Should the Bible be given an 18 rating.

Xluna · 14-11-2009 11:50AM #1

Recently,there was a lot of fuss over a scene in a popular video game,Modern Warfare 2,which earned it an over 18 rating. Parents,Politicians and the media appeared to be concerned that despite it's adult rating it could fall into the hands of children,who would not be able to discern fantasy from reality to the same extent a teen or an adult would. In essense people were concerned that they would emulate the violent scenes in real life.

Now by my logic the Bible should certainly be given an adult rating also,and we should be concerned that it would fall into the hands on a child. Unlike a video game,society in general encourages the Bible to be fact. Now I know there's plenty of decent morality in the New testament but a child could easily be confused as to which laws to follow and emulate.

The Old Testament encourages violent homophobia,genocide,racism and sexism.
So should the Bible be given an 18 rating so that it may not fall into innocent minds?

Antbert · 14-11-2009 12:40PM

Nice in theory, but I think flawed in that children want to play COD.

I like the idea that it's bad to teach primary school children an 18s book though. Perhaps suggest some other reading material like Lady Chatterly's Lover or Fight Club.

I did try to think of more pretentious books. If I think of better ones I'll shamelessly go back and edit.

Galvasean · 14-11-2009 01:09PM

Antbert wrote: »

Nice in theory, but I think flawed in that children want to play COD.

Well many children do want to read the Bible. More imortantly, a great many children do read it.

Was watching a documentary about the biblical character David yesterday. Man that would make a great movie; lust, betrayal, murder, adultery, rape, incest, regicide, baby-killing, slavery, warmongering, epic battle scenes, blood n' guts.... To make an accurate portrayal in film you'd need a hard 18s (or if you had a very savvy producer you could get away with 15s).
There's 'worse' sections of the Bible too, with even more brutality and ethically dubious bits.
I mean if Perfect Dark on the N64 can get an 18s rating, surely the Bible deserves one too...

Antbert wrote: »

I like the idea that it's bad to teach primary school children an 18s book though. Perhaps suggest some other reading material like Lady Chatterly's Lover or Fight Club.

I did try to think of more pretentious books. If I think of better ones I'll shamelessly go back and edit.

I don't think the kiddies are ready for American Psycho just yet..

PDN · 14-11-2009 03:04PM

Restricting access to the Bible by under-18s is practiced by the regime in the People's Republic of China. I'm sure those in the corridors of power in Beijing will appreciate that there are like-minded people in the West.

Flamed Diving · 14-11-2009 03:09PM

PDN wrote: »

Restricting access to the Bible by under-18s is practiced by the regime in the People's Republic of China. I'm sure those in the corridors of power in Beijing will appreciate that there are like-minded people in the West.

What pathetically juvenile reasoning. :rolleyes:

PDN · 14-11-2009 03:11PM

Flamed Diving wrote: »

What pathetically juvenile reasoning. :rolleyes:

What a moronic substitute for debate. :rolleyes:

Flamed Diving · 14-11-2009 03:14PM

PDN wrote: »

What a moronic substitute for debate. :rolleyes:

Remember everyone, if you think the bible should have an 18's rating... you are a Maoist!! :eek:

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

PDN · 14-11-2009 03:17PM

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Remember everyone, if you think the bible should have an 18's rating... you are a Maoist!! :eek:

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Which isn't what I said, but I guess you think dishonesty is justified in maintaining the party line.

Flamed Diving · 14-11-2009 03:21PM

PDN wrote: »

Which isn't what I said, but I guess you think dishonesty is justified in maintaining the party line.

That, coming from a Christian.

The cheek of ya...

mark renton · 14-11-2009 03:22PM

I dont think its the reading part that would worry me, more the preaching part - preaching the bible to under 18s should be restricted - by then at least there is a little room for that individual to make up their own mind

achtungbarry · 14-11-2009 03:23PM

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Remember everyone, if you think the bible should have an 18's rating... you are a Maoist!! :eek:

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

pierrot · 14-11-2009 03:26PM

Reductio ad Maoum

PDN · 14-11-2009 03:28PM

Flamed Diving wrote: »

That, coming from a Christian.

The cheek of ya...

So, serious question, you think Christians are more dishonest than other people?

