Why are Christians always the ones getting the bad rap for being selective in

[Nestof3]

what they read?

 

I am serious here -- not angry, snarky or anything else negative. But I wonder about this everytime a thread comes up about "can you believe so and so (plug in radical Christian) doesn't read ____________?" Where are the threads that start, "I cannot believe people read Harry Potter, manga, etc?"

 

I can think of all sorts of books many non-Christians would probably not read. I wonder, for example, how many non-Christians sit around reading this:

 

 

or

 

 

or how about this?

http://www.rodandstaffbooks.com/item/1-2403/?list=Storybooks_Ages_12-15

 

Haven't we all figured out by now that people have different standards? It seems people are still shocked by this.

 

Yes, people, Christians can be weird. We will very often be very different than what you are used to. We are a peculiar people, and many of us worry about things like lightness and darkness. Many of us aim to figure out what it means to walk in a manner worthy of His calling. If you really want to understand why we are the way we are, just read the New Testament -- the whole thing. It's not really that long.

 

Please tell me what other religions focus on this. Please tell me what other religions insist that there is only one way, one truth, and one life. Perhaps if you understand that, you will understand Christians more.

[Lady Florida.]

I don't care what anyone chooses to read or not read, but I don's shy away from posting my opinions in threads asking about it.

 

I do care when someone makes it their business to tell me or my child that what we do is wrong. I think that's where this comes from. If someone says "We choose not to read XXX" and leaves it at that, I have no problem with it. When someone proceeds to tell me or my child why they don't (without us asking), or what's wrong with it, or why we shouldn't, then I have a problem.

 

My six year old was told he and his whole family were going to hell because of our reading choices. (He didn't understand at that age that we don't believe in hell, and was quite scared.) He was told this By. An. Adult. That was totally unacceptable to me, and unfortunately that's where the bad rap comes from. From people like that.

[Nestof3]

Yes, I am only talking about the shock in the selectiveness. I agree your story is an entirely different matter.

[akmommy]

I don't think it's weird. I'm not a Christian, but I have thrown brand new books in the trash because I found them offensive and certainly did not my children reading them. The edition of Story of the Thirteen Colonies I had went in garbage before I even got past chapter one. We all have different standards for ourselves and our children, and guess what? That's okay!

 

Just please if you know or think your standards for books or TV are in conflict with some one else's and you expect them to care for your children, please, please let them know. I refuse to watch DS's nieces because instead of telling me they didn't allow their kids to watch something they expected the kids to police each other. This was very unfair to the kids and disrespectful to me.

 

 

 

Yes, people, Christians can be weird. We will very often be very different than what you are used to. We are a peculiar people, and many of us worry about things like lightness and darkness. Many of us aim to figure out what it means to walk in a manner worthy of His calling. If you really want to understand why we are the way we are, just read the New Testament -- the whole thing. It's not really that long.

[Lady Florida.]

Yes, I am only talking about the shock in the selectiveness. I agree your story is an entirely different matter.

 

Oh, okay. Got it. Sorry about that.

[swimmermom3]

Dawn, if you tell me you can't read Malory's Morte d' Arthur because of your Christian values, I can respect that as long as you don't call me "evil" or "immoral" because I do read it. What I cannot respect in any shape or form is the Christian who asks for a "sanitized" version of a classic. You know, you have seen the requests on this board for an Arthur where Guinevere remains a good, faithful Christian wife, Lancelot falls into a hole in the ground and the knights never really kill anyone, except in the name of God. The goal is to stick to a moral high ground and yet be able to tell everyone that yes, you have read King Arthur. The whole thing lacks integrity. Just don't read the book.

[Princess Peach]

I am a Christian and I have a legalistic background that I am slowly coming out of right now, so that colors my perceptions. I have been thinking a lot about this type of issue lately.

 

What it comes down to for me, is that many times conservative Christians take a standard or preference and make it a dogma. Within that, there is a judgment made about the other person. Usually that judgment is the idea that the other person is not Godly or holy enough because they do something or don't do something. And that is when they are comparing themselves to other Christians. Imagine the consequences when they are dealing with unbelievers! That attitude will certainly not win anyone to Christ.

