Unrealistic premise - Persecuted (2014) Discussion

[–] Callie36 10 years ago

Hey man, Real 'Murican Christians (tm) don't let facts get in the way of a good persecution complex.

reply

Especially those televangelists. Who only want to save you. So call now at 1-800-ILLSAVEYA and donate! With every $5000 donation you get one (1) free miracle toilet paper!

reply

[–] TopFrog 10 years ago

Most speculative of fiction? Compared with what is in some of the "documentaries" about Obama and the Left, this seems pretty reasonable.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] plasticmojo 10 years ago

I'm glad you put the word 'documentaries' in quotes.

reply

[–] imdb-14546 10 years ago

Who wants realism in a porno?

With no one left to persecute them, economically and politically dominant American Evangelicals have been forced to turn to cheap substitutes.

reply

[–] clearthinkernow 10 years ago

Christian rights are being trampled on every single day in the US. Uninformed voters elect all sorts of untried legislators. The government every day is telling us what we can do, what we can no longer do, what we can say and what we can no longer say. I just saw an interview about this movie and the interviewers made mention of this premise being "ripped from the headlines", meaning it is realistic and current. The writer said he'd actually written this five years ago, before this kind of persecution started here. Very timely topic and extremely realistic in the US.

reply

[–] holdek01 10 years ago

They are saying that in the interview in order to drum up interest in their movie.

reply

[–] shrugs 10 years ago

Can you give me some examples of "Christian rights being trampled on every single day in the US"?

What if a squirrel wants a sausage?

reply

[–] BertramWilberforceWooster 10 years ago

Can you give me some examples of "Christian rights being trampled on every single day in the US"?

Real examples? No. Made up ones? Most definitely!

--
If I cannot smoke cigars in heaven, I shall not go!

reply

[–] wayn-swiss 10 years ago

Why yes...yes I can. How about the HGTV hosts who lost their show because they they said they believe homosexuality is a sin? How about Tim Tebow being villified for his views while Michael Sam is celebrated for his? How about Christians having to fight for the right to have public displays of their faith, while Muslims doing the same are encouraged and supported? It's not even whether you believe Christians are right or wrong, it's about our right to speak what we believe in, guaranteed to us by the constitution. And once they silence us, do you think it will stop there? Care to venture a guess as to who will be next?

reply

[–] actnfla 10 years ago

Don't you right wing Christians all for the,"FREE MARKET?"
If the Government keeps you from you opinions that is one thing
that is against the,"BILL OF RIGHTS!"
But in a free market the right to control speech is market driven!
a Company or a private organization has the right to hire and FIRE
any one that want.
" Life sucks then you die "
No one has said speech didn't come without COSTS!

reply

[–] terylene 10 years ago

Actually, the potential HGTV hosts having their show taken away from them is an example of the free market NOT getting a chance to decide. It was one small special interest group that complained and after some deliberation, HGTV caved before airing a single episode to the public. Outside of the special interest group and HGTV, nobody had a say in the decision. Hardly a "market driven" decision.

I think you're conflating free market and private enterprise. HGTV as a private enterprise indeed has every right to cancel any show they want for any reason. You got that right. But never airing an episode to gauge how the public felt has nothing to do with a decision being driven by the free market. If the decision was truly left up to the free market, the show would have aired as originally planned (remember, it was already introduced at an HGTV press event) and then the decision would have been made based on either the show's success or failure.

In my opinion, HGTV missed the ball. They should have took the lead of the success of "Duck Dynasty," which received mammoth ratings after standing up to a similar brouhaha. What would likely have been another boring, run-of-the-mill, cookie cutter HGTV offering might have enjoyed massive ratings and tons of free publicity for at least the debut episode. Instead, they will likely air "House Hunter Vacation Rehab Renovation Addict All-Stars" or something like that and nobody will care.

If you're a fan of the free market AND the First Amendment, then why not let the public decide on "Persecuted" based on its merits or lack thereof? Conservatives/Libertarians aren't going to spend their hard-earned money on a movie just because they like the message. If it's crap, they'll avoid it with everyone else. If it's good, they'll show their support with their wallets. That's the free market at work.

I also agree when you say free speech doesn't always come without costs. However, that's a knife that cuts both ways. Just tell that to the Dixie Chicks...if you can find them.

reply

[–] tgemberl 10 years ago

As a commercial entity, HGTV has the right to cancel anything they want. Whether they are wise to do so is another matter. You can criticize their decision.

When Christians suffer what Muslims suffer in Myanmar, being told to leave the country with their churches being burned by mobs, I will believe they're being persecuted in America.

