Cinema ban on the Lord's Prayer

[Leafitout]

Surely if anyone finds this advert offensive they can choose not to watch it. I can't see the problem with showing it.

No, it isn't the same God.

I'm not having a go, Jessy. I genuinely think any frothing or offence-taking over this issue is coming from you and other haters of Christianity. It's disturbing and weird.

Not wanting to have Christian faith imposed on you does not make you a 'hater of Christianity'.

Elizabeth, Christians believe prayer is a powerful tool and benefits everyone who comes to God in sincerity.

But food is also very beneficial. I was just wondering how many people the Church could have perhaps fed this Christmas, rather than blowing the money on an advert that no one really wants or needs to see.

Jassy.

Where are you getting the idea that I 'hate' Christianity? Is it the same source of facts as those you're using on church weddings and christenings? If so - time to get a new source.

I've said numerous times I don't find the ad offensive, but I think the CofE's response is ridiculous (and possibly a planned PR stunt) and I don't think cinemas declining to show it is an attack on free speech.

I'm not sure what 'frothing' actually means in this context, apart from rhetoric to categorise those who disagree with you in a way that avoids having to discuss the issue. Maybe you can elaborate on examples of 'frothing'?

I feel it is an infringement on me personally (and my children) to have the prayer said over me in the ad while I am at the cinema. That is how I feel about it and I don't think that is an unreasonable way for a non-Christian (atheist, Muslim etc) to feel.

actually, I think it is unreasonable (depending on what you hope ought to happen), because it is precisely this kind of reasoning that gets the other side talking about "offence" and justifying silencing others because of disagreement.

Churches absolutely do not have a right to convert people. It undermines the whole principle of the human right of freedom of religion.

I never said they have the right to convert people. They have the right to get their message out there in the hopes that it converts people.

I think you are simply refusing to show people who do not share your very individual religious beliefs any respect tbh.

I do not want to be forced to participate in an act of collective worship which calls all people sinners who need the forgiveness of 'God' and requests that the earth be given to 'God' as his kingdom and his name be revered on earth...

If you want to say the prayer privately or during collective worship in an appropriate forum then I absolutely respect and value your right to do that. I expect the same respect in return.

"I'm not having a go, Jessy. I genuinely think any frothing or offence-taking over this issue is coming from you and other haters of Christianity. It's disturbing and weird."

Can we please have a ban on the word "frothing"? People only say it to try to belittle other people's points of view. And its use reflects badly on the user.

Well strawberry the law is very clear that lack of belief is equally deserving of respect and protection as religious belief.

Religious people absolutely do not have the right to use non-religious property or institutions to promote religious belief.

People can talk about whatever they wish. People do not have the right to preach at others.

What I think should happen is what has happened.

I never said they have the right to convert people. They have the right to get their message out there in the hopes that it converts people

But no right to a particular platform to do so. Complaining that their free speech is infringed because someone has declined to let them use a particular platform is a bit ridiculous.

They also don't have the right to have their message, or even the act of proselytisation, welcomed.

In my world, please stay off my doorstep, and I'd prefer not to see it at a cinema I've paid to attend (and I'll probably tell the cinema about any advertising I find particularly irritating, offputting or inappropriate).

Offed I believe my body is a 'temple', for the Holy Spirit, that is in me. Wherever I go, God is with me, in me, so in this respect, church goes with me. A definition of the church is Christian believers, so wherever there are any, there is church, regardless of building status. This could be reflected in what believers do or don't do, say or don't say. Worship, according to my Christian belief, is much wider than well known prayer, hymns and ritualised gestures.

The underlying message of this beautiful short film is 'just pray', isn't it?

If you are religious, just pray. If you aren't - try it, you might like it even if you don't believe in any God, it's good to take time out. Call it meditation if you like? As there's a fashion today for 'mindfulness' and all the courses purporting to teach it, it's just another way to be mindful.

As for it being an advert- well all the trailers in cinemas are ads so I don't see any contradiction here.

And it hasn't been banned. The cinemas are simply following the conditions for showing advertising that they have always followed. As is their right.

Your body capsium... Stay away from mine.

"As for it being an advert- well all the trailers in cinemas are ads so I don't see any contradiction here."

I'm presuming you haven't read the thread, then?

Stay away from my 'soul', stay away from my beliefs...

But no right to a particular platform to do so.

of course.

Complaining that their free speech is infringed because someone has declined to let them use a particular platform is a bit ridiculous.

agreed.

They also don't have the right to have their message, or even the act of proselytisation, welcomed.

again!

I'd prefer not to see it at a cinema I've paid to attend

Me too. But that goes for 100% of the other ads too. and you can complain.

Well strawberry the law is very clear that lack of belief is equally deserving of respect and protection as religious belief.

yes. So that means they can't advertise?

Religious people absolutely do not have the right to use non-religious property or institutions to promote religious belief.

who said they had a right to use? You are objecting to them buying advertising space, like every other organization can. I am not questioning the cinema's business decision - that's their business, and one I like. But it doesn't sound like that's what you are saying.

What happens if the british humanist association were to take out a similar ad (i.e. one selling their message)? Should we entertain cries from Christians that they were offended?

BertrandRussell: have to confess I haven't - there is rather a lot and I've only just got in for my lunch! Happy to sit back & just watch the thread!

It is the church and various members of the government who are saying their rights have been infringed. They do not have any right to be sold advertising time in a cinema. There is no attack on free speech. There is no attack on the culture or history of our country. There is no attack on freedom to practise any Christian religion. These are the claims people are making about this issue. They do not have a right to make an advert. The state has no right to prevent them making the advert. Private businesses have the right to refuse to contract with them to show their advert.

Red - sorry, should have made it clear in my post that I wasn't suggesting that you were saying otherwise, just taking further for the purpose of the wider discussion.

I remain really interested in the 'prayer/religion as a product' discussion, but it feels like I'm alone there...

I am saying my own personal feelings are that this advert being shown in the cinema would make me feel as though I was being forcibly involved in an act of collective worship and that this is disrespectful of my rights as a person who is actively not part of that particular religion.

That is how I would feel if this advert was shown before a film I went to see.

I'm interested in theology. I don't mind people knocking on my door either. I choose whether I open the door or not. I have been to the Quaker church with some Quakers who knocked round regularly. I enjoy having respectful discussions about religious belief.

I just feel quite strongly about, particularly the format of, this advert. If it was not a prayer I would not feel so strongly, though I would still agree with the principle that cinemas should not show religious or political ads.

What happens if the british humanist association were to take out a similar ad (i.e. one selling their message)? Should we entertain cries from Christians that they were offended?

Stephen Green got a fair few column inches around the Atheist Bus Campaign and the Jerry Springer musical, from memory.

I am saying my own personal feelings are that this advert being shown in the cinema would make me feel as though I was being forcibly involved in an act of collective worship and that this is disrespectful of my rights as a person who is actively not part of that particular religion.

Especially so when it is coming from a state religion.

It is the church and various members of the government who are saying their rights have been infringed.

I agree with this and the rest of your post.

What I don't agree with is that anyone should take how you feel about this particular ad seriously in any legal setting, because this is precisely what religious people ask for and I don't think we should give it to them.