[mommaduck]

You know, you have seen the requests on this board for an Arthur where Guinevere remains a good, faithful Christian wife, Lancelot falls into a hole in the ground and the knights never really kill anyone, except in the name of God. The goal is to stick to a moral high ground and yet be able to tell everyone that yes, you have read King Arthur. The whole thing lacks integrity. Just don't read the book.

 

People have really asked for that? I'm speechless. What they are asking for is a story of someone else. You can't have Arthur without the sorcery, the infidelity, the incest, the battles, etc...

[susankenny]

Some of the most radical posts I have ever read in various forums are not from Christians, but rather, from people with strong opinions and convictions - so strong in fact that they cannot see beyond their own POV.

 

People have gotten themselves in a tizzy over the fact that my kids have read Junie B. Jones, my daughter was allowed to dress up like a Disney princess, and that I actually had an epidural. Gasp. And let us not mention my kids were allowed to ride in a stroller...oh no, we can't even go there.

 

 

Please. the pendulum of judgment swings heavily in all directions.

 

 

Susan

[LibraryLover]

I think all of us here can appreciate being selective about books. Selective isn't shocking to me. Reasons why some things are selective are interesting to me.

 

As was the recent posting here about screening old Any Griffith shows before their children watch them because Barney and Andy date...that was interesting. Not shocking, but interesting.

 

These thing are interesting. :D;)

[secular_mom]

Some people haven't been exposed to the idea that such children's fiction is so horribly offensive to others and that other people actually believe that it promotes witchcraft and gives actual recipes and potions to readers. That is pretty shocking to people when they find out. It's just bizarre and absurd really, to the people who have actually read the books. Why do you feel it's a negative thing for someone to post that they are surprised about something? Do you feel like your are being baited with such questions comments or is it something else? I'm seriously asking, not being snarky or anything.

[Nestof3]

Dawn, if you tell me you can't read Malory's Morte d' Arthur because of your Christian values, I can respect that as long as you don't call me "evil" or "immoral" because I do read it. What I cannot respect in any shape or form is the Christian who asks for a "sanitized" version of a classic. You know, you have seen the requests on this board for an Arthur where Guinevere remains a good, faithful Christian wife, Lancelot falls into a hole in the ground and the knights never really kill anyone, except in the name of God. The goal is to stick to a moral high ground and yet be able to tell everyone that yes, you have read King Arthur. The whole thing lacks integrity. Just don't read the book.

 

I agree, that is silly.

[kalanamak]

 

Haven't we all figured out by now that people have different standards? It seems people are still shocked by this.

 

 

Because the majority of Americans identify themselves as Christian, but are not nearly as picky as the (small subset of) Christians that people are shocked by. And many of the people who identify themselves as Christians but are not part of the small subset you speak of, feel a little bit of holier than thou from them. I am reminded of my Jewish school. I did fine there because no one cared what I did (not being Jewish) but the non-OJs (orthodox Jews, this is what everyone called them) were NOT happy about the grief they got. As one kid said "I thought -- great, a Jewish school, and came to find out that was the worst part of it."

 

And thus you get people who identify themselves as Christians, feel themselves to be Christians, and still shaking their heads over "fanatics" and "fundies".

 

I have no dog in this fight, but it is just an observation I've made of people of various religions. If anything, the more religious Muslims and Buddhists have more sympathy for the "very" Christian Christians, than the "mainstream" Christians.

 

I certainly don't mean to offend. But it is just my observation. Perhaps we should think of Strict Traditionalists, Traditionalists, Followers of the Enlightenment, Progressives, and the Avant Garde, instead. Perhaps each religion has members in these "catagories". :001_smile:

[Lovedtodeath]

I am a Christian and I have a legalistic background that I am slowly coming out of right now, so that colors my perceptions. I have been thinking a lot about this type of issue lately.