"Extremism in the pursuit of moderation is no vice."

reply

[–] dorrisdave 10 years ago

"How about the HGTV hosts who lost their show because they they said they believe homosexuality is a sin?"

Private company made a decision on who they paid to represent their brand. Not persecution.

"How about Tim Tebow being villified for his views while Michael Sam is celebrated for his?"

Never saw Tebow "vilified". Some people made fun of him. Free speach, right? As for Sam, I don't think he was celebrated for his views, but for his courage. What he did might have cost him $millions.

"How about Christians having to fight for the right to have public displays of their faith, while Muslims doing the same are encouraged and supported?"

Just plain wrong. I don't care what you display on your property. But public land is mine as well, and I refuse to pay for you to use it to advance a religion. And I'd be interested to hear of a case of Muslims being supported in placing religious displays on public land that wasn't a case of equal rights with Christians.

"It's not even whether you believe Christians are right or wrong, it's about our right to speak what we believe in, guaranteed to us by the constitution."

Ridiculous. Christians have enormous (and undue) influence on politics and policy in this country. You have radio and TV stations, The Christian makeup of Congress and the Senate is disproportionately Christian as compared to the country as a whole. The persecution complex really only caugt fire when you started losing your battle to persecute and discriminate against others.

reply

[–] footnotegirl 10 years ago

You don't seem to understand what 'rights' are, or who the government is. HGTV is not the government, it is a corporation that can choose to broadcast or not broadcast whatever it wants. No one is going to make CBN broadcast Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, either.
It is not anyone's 'right' to be free from criticism. Tim Tebow isn't 'villified', generally, he's disagreed with. Laughed at? Looked down upon. He's also held up as an example, makes millions of dollars, and is asked to speak publicly to great acclaim. In no way have his rights been infringed.
Christians aren't 'having to fight for the right to publicly display their faith', they're fighting to make sure that theirs is the ONLY faith publicly displayed on what is supposed to be secular government property. You can put whatever Christian signs on your own property that you like and no one can stop you. Being the only religion that gets to have their displays on government property is not a right. That would be called a theocracy. Which is why other religious or non-religious groups fighting to get their displays also allowed on what is supposed to be their property too is often supported (certainly constitutionally).
Please, since you have not stated a single actual RIGHT of Christians that has been infringed, try again.

reply

[–] Qapla5 10 years ago

You do realize that the First Amendment guarantees no GOVERNMENTAL interference with religious beliefs, right?

Please remind us all when HGTV became part of the government.

As for the Tebow/Sam deal, you must be incredibly selective in what you read. I've seen far more invective directed against Michael Sam than anything Tebow faced. Plus, Tebow brought a lot of the fuss on himself. He makes out being such a good Christian, but then what did he choose as his profession? Pro football. And when do most pro football games get played? On the CHRISTIAN Sabbath--Sunday. If you're going to be a good Christian and take the Bible really seriously, you should be willing to accept the Ten Commandments. And isn't one of those commandments something about "Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy?" How do you keep the Sabbath "holy" when you're busy throwing aroung an ovoid-shaped ball while your buddies are banging into your opponents?

And then there was the grandstanding afterplays that became known as "Tebowing." Always "thanking" God for the good plays but never making any displays of disappointment when God "blocked" or "intercepted" a pass.

reply

[–] MarsiliaSeren 10 years ago

How about the HGTV hosts who lost their show because they they said they believe homosexuality is a sin?

HGTV is a private company, the controllers of which decided that two guys who would alienate a fairly sizable part of their audience weren't a good fit for the network. Also, nobody has the right to a TV show.

How about Tim Tebow being villified for his views while Michael Sam is celebrated for his?

Tebow thinks it would be a good idea to deny rights to women and the LGBT community. Sam is gay. Tebow's views are that other people should follow the rules that he believes are contained in his holy book. Sam's views are that he's really in love with his boyfriend. Are you seeing the difference? Probably not.

How about Christians having to fight for the right to have public displays of their faith, while Muslims doing the same are encouraged and supported?

Give examples of this, but keep in mind that:

Prayer has never been banned from public school, it just can't be compulsory.

Christian structures (crosses, nativity scenes, statues representing Jesus, etc...) on public land are only protested when people of other faiths (or no faith) aren't allowed equal space on that same property.

It's not even whether you believe Christians are right or wrong, it's about our right to speak what we believe in, guaranteed to us by the constitution.

