The Instigator
Adrian_Felix
Pro (for)
Winning
75 Points
The Contender
kels1123
Con (against)
Losing
31 Points

The Golden Compass Boycotters Are Ignorant.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/13/2007 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,438 times Debate No: 345
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (35)
Votes (34)

 

Adrian_Felix

Pro

I would like to define ignorant, as someone who has not read the books and does not know the ending without some Christian Authority telling them.

The book is not about that.
kels1123

Con

I'm assuming that you mainly are talking about the Catholic Church as they have banned the book from their schools. As a Catholic school they have every right to ban whatever books they choose from their libraries. Also as Christians we are allowed to boycott any book or movie we would like. An atheist probably wouldn't want to go see a book or movie all about GOd and if you don't have God in your life you are doomed. I don't want to see a movie or book by an author who has claimed that he wrote the books in hope that parents will take their children to see the first , as it is the tamer and eventually take them to the last three in which the children then kill GOD . AS and American I have the freedom to see any movie or read any book I would like and not see those I do not wish to see. That doesn't make me ignorant. Just my views.
Debate Round No. 1
Adrian_Felix

Pro

Catholic Schools, I agree have every right to do so. However, it's Anti-Christian to stop someone from voicing their opinion. God gave every human the right to say what they please, heretical or not. As much as your comment of doomed anti-Christians is funny, it has no merit what so ever, because you have no proof of Heaven or Hell. The Children do not kill God, they kill Metatron, who in Jewish doctrine is an angel who betrayed God because he posed to be Him. So if anything the book is Pro-Christian, because it stops false Gods. You only gained your views from people who lead you. Thus that makes your view point ignorant.
kels1123

Con

Again let me ask you , how am I or any other Christian stopping him from voicing his opinion? He can voice his opinion as much as he wants, I just choose not buy into it. We all have different opinions , I highly doubt the author is going to read books all about how God is good , so again why is it wrong that I choose not to see a movie I don't believe in. What if you are asked to go see a movie , you have no interest in .. Say you like action and someone wants you to go see Crossroads with Brittney Spears or Gigli , and you say no I dont like those movies or no I dont like the actors ... or the message it gives . That doesn't make you ignorant. It is your preference and your opinion. Noone is ignorant because of their own interests and beliefs. I am not saying you can't go see it , just that I won't go see it , because to me it goes against what I believe. That is my right , just as the author has the right to write it , I have the right not to read it or see it. To say I am ignorant because I won't see a movie that I dont believe in because I feel it goes against my religion ..is ridiculous. Prove to me How we are ignorant ??? You havn't presented any facts to this nature. Actually the actor has said thet the children kill God and he has expressed his dislike for the Catholic religion and his opinions of my religion , hmmmm a little ignorant himself , I believe. Technically he is boycotting Christianity by not being a Christian , is he ignorant , no he is just expressing his beliefs as Christians are by not seeing the movie or reading the book.
Debate Round No. 2
Adrian_Felix

Pro

Hmmmm. What does boycott mean? I believe it means, in your action atleast, to stop a movie from producing or selling. Not letting someone voice their opinion through a movie is stopping them from being heard. That is Anti-American. Don't buy into it. Great. Their is a difference between not seeing a movie and boycotting it. Pullman has read books about God considering he is good friends with the creator of Narnia. He is an Atheist so he doesn't get offended by your God because he doesn't believe in it. I have never not seen a movie because I disagreed with it, because I'm not ignorant enough to know that they can keep their opinion. I believe Christians are scared of losing Christians because they know what they are doing is wrong and is just scapegoating these movies to make them look good. If you were paying attention you would have seen my definition of ignorant. Someone who has not read the books. Which makes you ignorant. Pullman dislikes organized religion because he believes people should have their own choice of what they want to believe. You didn't know that did you? That makes you ignorant to that fact. That's the point of this debate. The difference between Pullman and Christianity is that Pullman is not trying to silence the Church. He is telling its followers to follow their heart and trust what they believe and no one else should tell you how to. That's so Pro-Christian, it's crazy. God gave us free will, and Pullman is telling us to use it. Wow. I bet once again you didn't know that. That makes you Ignorant, with a capital I. Ignorant is not knowing the truth, and you don't know it. They do not kill God. You wouldn't know that, because you are Ignorant to that fact. Someone gave you false information. Sorry.
kels1123