 

What it comes down to for me, is that many times conservative Christians take a standard or preference and make it a dogma. Within that, there is a judgment made about the other person. Usually that judgment is the idea that the other person is not Godly or holy enough because they do something or don't do something. And that is when they are comparing themselves to other Christians. Imagine the consequences when they are dealing with unbelievers! That attitude will certainly not win anyone to Christ.

I actually think that the unbelievers are judged less. As in one judgment: unbeliever instead of 120 judgments: lazy, immodest, bad association, lover of money, lover of (fill in the blank) etc. etc. What's really nice is that the one striving to be a Christian ends up with the same eventual judgment as the unbeliever in the judgmental person's eyes: not good enough.

 

I have struggled personally with this: I would rather be condemned for not trying (and not being reminded of it constantly) than to always feel that I am not good enough no matter how hard I try.

[Nestof3]

I hear what you're saying, but this is again a totally separate issue.

 

Some Christians do interpret scripture in ways that forbid them to do certain things, and because of that, they keep themselves away those things. Sometimes that means keeping away from certain people. There have been activities we had to refuse and instead of just accepting that, people feel it's their place to make us feel weird. They try to convince us that other Christians have no problem with it, etc. etc.

 

That is just going to happen.

 

 

I am a Christian and I have a legalistic background that I am slowly coming out of right now, so that colors my perceptions. I have been thinking a lot about this type of issue lately.

 

What it comes down to for me, is that many times conservative Christians take a standard or preference and make it a dogma. Within that, there is a judgment made about the other person. Usually that judgment is the idea that the other person is not Godly or holy enough because they do something or don't do something. And that is when they are comparing themselves to other Christians. Imagine the consequences when they are dealing with unbelievers! That attitude will certainly not win anyone to Christ.

[74Heaven]

People have really asked for that? I'm speechless. What they are asking for is a story of someone else. You can't have Arthur without the sorcery, the infidelity, the incest, the battles, etc...

 

You can introduce Arthur to younger children with some of the info and not *all* of the info.

 

If there is a cleaned-up classic, it could be a valuable curriculum resource to some.

 

The OP's point is valid. The Bible tells us to "be innocent regarding evil and wise concerning good" / "shrewd as serpents and gentle as doves" and many more passages about "bad company corrupts good character". Phil 4:8 tells us to focus on "whatever is good, pure, lovely..." (paraphrase)

 

Nestof3, I think it is just what we should expect if we are to "in the world, but not of it" - we are like foreigners living here. We are peculiar. And we should not be surprised that we are not applauded for our standards.

 

That said, it is no secret that tolerance preached by many is not extended to Christians. I am so often surprised, but I should not be. We do not belong to this world.

 

Lisa J, mom to 5

[nmoira]

Yes, people, Christians can be weird. We will very often be very different than what you are used to. We are a peculiar people, and many of us worry about things like lightness and darkness. Many of us aim to figure out what it means to walk in a manner worthy of His calling. If you really want to understand why we are the way we are, just read the New Testament -- the whole thing. It's not really that long.

 

Please tell me what other religions focus on this. Please tell me what other religions insist that there is only one way, one truth, and one life. Perhaps if you understand that, you will understand Christians more.

I was with you until here. A solid majority of people on this board are Christian, and I'd guess that most of them allow HP. This is *not* a Christian vs. non-christian issue. I do think that some people get amused out at least perplexed when they hear familiar works described in hyperbolic and (to them) inaccurate manner. I get that some people don't read fantasy or allow books with magic in their homes, but to say that they promote witchcraft is just silly. Where are all these witches and wizards who were turned by exposure Harry Potter?

[Nestof3]

I think all of us here can appreciate being selective about books. Selective isn't shocking to me. Reasons why some things are selective are interesting to me.

 

As was the recent posting here about screening old Any Griffith shows before their children watch them because Barney and Andy date...that was interesting. Not shocking, but interesting.

 

These thing are interesting. :D;)

 

I actually think the movies went down hill in the end because it became all about parking and dating. I guess they ran out of stuff to film. LOL

[Slartibartfast]

IMO there are a lot of things in the Bible that people do not follow.