Nobody is saying you can't say exactly what is on your heart. I'm going to repeat that. Nobody is saying you can't say exactly what is on your heart. What you're seeing as a trampling of Christian rights is actually an erosion of Christian privilege (Yup. I used the "P-Word.") This means that people who aren't anti-LGBT and anti-abortion/contraception, people who don't believe in the newfangled concept of Biblical literalism (which didn't come into favor until the late 1800s), and even people who don't accept Jesus as the Son of God who came to Earth to die for our sins, are raising our voices and exercising OUR First Amendment right to disagree with you and demand that our faiths and our bodies and our relationships and our personal safety get just as much consideration as your "deeply held religious beliefs."

So, you have the right to state your beliefs. You just don't have the right to expect silence from those who disagree with you.

reply

[–] EdCarden 10 years ago

Examples of Christians Rights (and non-Christains rights) being trampled on in America:

(1)No more 4th amendment: The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that it is not a violation of constitutional rights if police break down a citizen’s door, search the home, and confiscate firearms, so long that they believe it is in the citizen’s best interest: http://www.policestateusa.com/2014/sutterfield-vs-milwaukee/

(2)Bye-Bye to the 1st amendment: Feds enact “Free Speech” zones: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLQezCZfMqM

(3)Do I even need to mention the past and current/ongoing violations of the 2nd amendment?

(4)100 Mile wide “Constitution free zone” declared by DHS around US Border : http://www.wired.com/2013/02/electronics-border-seizures/

Keep in mind that most of these egregious violations of our rights by government are being done under the in the name of keeping us safe despite the fact that neither the government nor even the police are required by any law to keep any of us safe. The job of the police is to respond to and deal with crimes, not to protect us from crimes or criminals. As if that weren’t bad enough the courts have ruled that law enforcement can lie to you and its also ruled that the media is NOT REQUIRED to report the truth. There was a very ugly court case with 2 former investigative reporters from FOX News who got canned after trying to expose some of Monsanto’s questionable practices. The courts said that FOX was not required by any law to report the truth to the public.

Christians may represent up to %75 of all Americans but that does not mean that Christianity has some kind of power or hold over government. The US military was using training programs that included labeling Christians as potential domestic terrorists. You may disagree with Christianity but do you consider its followers domestic terrorists? Keep in mind that as Hilter’s Nazi party slowly started rounding up various groups of US citizens it did so by first labeling each group as hate groups and or terrorists. Because the German economy was suffering the German people were looking for a scapegoat and Hitler gave it them in the form of one group after another till it made its way to the Jews. Today America is suffering under tough economic times and Christians and Christianity are being targeted by the government as the scapegoats.

Every one of you should be angry as hell that the government believes it can tell us when and where we can and cannot speak our minds. Instead of directing all your anger at some group you disagree with how about directing that at the government which is routinely violating all of our rights If the Feds and police will violate the rights of Christians what makes you think they won’t eventually do the same to whatever segment/group you fall within?

reply

[–] shrugs 10 years ago

Instead of directing all your anger at some group you disagree with how about directing that at the government which is routinely violating all of our rights If the Feds and police will violate the rights of Christians what makes you think they won’t eventually do the same to whatever segment/group you fall within?

Next? Really? I'm a Gay atheist. If my rights aren't violated then Christians complain that in itself is a violation of their rights. And since most politicians are Christians this isn't new, so it's a bit late in the day to brace myself for persecution on either front, wouldn't you say?

.
I may have abused the italics mark-up here and I'm rightly ashamed.

reply

[–] dorrisdave 10 years ago

You did not list a single thing that's specific to religious rights being violated. Not one. That was the question.

reply

[–] neliberal 10 years ago

First, every one of those examples came from the previous Administration (you know, the conservative, Constitution-loving, Christian President)...
Second, at least the "First Amendment Zone" violation was reversed by the current President...
Third, the challenge here was to provide examples of discrimination against Christians BECAUSE OF THEIR FAITH. To cite Constitutional issues that target ALL Americans, regardless of faith, fails to answer that challenge. You've presented no evidence Christians are being singled out for discrimination, as the original poster claimed.