Con

Heres where I got my information and I dont always follow what the Church says .. I saw the Davinci Code after first reading about it and doing research. I will not see this movie after my research because I don't believe in the message. Christians are not ignorant for not wanting to see a movie, they are exercising the freedom of speech. I don't care who wants to see the movie. I just don't believe in the message so why should I have to see a movie I don't agree on, why should the Christian Church have to agree with a movie they dont believe in. We all have a right to stand up for what we believe in , thats not us being ignorant, its standing up for your beliefs .
As for my information,
http://snopes.com...
his own site
http://www.hisdarkmaterials.org...
There are two examples that led me to the conclusion that neither myself nor my daughter will see this movie. We arent preventing sales by boycotting it , you can still go see it and any Christian who feels it is okay can go see it , thats your choice. The Christian religion just wont give it the seal of approval as is their right. Also what proof do you have that those who decided they would boycott the movie haven't seen it or read the books ? Did you go to the Higher Ups at the Church and stay with them and see if they saw it or read it??????????? What proof do you have showing they are ignorant ???? How do you know what that decision was based on?
Debate Round No. 3
35 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by roman.legion 9 years ago
roman.legion
I am a Catholic, and I have read the books, but I have to wonder if I'm the only one, as most of the statements about them have been inaccurate. The kids do not kill the Authority (as him name goes). They don't even kill Metatron. The Authority is blown away in a puff of wind and Metatron is killed by the parents.

I'm iffy about whether or not the book is anti-Christian, but I know it is anti-Catholic and anti-religion. A boycott does not violate free speech. If Pullman wants to, he can insult the beliefs of hundreds of millions of people around the world. What the Church is SAYING (you support free speech, don't you) is that we should not support insulting other people's faith by buying the books or going to the movie. That isn't a violation of free speech, it is using free speech.

Just a side note, Pullman's depiction of religion is so outlandish and wrong that I actually FORGOT that I was supposed to take his insults seriously. Pullman is a bigot. Other than that, though, he is intelligent. The books themselves were very good from a literary standpoint.
Posted by Fimbulvintr 9 years ago
Fimbulvintr
I think exposing yourself to ideas radically different from your own is important. I respect peoples right to boycott but people need to stop being afraid of things that offend them.
Posted by brittwaller 9 years ago
brittwaller
No, that is not what I meant. I wouldn't imply such a thing - I don't want to cause a fight between any religions. They pretty much have that taken care of. I'm coming from a view point neutral of Protestants or Catholics; really, I don't know how you got any of that out of my comment.
Just forget about it. My point was that Catholics are ONE TYPE of christian - not that they are not christians or that Protestants don't like them and would be insulted to be associated with them (which is perhaps historically true, but not so much today). The whole Protestant/Catholic thing was a point of LOGIC. (Similar to syllogism.) I'm an atheist - what do I even care? I think you took my comment to be extremely offensive when you read it even though your interpretation was way off-base. Don't have a cow. I don't know what would make you take what I said that way, really.
I never said it wasn't within the schools' rights to ban any book they want. It's just stupid, the point of the debate.
To say you know someone from EVERY church, or demomination, is silly.

Peace
Posted by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
brittwaller , I never once said all Christians are Catholics , but again as you dont seem to understand ... CATHOLICS are CHRISTIANS ... The two GROUPS that have boycotted the Golden Compass are CHRISTIANS and Catholics ... I personally know many CHRISTIANS from all different churches that have decided not to see it or read it ... as for CATHOLICS the only thing they have stated is the books are now banned at Catholic schools and as private schools they have the right to BAN any book they deem as taxpayers do not pay to keep them open nor does the GOVT ... I never implied that Protestants were Catholics ...as I AM not stupid. I know the difference between Catholics and Protestants ... but if you are trying to make your comment to point out that Protestants dont like Catholics and would be insulted to be associated with them , (at least thats how I take that comment.) I think it was a bit immature and its comments like that which cause such stupid fights between two religions
Posted by coolman 9 years ago
coolman
Oh, and one more comparison for thought. Does anyone really think the Chronicles of Narnia solely converted anyone to Christianity?
Posted by coolman 9 years ago
coolman
I read this debate a few days ago but have waited until today to comment because I wanted to see the movie for myself first (I watched it this afternoon).

I wouldn't say that those who choose not to see the movie because of what they've heard are ignorant, but I DO find ignorance in those who publicly PROTEST the movie without knowing FOR THEMSELVES what it's all about. So I've heard the author made comments about an 'atheist agenda', that might be an okay reason not to see the movie if you disagree, but don't send out e-mails or put flyers under the wiper blades of cars at the theatre in protest of the film. You want to protest? READ the book or WATCH the movie, make an educated decision and THEN protest the IDEAS of atheism IF and ONLY IF you discover they actually exist there.

I AM a Christian. do not agree with atheism. But I refuse to follow a cause blindly. As I said, I saw the movie today. Based on what I've heard, I know the scenario where the kids 'kill God' isn't supposed to happen until the third part of the series. Even so, I will say that I didn't catch a HINT of atheism in this film. I was beautifully done and it seemed like the common 'good vs. evil' theme to me. Whether or not the author believes that this 'good or evil' comes from a divine source is no matter to me. The movie was entertaining and that's that. I probably will not read the book because I'm not much of a reader, not because I'm afraid it will damage my faith. I know my faith is stronger than that.