 

As long as you are not stoning people, wearing blended fiber clothing, segregating yourself during your period and eating shrimp I can read all the Morte d' Arthur I want.

 

People cannot point fingers about people being selective WHILE being selective.

[Princess Peach]

I hear what you're saying, but this is again a totally separate issue.

 

Some Christians do interpret scripture in ways that forbid them to do certain things, and because of that, they keep themselves away those things. Sometimes that means keeping away from certain people. There have been activities we had to refuse and instead of just accepting that, people feel it's their place to make us feel weird. They try to convince us that other Christians have no problem with it, etc. etc.

 

That is just going to happen.

 

Well, if a fellow Christian told me that she won't read a certain book because of her convictions, that's one thing, but if she says "Christians shouldn't read this certain book", that's entirely another thing. Kwim?

[LibraryLover]

I actually think the movies went down hill in the end because it became all about parking and dating. I guess they ran out of stuff to film. LOL

 

 

There's an Andy Griffith movie? Is it the most boring movie, ever?

 

I have to say that I don't really know the show well, but I can't imagine Andy 'parking'. :lurk5: And who would park with or date Barney? :auto:

[susankenny]

Dawn,

 

I think the biggest issue isn't the standard that we all set for ourselves (I've never met someone that didn't live by a set of standards). The issue tends to be when we use our standard as a measuring stick on others and judge one another for living differently (to a different standard). Sort of like the speck in your brother's eye when you have a pole in your own, ykwim? My SIL is a Christian (as am I), but we have different standards. Her children cannot play with pokemon or watch certain TV shows, etc. I have absolutely no issue with that. I do have a problem though when I feel judged by her for allowing my son to engage with these toys or shows (literally, she felt in was her place to question me in "love"). I feel angered when she is hypocritical but inconsitent in her own walk. For example, no pokemon is allowed but her kids can watch Airbender, or Avatar, or Law & Order:confused: Chronicles of Narnia is excellent, but Harry Potter is from the devil? It really makes ir difficult to not speak up & say something. I bite my lip to keep the peace though, but she never bites her lip regarding my choices. She never keeps the peace. Not to mention she has been divorced 3x and has premarital sex - can you imagine if I talked to her about it in "love". I think it would destroy my family.

 

 

 

Susan

[swimmermom3]

I am a Christian and I have a legalistic background that I am slowly coming out of right now, so that colors my perceptions. I have been thinking a lot about this type of issue lately.

 

What it comes down to for me, is that many times conservative Christians take a standard or preference and make it a dogma. Within that, there is a judgment made about the other person. Usually that judgment is the idea that the other person is not Godly or holy enough because they do something or don't do something. And that is when they are comparing themselves to other Christians. Imagine the consequences when they are dealing with unbelievers! That attitude will certainly not win anyone to Christ.

 

This is a very good point and I think it gets to the heart of the matter. In fact, my first impression in reading Dawn's post was that her wording subtly set her apart from the vile nonbelievers who aren't looking for the light, but are wallowing in darkness through their literary choices. Typically this stance makes me want to come out fighting, but I've read enough of Dawn's posts to know she probably didn't mean it to sound as harsh as it did or that she is truly tired of being judged. We are all tired of being judged.

 

Again, I don't care what you all read as long as you don't care what I read. Although, if you try to burn my books or sell me Agatha Christie novels on Amazon with the objectionable-to-you parts blacked out, I'll care. and may behave accordingly.

[Lovedtodeath]

I hear what you're saying, but this is again a totally separate issue.

 

Some Christians do interpret scripture in ways that forbid them to do certain things, and because of that, they keep themselves away those things. Sometimes that means keeping away from certain people. There have been activities we had to refuse and instead of just accepting that, people feel it's their place to make us feel weird. They try to convince us that other Christians have no problem with it, etc. etc.

 

That is just going to happen.