Meanwhile...Americans for decades AND CONTINUING TODAY, make clear that the strongest religious discrimination held is against an atheist. They are the single group least likely to win an election for public office, once their faith (or lack thereof) is known.
A so-called "Christian" Mayor of a town in Michigan set up an area for public displays by religious groups in City Hall. Space must be applied for. But when an atheist group of citizens asked for their space, they were denied, because the Mayor considers a lack of religion to be hateful and not welcome in public facilities.
Christians many years ago, set up a Ten Commandments sculpture at the State Supreme Court. There is now a Wiccan group demanding the right to have their religious sculpture (a statue of a devilishly looking goat-headed being) placed in the public area alongside the Ten Commandments. Needless to say, the state if fighting it, though they're mostly pretending the Ten Commandments are examples of "lawgiving" not religion...except half of the ten are specifically religious, having nothing to do with our laws, so the claim doesn't really hold. And as an aside to that, its worth pointing out that God didn't give Moses 10 Commandments, he gave him over 500.

reply

[–] david-2271 10 years ago

Yes, it must be just awful for you having salesclerks wish you "happy holidays."

Where do you find the strength to go on?

reply

[–] PizoDeMadera 10 years ago

Christians have more right than the rest, dont *beep* people. Enough with the damn victimization, what kind of world you people live in?

reply

[–] reg_griffin 10 years ago

The ONLY Persecution going on against Christians is the curtailing of their perceived right to be hateful & bigoted towards other people they consider to be inferior in some way, due to an old book, containing the distilled wisdom of varios Iron-age shepherds & the like. Being told it's not ok to discriminate anymore is NOT persecution, nor are the manufactured propaganda non-stories like FOX's "War on Xmas" nonsense. It's almost as if Christians will believe anything!

reply

[–] moviejaysin 10 years ago

I can't tell if you are trolling or an idiot. either ay, pleae don't procreate. Thank you.

reply

[–] Enrique-8 10 years ago

THIS IS:

Manipulative and inflammatory garbage explicitly made in order to scare Republicans to hate Democrats even more than they already do - all wrapped up in a pseudo-thriller.

Enrique Sanchez

reply

[–] m1rock 10 years ago

Yeah nobody is against the american right except maybe most of the first wold, most mainstream media, our goverment of the last 8 years, and 90% of the people on this board. I mean its not like being a christian and republican is villianised at all these days am I right? Yeah go *beep* yourselves.

reply

[–] ChknSoupForDaFanboysSoul 10 years ago

I see you are having trouble with ambiguity. Being told you are full of crap is not being persecuted. Some of your examples were people who are in the limelight and work for private employers who dismiss them because their actions can cause financial harm to the company. Freedom of speech and freedom of religion guarantee their will be no legal, criminal repercussions as a result of your words/beliefs. It does not guarantee that their will be no negative social repercussions. Your argument relies on a slippery slope argument that is a non sequitur. By this weak standard of what defines persecution, liberals are persecuted by the right as well.

reply

[–] wintermonk 10 years ago

Well, it is fiction, and sometimes people try to speculate how the future might go if a given direction continues. Sometimes people are way off. Look at 1984 by George Orwell. He was way off. Nothing like 1984 happened by the year 1984. Instead, Huxley's Brave New World was a much more accurate prediction of the future. Still both novels are decent stories and warnings about different ways a society could go wrong.

From what I've read, Persecuted is sort of taking aim at the "Fairness Doctrine," which could be twisted to limit free speech by telling people they aren't presenting an opposing viewpoint.

And some people think political correctness in the USA has been taken too far. Racism is the new heresy, and there are plenty of inquisitors out there eager to ferret out racists and destroy them.

Also, you have "hate speech" codes on university campuses where if you walk around all day and say, "White Male Christians are scum," nobody really cares--after all, it's "free speech!" But if you say, "I personally believe homosexuality is immoral", you are suddenly guilty of "hate" and find yourself visiting the Dean.

That's not what I would call persecution, but it's certain a step the country has taken in a certain direction. If we continue...

reply

[–] ChknSoupForDaFanboysSoul 10 years ago

Political correctness is when people want a new euphemism to be adopted such as flight attendant in place of stewardess. In recent years certain groups have tried to broaden the definition of politically incorrect to include being offended by anything a person says including CLEARY bigoted stuff like what Sterling said recently. PC is what people call it when it doesn't offend THEM. But if this trend of PC backlash was really about PC going too far and not just ideas they agree with being viewed as taboo, then the right would have been upset when the CEO of PBS had to step down for what he said. Or they would have been upset that Focus on the Family was always trying to boycott companies that support Ellen DeGeneres. But instead they got upset at folks who wanted to boycott Chic Fil A for what that owner said. PC is becoming politically incorrect, which is ironic!

reply

[–] actnfla 10 years ago

Ripped from the Headlines??? Thats the oldest ballyhoo
scam in show business! Like Hiring Fake Protesters at a
movie theater who claim they hate this film for XYZ reasons
Thats a automatic boost to the films bottom line.;)
As for the Christians never lie? read some facts first!