Besides, according to the Pro (who I would assume has actually read the book) said that the supposed 'God' they kill isn't even called God. Even if it DOES have an underlying meaning, is a little kid going to pick up on that? The amount of intelligence it would take to make that connection is probably enough intelligence to prevent a person from letting a fantasy novel/movie affect their religious faith.

"I believe THIS because the giant talking Polar said so!"
I think not.
Posted by DeKHaole 9 years ago
DeKHaole
Kels, I understand the point you are trying to make, however, in order to NOT be ignorant of some side of an argument or position, one must first know both sides of the argument. This is the main problem that people today run into with all of the ego-casting that takes place today. Today people simply plug in their I-pods listen to their I-tunes, check their customizable news on MY yahoo... do you see where I'm going?
The vast majority of Americans are falling prey to the evil that is ignorance because we no longer have to do any screening of the information for ourselves. Rather than go and see the movie, or read the book to judge it on its own merits you have read what other people have said or thought about the work. If you do not want to be judged as "ignorant" of what is contained in the books, then you should go and bear witness to what the movie and the book have to say, listen to both viewpoints - in this case that of Phillip Pullman, and that of the Church - you have said that you should not have to watch/read things that you don't agree with... Well while this may be true, if you act in such a manner as you have described you are then making yourself ignorant of facts.
As a final example: Lets assume you're Republican (not for any reason, just sake of argument.) If you listen to only right-leaning news will you not have a skewed perception of reality? However, if you listen to both right and leftward leaning news and then synthesize the two, will you not, knowing both sides of an issue, be able to form your own opinion despite the fact that you may not have agreed with all the information given by the left-leaning news reports?
Posted by brittwaller 9 years ago
brittwaller
Yes, without exploring what a true Christian is, etc, ostensibly all Catholics are Christians but not all Christians are Catholic. That was my point. Are you implying otherwise? If you are, I know quite a few non-Catholic Christians who would take issue with you. Like Protestants. As for your explanation of seeing the film, you should have mentioned that during the debate instead of speaking theoretically about it after the fact. It was my error to confuse the book/movie issue, I admit. Still, as far as the book being boycotted, it is an ignorant gesture. The psychology of the Catholic Church hasn't changed in 1500 years: The good shepard says "Don't let them learn too much, or else they might start thinking for themselves one day - and we can't have that." Through the years, the Catholic Church has banned books (as is their right, we know) by Francis Bacon, Baruch de Spinoza, Immanuel Kant, John Locke, John Milton, John Calvin, David Hume, and so on, not to mention GALILEO. You're telling me there is not a pattern here, a pattern of ignorance, both by the institution of the Catholic Church itself and by those who unfortunately obeyed its orders? Note: don't try to condescend with sarcasm - it makes you look bad:)
Posted by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
Actually being Catholic is Christian ... which most people actually know. Also it was banned by Christian religions and by Catholic schools. Noone is protesting it , the Catholic church just banned the books from their schools. I am not protesting. You can see whatever movies you all want to see, I do not care .As for I couldnt have seen it , it hasnt come out , that again is not true. I could have gone to a screening a few weeks ago ... All you need is someone who is a manager at the movie theater and you can see any movie before it comes out ..if they let you in , so they can test run the film. I have been to many. What I said in the debate, was actually that there is no way the other side could possibly know all boycotters of this movie are ignorant because he can not prove any of them did not see the movie. Also it was stated the Golden Compass boycotters , not just the movie and it was actually the books that were boycotted not the movie. They were boycotted in childrens schools that are run by the church and paid for by the parents.
Posted by gack1224 9 years ago
gack1224
This debate is mostly definitional and I think Con is missing the point. PRO is basically saying that it's ignorant to follow blindly what a church authority tells you or a certain group. You have every right not to go to the movie but you haven't proven clearly that boycotters aren't directly influenced by Christian groups. Following the views of another without challenging their views is ignorant. I agree with PRO and therefore advocate that Christians challenge the views of their groups and authorities because, as PRO pointed out, it is Christian to find what God means for yourself. It is your right to care for your child (and somehow protect her from a violent movie) but you shouldn't be so short-sighted about the movie's entertainment value or its ability to sell.
34 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by kels1123 8 years ago
kels1123
Adrian_Felixkels1123Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by RepublicanView333 9 years ago
RepublicanView333
Adrian_Felixkels1123Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by impactyourworld89 9 years ago
impactyourworld89
Adrian_Felixkels1123Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by DeKHaole 9 years ago
DeKHaole
Adrian_Felixkels1123Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by ceaser 9 years ago
ceaser
Adrian_Felixkels1123Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by FunkeeMonk91 9 years ago
FunkeeMonk91
Adrian_Felixkels1123Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by stultz 9 years ago
stultz
Adrian_Felixkels1123Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by SandlasJuagas 9 years ago
SandlasJuagas
Adrian_Felixkels1123Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by brittwaller 9 years ago
brittwaller
Adrian_Felixkels1123Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by djloop 9 years ago
djloop
Adrian_Felixkels1123Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30