I see what you are saying. I believe that the problem is that many people are not applying this scripture correctly. 1 Corinthians 11:27-30 "For why should it be that my freedom is judged by another person's conscience? If I am partaking with thanks why am I to be spoken of abusively over that for which I give thanks?"

 

I actually think that the unbelievers are judged less. As in one judgment: unbeliever instead of 120 judgments: lazy, immodest, bad association, lover of money, lover of (fill in the blank) etc. etc. What's really nice is that the one striving to be a Christian ends up with the same eventual judgment as the unbeliever in the judgmental person's eyes: not good enough.

 

I have struggled personally with this: I would rather be condemned for not trying (and not being reminded of it constantly) than to always feel that I am not good enough no matter how hard I try.

[Slartibartfast]

There's an Andy Griffith movie? Is it the most boring movie, ever?

 

I have to say that I don't really know the show well, but I can't imagine Andy 'parking'. :lurk5: And who would park with or date Barney? :auto:

 

 

Barney had a girlfriend through most of the series, they got married during one of the reunions. (yeah...I watched the reunion. My dad had the remote, don't laugh!)

[sunshine_librarian]

I think it has to do with the approach in being choosy. If someone said,"I really don't want my kids to read Twilight because it was just so poorly written and edited," very few people would disagree, even if they personally loved the books. But if someone said, "I don't want my kids to read The Scarlet Letter because it chronicles the experience of a fallen woman, and I see that as glamorizing adultery - which you know you go to H3ll for!" many people would feel the need to say something, if not to the speaker then on a forum somewhere ;). It comes a across as more of a suggestion that if you thoughtlessly let your children read that book that your daughters are going to be strippers, and Shame On You!

[Lovedtodeath]

I think that part of the problem, as well, is that if my standard for my family is to refrain from engaging in certain activities then people assume that I am judging them for doing so even if I am not.

[Crimson Wife]

What I cannot respect in any shape or form is the Christian who asks for a "sanitized" version of a classic...The goal is to stick to a moral high ground and yet be able to tell everyone that yes, you have read King Arthur. The whole thing lacks integrity. Just don't read the book.

 

I don't agree with changing the plot, but I have no problem with children's retellings that leave out certain age-inappropriate aspects. My kids can read the originals in high school or college to find out everything that happened in the story. But when they're little, they are fine just knowing some of the plot. We simplify things for kids all the time- why should literature be any different than any other subject?

[Lovedtodeath]

I don't agree with changing the plot, but I have no problem with children's retellings that leave out certain age-inappropriate aspects. My kids can read the originals in high school or college to find out everything that happened in the story. But when they're little, they are fine just knowing some of the plot. We simplify things for kids all the time- why should literature be any different than any other subject?

:iagree:I did this with the Iliad and the Aeneid, so that we could be exposed to the story instead of skipping it altogether.

[Lady Florida.]

And who would park with or date Barney? :auto:

 

Thelma Lou. :D:D

Edited April 29, 2011 by floridamom

[mommaduck]

You can introduce Arthur to younger children with some of the info and not *all* of the info.

 

If there is a cleaned-up classic, it could be a valuable curriculum resource to some.

 

The OP's point is valid. The Bible tells us to "be innocent regarding evil and wise concerning good" / "shrewd as serpents and gentle as doves" and many more passages about "bad company corrupts good character". Phil 4:8 tells us to focus on "whatever is good, pure, lovely..." (paraphrase)

 

Nestof3, I think it is just what we should expect if we are to "in the world, but not of it" - we are like foreigners living here. We are peculiar. And we should not be surprised that we are not applauded for our standards.

 

That said, it is no secret that tolerance preached by many is not extended to Christians. I am so often surprised, but I should not be. We do not belong to this world.

 

Lisa J, mom to 5

 

I'm aware that things can be introduced to children without all of the details, but I would think that as the child becomes older (a teenager) they would also be given more information on the classic rather than living with the idea that the story is a shiny ideal. It's just as with stories from Scripture. We don't explain EVERYTHING to them right away, but as they get older, they do read the not so nice details and come to understand them. This is entirely different than totally isolating them from the actuality of the story or the reality of the world around them.