Flamed Diving · 14-11-2009 03:34PM

PDN wrote: »

So, serious question, you think Christians are more dishonest than other people?

I think that people who are fervent believers of any ideology - whether it be a religion, political/economic ideology or even a fanatical football supporter - are not only capable of being dishonest in order to 'toe the party line', but also have been shown to be so time and time again. Perhaps they do so without realising in all cases, but they nevertheless do it.

When it comes to Christians - especially ones who follow the Bible strictly - they are more than willing to be dishonest when it comes to anything that contradicts the Bible. The best example being JC, of that thread.

The more fervent the belief, the more dishonest they are willing to be. Anything but betray the ideology.

PDN · 14-11-2009 03:39PM

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I think that people who are fervent believers of any ideology - whether it be a religion, political/economic ideology or even a fanatical football supporter - are not only capable of being dishonest in order to 'toe the party line', but also have been shown to be so time and time again. Perhaps they do so without realising in all cases, but they nevertheless do it.

When it comes to Christians - especially ones who follow the Bible strictly - they are more than willing to be dishonest when it comes to anything that contradicts the Bible. The best example being JC, of that thread.

The more fervent the belief, the more dishonest they are willing to be. Anything but betray the ideology.

So, again serious question, I should only expect honesty from luke-warm atheists rather than fervent atheists?

Xluna · 14-11-2009 03:47PM

PDN wrote: »

Restricting access to the Bible by under-18s is practiced by the regime in the People's Republic of China. I'm sure those in the corridors of power in Beijing will appreciate that there are like-minded people in the West.

Christian America executes more people per year than Communist China-and yeah,flawed logic anyway.:cool:

Xluna · 14-11-2009 03:49PM

PDN wrote: »

So, serious question, you think Christians are more dishonest than other people?

I think religious people in general lie to themselves more than other people.

Rowley Birkin QC · 14-11-2009 03:52PM

Gah, another genuinely interesting topic derailed.

I'd like to hear a genuine response PDN.

Teferi · 14-11-2009 03:58PM

I respect PDN as a poster from reading his many posts but I can't help but think that a spurious comment like this:

PDN wrote: »

Restricting access to the Bible by under-18s is practiced by the regime in the People's Republic of China. I'm sure those in the corridors of power in Beijing will appreciate that there are like-minded people in the West.

would earn you a few days off in the xtianity forum (I don't think it is unfair to say this).

OT: If you are using the logic of the people who had a bit of a shout against mw2 then it should have an 18 rating. However, that wouldn't be smart. It shouldn't be rated.

PDN · 14-11-2009 04:01PM

Xluna wrote: »

Christian America executes more people per year than Communist China-and yeah,flawed logic anyway.:cool:

I wouldn't agree that America is Christian. But, leaving that aside for now, according to wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment the US executed 37 people in 2008, whereas China executed over 5000.

I think religious people in general lie to themselves more than other people.

Except, apparently, when it comes to lying about rates of execution.

Flamed Diving · 14-11-2009 04:02PM

PDN wrote: »

So, again serious question, I should only expect honesty from luke-warm atheists rather than fervent atheists?

I'm not an atheist, but I will have a go answering since I delivered my model. I would consider people who are not emotionally tied to the response of the question I am asking, to give a more honest answer.

Ask a Liverpool fan who the best players in Europe are, and I guarantee a disproportionate amount will play for Liverpool. I remember one of my Liverpool supporting friends watched his team lose 4-0 to Coventry, some years back, and he still felt that they should have won. If you asked any non-Liverpool supporter who deserved to win, I think we all know what the consensus would have been. People will convince themselves of anything, if they are emotionally tied to it. Politics, economics, physical relationships, mothers standing by their rapist/murderer son, and religious believers. It's all the same, deep emotional bonds create bias and restricts peoples ability to think critically.

Now, to answer your question. Well, I don't think atheists are entirely unbiased. I was one for years, but I think many are not really being honest with themselves (99.99% certain there is no god, is not atheism, imo), but this is more of a philosophical dilemma, and would hardly lead one to attempt to deny their children education in certain biology subjects, or that scientific knowledge is wrong, whenever it crosses paths with a certain book. Or worse, spread lies about science to further their religious cause.

i.e. Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort and their dispicable behaviour with Origins of Species.