reply

[–] srb-3 10 years ago

Angus T. Jones was publicly mocked in the mainstream media for being a Christian and having a pastor as his mentor. The fact that his mentor is also his drug councilor was completely ignored by the mainstream media.

reply

[–] footnotegirl 10 years ago

Public mocking is not actually something that infringes on anyone's rights. The right to free speech is NOT the right to speak without criticism.

reply

[–] srb-3 10 years ago

Public mocking is not actually something that infringes on anyone's rights. The right to free speech is NOT the right to speak without criticism. '

No but it is persecution when said mocking is supported by the mainstream media. Which was the case with Angus T. Jones.

reply

[–] footnotegirl 10 years ago

Being mocked for something unwise that you've said is still not persecution. The dictionary definition of persecution is:

a program or campaign to exterminate, drive away, or subjugate a people because of their religion, race, or beliefs:

(and btw, drive away means like, 'drive out of the country' such as was frequently done to the Romany. Not 'dude, go away, you sound stupid'.
Angus Jones can still go to church.
Angus Jones can still read the bible.
Angus Jones can still wear a cross.
Angus Jones can still work.
He can buy goods in any store in the country. He can enter any restaurant.
He's not persecuted.
He's just not terribly well liked by people who think that his saying nasty things about the people who made him rich and famous was pretty dumb.

reply

[–] srb-3 10 years ago

Angus T. Jones had to make an apology he shouldn't had to make so he could keep his job.

The fact that he went to that church for his drug addiction was completely ignored.

The fact that his pastor is also his drug councilor was also completely ignored.

He is persecuted.

reply

[–] footnotegirl 10 years ago

I'm sure that if you told the media that you believed that your employers product was awful and harmful, you wouldn't even keep your job, let alone get to keep it with an apology.
No one told him to leave his church.
No one told him to stop getting drug counselling.
He is not persecuted.

reply

[–] srb-3 10 years ago

I'm sure that if you told the media that you believed that your employers product was awful and harmful, you wouldn't even keep your job, let alone get to keep it with an apology. '

I'm sure he was told to apologize or lose his job.

'No one told him to leave his church. ' We don't know that.

'No one told him to stop getting drug counselling.'

Of course not, they would have to admit that he was getting drug counselling from his church to begin with. If he went to a standard drug treatment facility for counselling he would not have been mocked. He would have been applauded for his getting treatment and his statement.

He is persecuted.

reply

[–] footnotegirl 10 years ago

We don't know that he was told to leave his church either, but certainly the government did not tell him to leave his church.
You have yet to show anything about the thing that happened to this one person who publicly insulted his employers and the work that he was contracted to do for them that shows anything even coming close to the definition of 'persecution'.

reply

[–] srb-3 10 years ago

Here is his interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWmrFHt_6h8 please note the length: 29 minutes and 30 seconds.

Here is what was shown https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUWDJC1tmQ8

from 0:16 - 0: 50 that's 34 seconds, completely ignoring his drug addiction and treatment.

He is persecuted.

reply

[–] footnotegirl 10 years ago

You do not understand what persecution means. A single person getting mocked and losing their job over statements they made about their employers (whether their addicted to drugs or not) is not persecution. It's certainly not indicative whatsoever of widespread persecution of Christians in this country.
I would note that Charlie Sheen ALSO lost his job on the show due to saying terrible things about his employers and having drug and behavioral issues.

reply

[–] srb-3 10 years ago

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/persecution

SEARCHING ... “persecution”
per·se·cu·tion noun \ˌpər-si-ˈkyü-shən\
1
: the act or practice of persecuting especially those who differ in origin, religion, or social outlook
2
: the condition of being persecuted, harassed, or annoyed

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/persecuting

per·se·cute verb \ˈpər-si-ˌkyüt\
: to treat (someone) cruelly or unfairly especially because of race or religious or political beliefs

: to constantly annoy or bother (someone)
per·se·cut·edper·se·cut·ing

Full Definition of PERSECUTE

transitive verb
1
: to harass or punish in a manner designed to injure, grieve, or afflict; specifically : to cause to suffer because of belief
2
: to annoy with persistent or urgent approaches (as attacks, pleas, or importunities) : pester

Charlie Sheen's issue with his employers and drugs is a matter of public issue. That is the media informed the public about Charlies Sheen past drug issues and how he now claims to be clean. Angus T. Jones on the other hand his going to a church to receive treatment for his drug addiction was and is ignored. This fits the 1. definition of persecution and the first definition of persecution. Turns out I do know what persecution and persecute mean.

reply