[LibraryLover]

Barney had a girlfriend through most of the series, they got married during one of the reunions. (yeah...I watched the reunion. My dad had the remote, don't laugh!)

 

I don't mean to hate on Barney. In fact, my favorite men are pretty geeky.

[Lovedtodeath]

I refuse to read Dawkins. He creeps me out. Give me grief over it and I am sure that I can find some authors that you wouldn't want to read.

[Slartibartfast]

I don't really agree with things being dumbed down.

 

I read the Iliad and the Odyssey at a pretty young age. But when I reread them, each time I found something new in the same books I already read. "Oh I didn't see that before," or "Oh! Ha! I guess I didn't get that last time!"

 

Each time you read it at different stages in your life you find something new. To me that is what makes some literature special.

 

You don't really get that feeling with dumbed down versions. There is not as much waiting to be discovered or understood differently.

 

I might have read one book as an adult but then read it again as a mother and I would see it completely differently.

Edited April 29, 2011 by Sis

[Slartibartfast]

I don't mean to hate on Barney. In fact, my favorite men are pretty geeky.

 

Oh...I am not defending Barney I was just mentioning it cause I guess I have a lot of Andy Griffith trivia stored away. :lol: Surely I could use that space for something more useful...but no.

 

:confused:

[Lovedtodeath]

I don't really agree with things being dumbed down.

 

I read the Ilead and the Oddessy at a pretty young age. But when I reread it, each time I found something new in the same book I already read. "Oh I didn't see that before," or "Oh! Ha! I guess I didn't get that last time!"

 

Each time you read it at different stages in your life you find something new. To me that is what makes some literature special.

 

You don't really get that feeling with dumbed down versions. There is not as much waiting to be discovered or understood differently.

 

I might have read one book as an adult but then read it again as a mother and I would see it completely differently.

Making them shorter by leaving out certain scenes is different than dumbing them down.

[Nestof3]

Well, if a fellow Christian told me that she won't read a certain book because of her convictions, that's one thing, but if she says "Christians shouldn't read this certain book", that's entirely another thing. Kwim?

 

Yes, I do agree with that.

[LibraryLover]

Oh...I am not defending Barney I was just mentioning it cause I guess I have a lot of Andy Griffith trivia stored away. :lol: Surely I could use that space for something more useful...but no.

 

:confused:

 

 

IOh, it was me, not you. I was feeling guilty, thinking, 'Poor Barney, he never hurt anyone but himself, let him be." LOL I have lots of brain hard drive taken up with things that aren't 'important'. Why do I have Anne Baxter trivia ready to go at a moment's notice, but not the ability to speak 5 languages? It's tragic, really.

[Nestof3]

I think that part of the problem, as well, is that if my standard for my family is to refrain from engaging in certain activities then people assume that I am judging them for doing so even if I am not.

 

Trust me, I hate trying to back out of things. I feel uncomfortable because I want to be able to choose my own way without making someone else feel awkward. And, to be honest, I hate feeling like a total freak -- weirdo -- strange bird. I've felt like one in so many ways for so many things throughout my life.

 

My brother became vegan as of late, and I let him know I understood his stance and respected him even though I don't share all of the same concerns he does. I didn't want him to feel weird. My dad, however, made a huge deal out of it.

 

Another topic:

 

I admit, I don't understand how people can find animals sacred. I find all sorts of things odd about others' religions. But, they are theirs. I also find Greek mythology to be a hoot. End of story.

[Karen in CO]

This is a very good point and I think it gets to the heart of the matter. In fact, my first impression in reading Dawn's post was that her wording subtly set her apart from the vile nonbelievers who aren't looking for the light, but are wallowing in darkness through their literary choices. Typically this stance makes me want to come out fighting, but I've read enough of Dawn's posts to know she probably didn't mean it to sound as harsh as it did or that she is truly tired of being judged. We are all tired of being judged.