PDN · 14-11-2009 04:08PM

Rowley Birkin QC wrote: »

Gah, another genuinely interesting topic derailed.

I'd like to hear a genuine response PDN.

A response to the OP?

I oppose the censorship of books. I think that those who advocate the banning of books or the burning of books are the worst kinds of bigots and cowards. I think that those who would implement censorship because of their religious (or antireligious) views, and then pretend it's to protect children are the worst kind of hypocrites.

Flamed Diving · 14-11-2009 04:14PM

PDN wrote: »

A response to the OP?

I oppose the censorship of books. I think that those who advocate the banning of books or the burning of books are the worst kinds of bigots and cowards. I think that those who would implement censorship because of their religious (or antireligious) views, and then pretend it's to protect children are the worst kind of hypocrites.

I partially agree with you, however you seem to imply that pornography should be freely available to minors? Remember, pornography can come in book form.

PDN · 14-11-2009 04:22PM

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I partially agree with you, however you seem to imply that pornography should be freely available to minors? Remember, pornography can come in book form.

I would much prefer that parents shield their children from pornography, rather than the State doing so. However, given the problems that our society has with sexual abuse and exploitation of children, I could see the wisdom in the State intervening where preteens were allowed access to more extreme forms of pornography.

However, I don't believe any rational person (other than the most bigoted demagogue) could possibly equate the Bible with extreme pornography.

Flamed Diving · 14-11-2009 04:28PM

PDN wrote: »

I would much prefer that parents shield their children from pornography, rather than the State doing so. However, given the problems that our society has with sexual abuse and exploitation of children, I could see the wisdom in the State intervening where preteens were allowed access to more extreme forms of pornography.

However, I don't believe any rational person (other than the most bigoted demagogue) could possibly equate the Bible with extreme pornography.

No, but does a child really need the image of a person being stoned to death in their mind? Have you ever seen such an image, PDN? I saw such a video, and I wish I never did.

PDN · 14-11-2009 04:33PM

Flamed Diving wrote: »

No, but does a child really need the image of a person being stoned to death in their mind? Have you ever seen such an image, PDN? I saw such a video, and I wish I never did.

Yes, I have seen photos and fiilm footage of stonings. But we're not talking about that, are we?

We're talking about a book. Are you really suggesting we restrict children's access to all books that mention similar acts of violence? A huge chunk of literature and history will thereby be excluded.

dvpower · 14-11-2009 04:34PM

PDN wrote: »

However, I don't believe any rational person (other than the most bigoted demagogue) could possibly equate the Bible with extreme pornography.

Cue posts from the Old Testament.

@OP. If there was a video game based on the bible, it might get a 18+ cert (if only to generate a bit of interest).:)

Flamed Diving · 14-11-2009 04:38PM

PDN wrote: »

Yes, I have seen photos and fiilm footage of stonings. But we're not talking about that, are we?

We're talking about a book. Are you really suggesting we restrict children's access to all books that mention similar acts of violence? A huge chunk of literature and history will thereby be excluded.

Not all, but if certain books contain extreme and prolonged sections of violence, then I suppose it would do no harm to have a rating label on them.

Xluna · 14-11-2009 04:47PM

PDN wrote: »

I wouldn't agree that America is Christian. But, leaving that aside for now, according to wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment the US executed 37 people in 2008, whereas China executed over 5000.

Except, apparently, when it comes to lying about rates of execution.

Well I was mistaken there, I obviously misheard a quote. I was'nt lying though,if I was going to lie I'd have at least made the lie believable.
" Judge not lest ye be judged".:cool:

Xluna · 14-11-2009 04:51PM

dvpower wrote: »

Cue posts from the Old Testament.

@OP. If there was a video game based on the bible, it might get a 18+ cert (if only to generate a bit of interest).:)

Oh but there are-many of them and they all suck ass!:D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkNvQYiM6bw

ShooterSF · 14-11-2009 05:11PM

PDN wrote: »

Yes, I have seen photos and fiilm footage of stonings. But we're not talking about that, are we?

We're talking about a book. Are you really suggesting we restrict children's access to all books that mention similar acts of violence? A huge chunk of literature and history will thereby be excluded.

So would you suggest that Call of Duty shouldn't carry an age restriction? What about violent movies?

Should the Bible be given an 18 rating.

Comments