Personally, I have to wonder - do the arguing parties just believe our minds are that mushy and pliable or are enough minds mushy and pliable that the feel they have a ground to stand on? Is the constant assault on our rights (this one on free thought) deserved?
Ghandi said we're all the same and I agree and I think if anyone never questions anything they believe in they have lost sight of the forest. But in asking hard questions and searching for answers, what I have is stronger and no doubt because of it.
And one of the most important teachings of Christianity comes to mind whenever these arguments come forth: if you have complete faith in God and accept Jesus the Christ as your personal savior, no spiritual harm can befall you. Whatever happened to this tenet? Will we be tempted? Yes. Will be be challenged? Yes. But that is the path ... is it not??
The issue is not as it seems: it is not the movie ... nor the books ... nor the author ... nor the genre ... nor faith ... it is the war for control over the mind.
Now excuse me while I don my collection of theist symbols, my purple cape, my pointed hat, gather my wand, crystals, rosary, incense and library and trek to the nearest porn shop.
I haven't read the books, yet, but my wife just finished the first one and started the second, and she is actually seeing the movie as we speak, with her book club. I trust her judgment on stuff like this, so, there's my experience. We are also both fans of the Narnia series, but were underwhelmed with the movie.
To start with Sheulsa's question about mushy minds, it's a lot easier to lead mushy-minded people in general, so there are many people who have worked hard to keep their followers in that mushy state.
Lo and behold, the movie that they are calling to warn everyone about is a story about how keep their leadership roles by keeping people in a mushy-minded state, and deny them their imagination! Now, I'm not saying that the leaders who are calling for the boycott (not the same a censorship, as was mentioned above) are indeed only able to keep their jobs as leaders by mush-minding their followers, since I don't know them, but, if the shoe fits . . .
Conversely, the people who are mushy-minded may, in fact, be converted, or at least, be unable to lead their own children, because they have been trained to be mushy, and had it called "faith." (It's also easier to be a mushy-minded follower, if one must follow -- less responsibility).
I've worked with some pretty insecure pastors, and they must be extremely worried about this kind of movie -- but the very act of stopping people from watching this movie may make them look more like the villains in the movie!
On the other hand, I know quite a few Christians who are not threatened by this movie, and welcome dialog about it, for something new to discuss! (You just don't hear about them much 'cause they aren't throwing a fit!)
This reminds me of the Matrix. When it first came out, I was in a very protective Christan college. Buzz about the Matrix was everywhere. It was the first R-rated movie that I ever heard openly endorsed by religious people. They drew parallels about how "this world is not our home" and if we have enough faith "we can do anything," taking the "blue pill" is akin to being baptized. Of course, as Bob brought up earlier, Neo sacrifices himself, and is resurrected -- the savior. Etc, etc.
Then the second one came out, and everybody was strangely quiet. Hmm, no sermon illustrations in that one, apparently. See, the Watowski (sp?) brothers are followers of Nietzsche. The Matrix was their way of explaining it. My wife had tried to watch it years before, but couldn't get into it. About a month ago, we read some Nietzsche, (or rather, the cliff-notes version), and then watched the Matrix, and the allegory was plain.
If someone had told the college faculty that the movie was about Nietzsche, (taboo!) and even philosophy in general (also taboo!) they would have called for a boycott, and warned all of us "impressionable students."
I think the same would have happened with the Golden Compass. If Pullman had not said anything about being an Atheist until after the public commotion died down, (barring the use of specific Christian names for God in the third book), would anybody have really cared? Or even, how many pastors would have taken illustrations from the movies to use in their sermons?
(Don't even get me started on the sermon I heard about "I do believe in fairies, I do, I DO!")