 

Again, I don't care what you all read as long as you don't care what I read. Although, if you try to burn my books or sell me Agatha Christie novels on Amazon with the objectionable-to-you parts blacked out, I'll care. and may behave accordingly.

 

Agreeing.

 

I am very selective about what my kids read. I have a friend who is a literacy coach at a local ps. Her ds, who is the same age as my dd, loves Vampirates. I'd not let a book like that in my house. I also know many who let their pre-teens read the Twillight series. Not in my house. My kids do learn to read with the Pathway readers and the CLP Nature stories, but I'd not use many science books from Christian publishers.

 

I probably don't get a bad rap for these choices, because I just smile and nod when people make choices that I'd not allow unless I'm asked about them or if they offer the books to my kids. Maybe the Christians get a bad rap because there have been multiple instances of them leading book burning and book banning drives. You don't really see others in this country burning BJU books or R&S books because they are offensive.

[HeidiKC]

As was the recent posting here about screening old Any Griffith shows before their children watch them because Barney and Andy date...that was interesting. . :D;)

 

What?! I missed that one. I'll have to look that up! Love Andy Griffith.

[Lady Florida.]

Some people haven't been exposed to the idea that such children's fiction is so horribly offensive to others and that other people actually believe that it promotes witchcraft and gives actual recipes and potions to readers.

 

I think this could be part of it. I was caught off guard when we first started homeschooling and I was exposed to beliefs that I had no idea some people held. I was genuinely surprised, and if I had been on this or any homeschooling board, I might have posted expressing my shock and surprise. It wouldn't have been meant as a judgement or bad rap, but as surprise. (This would have been before our HP incident. After it happened I might have posted, in indignation, "I can't believe what someone told my kid today!".)

[fairfarmhand]

Oh...I am not defending Barney I was just mentioning it cause I guess I have a lot of Andy Griffith trivia stored away. :lol: Surely I could use that space for something more useful...but no.

 

:confused:

 

 

oh yes. In fact I can probably quote many of the episodes word for word.

 

The pathetic thing is that I still laugh...

[Jenny in Florida]

I can think of all sorts of books many non-Christians would probably not read. I wonder, for example, how many non-Christians sit around reading this:

 

I've never heard of these books, and I couldn't find a description of any of the titles on either Amazon or B&N.com. So, I don't know whether I would read them or not. However, if I didn't read something that was overtly Christian, it would more likely be because I didn't find it interesting than because I thought it was offensive. And I would never presume to tell anyone else they were wrong to read it. (There might be some exceptions to that second part, but it would be based on specific content, not because a title talked about a religion in general.)

 

Please tell me what other religions focus on this. Please tell me what other religions insist that there is only one way, one truth, and one life. Perhaps if you understand that, you will understand Christians more.

 

I can't think of any "religions" in general that require the kind of screening I think you're describing. I think there are probably individuals of various faiths that practice it, but the people I find discussing it most often are Christians.

 

For what it's worth, I consider myself a very religious person. I go to church most Sundays and am, in fact, moving next week in part to be closer to our church. My religious beliefs permeate every aspect of my life.

 

When our kids were littler, we were very careful about what they read and saw and even the toys they had. We had frequent conversations about how they might cope with being "different" and having things they weren't allowed to do or see. But we always, always framed it by explaining to them that these are OUR beliefs and explaining why, never by telling them other people are wrong.

 

But I absolutely don't think my beliefs give me the right to make a scene when other people follow other paths. So, for example, thinking about the two recent Harry Potter-related threads, I would never in a million years behave the way the people described in those stories have behaved. If I found a book in a rental home that didn't fit with my values, I'd quietly put it away, and that only if I genuinely felt my kids shouldn't even catch a glimpse of the title.

 

As someone else said, we stay in a lot of motels, all of which have that lovely Gideon Bible in the draw. I've never, ever even considered the possibility of marching down to the front desk and insisting they remove it from the room.

