. No doubt, that ill-meaning comments do have a significant impact on ticket sales, but curiosity generated by negative comments will no doubt compensate for that slight loss of religious audiences.
Well, what if, say, a nation bans from the movie? Wouldn't that mean that no one stands to gain, besides the jubilant fundies?
Not true. Any ban on the movie in any country will only inspire her citizens to lay their hands on boot-legged DVDs of the film, which only serves to fatten the pockets of pirated vendors of copyrighted films.
In an increasing globalized world, intertwined economies and peoples of many cultures and creeds have created an unprecedented playground for human interaction, so much so that any bans on cultural expression is as good as firing a water gun at a charging bull.
My advice to Christians: Keep quiet. By not giving the movie any criticisms, the film makers will have no grounds to generate any sort of publicity.