 

And if I knew another child of our acquaintance was reading books I considered unacceptable, I'd quietly discuss it with my child after the other kiddo went home. We'd talk about how different families have different standards and that, since we value our right to make decisions for our family, we HAVE TO respect the rights of other families to do the same. I can't imagine ever speaking directly to the other child about it and attempting to impose my beliefs. If I thought, for some reason I honestly cannot imagine, that the other child was talking about it too much and confusing or upsetting my child (which also probably wouldn't happen), the most I might ever do is matter-of-factly ask the second child to talk about something else for a while.

 

 

I do care when someone makes it their business to tell me or my child that what we do is wrong. I think that's where this comes from. If someone says "We choose not to read XXX" and leaves it at that, I have no problem with it. When someone proceeds to tell me or my child why they don't (without us asking), or what's wrong with it, or why we shouldn't, then I have a problem.

 

Bingo. And it seems to me that both of the other threads involve people doing something similar to this.

[HeidiKC]

Oh, wait... I thought you meant Andy and Barney were dating EACH OTHER in some of the episodes! HA! I found it hard to picture, and hard to imagine they'd have the storyline back then. But I would have ordered it right away from Netflix!

[KristinaBreece]

:blink::svengo:

Oh, wait... I thought you meant Andy and Barney were dating EACH OTHER in some of the episodes! HA! I found it hard to picture, and hard to imagine they'd have the storyline back then. But I would have ordered it right away from Netflix!

 

 

Me, too. But my poor grandfather would have had a massive coronary at the thought.

[Lovedtodeath]

So, for example, thinking about the two recent Harry Potter-related threads, I would never in a million years behave the way the people described in those stories have behaved. If I found a book in a rental home that didn't fit with my values, I'd quietly put it away, and that only if I genuinely felt my kids shouldn't even catch a glimpse of the title.

 

As someone else said, we stay in a lot of motels, all of which have that lovely Gideon Bible in the draw. I've never, ever even considered the possibility of marching down to the front desk and insisting they remove it from the room.

I haven't read these other threads, but some people think that dangerous spirit creatures are attracted to certain objects like movies or books and having the movie or book on premises would actually scare them. It is not an action of judgment or being offended so much as an action motivated by superstition or fear.

[susankenny]

Oh, wait... I thought you meant Andy and Barney were dating EACH OTHER in some of the episodes! HA! I found it hard to picture, and hard to imagine they'd have the storyline back then. But I would have ordered it right away from Netflix!

 

 

Ha ha. Yes! That was the lost episode or uncut version, lol.

 

Susan

[twoforjoy]

Just to use the examples you give in your first post, while I totally agree that most non-Christian (or moderate/liberal Christian) parents wouldn't choose the books you mention, I don't know that they'd ban their children from reading them with the same vehemence I see HP sometimes denounced with.

 

I don't know, I do think that there is a difference--particularly within the homeschooling community--between how conservative Christians and others respond to things they don't like/want their children exposed to. Maybe because they make up such a majority, it seems like the preferences and standards of conservative Christians often become requirements for what is or is not okay for all Christians and even demands that things they find offensive be censored. And I do think a lot of less conservative homeschoolers can get put off by that, especially since it's already so difficult to find homeschooling materials that are useful for those who want to teach evolution or believe in universal reconciliation or don't want social studies materials that come from a unregulated-free-markets-are-best perspective, and it just seems like people are making demands that would make that even harder.

 

So I just wonder if that kind of spills over into then finding people's criticisms of books like HP frustrating, even when it's simply a matter of personal preference and not trying to get the local library to take the books off the shelves or writing editorials about how no parent should let their child read the books.

[stripe]

I know plenty of non-Christians who don't do or read certain things. It probably has to do with how many very conservative religious non-Christians people on the WTM forum interact with. I had very conservative neighbors of the same religion, but we lived very different lives. I did apparently shocking stuff like breastfeed my baby in front of her kids when I locked myself out of her house with a baby. I might add, her kids used to sit in my living room, looking at every single book I had. I think because they didn't really have books. I also have a TV and an internet connection. I didn't really need to be told what they don't do. It was obvious.