Skip to main content

Intelligent debate

Leading up to the film festival, animal rights activists had demanded that "Casuistry" be pulled from the program. ... [Toronto Film] festival co-director Noah Cowan rejected the calls. "Film festivals exist, in part, to generate intelligent, reasoned discussion, not to stifle it," he said in a statement before the festival began.
Bless the kind souls who are pushing to take a discussion of the possible glories of animal torture off of the screens of Toronto. Because if they succeed we may be able to delay cinemas showing films discussing things that are even worse. These kids committed an act of that was utterly horrific and pointless, which they then tried to justify by using the relativistic crap they learned in "art" school. Is it any wonder "art" schools and "artists" are so widely held in such disrepute?

Comments

The Tiger said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
9/15/2004 07:55:00 pm
The Tiger said…
Oops. Misunderstood the post. (And the film. Just googled it. Horrifying.)

***

Welcome to the Red Ensign Brigade!

***

Non-violent protests are a good thing. ... If I were in charge of the film festival, I wouldn't have agreed to show it -- perhaps public embarassment will do the trick?

Isn't there some sort of law about profits from accounts of crimes committed by the writer/filmmaker being forfeit?
9/15/2004 07:59:00 pm
Curt said…
If there is such a law - not allowing people to profit from a crime they commit - it would not apply here. The film is about the guys who filmed the killing of a cat. It is not the actual film the cat killers made.

The merits of the cat killing film are the focus of the film now being shown and protested. For myself, I think there is nothing to discuss. It was a stupid act, creating only a useless film.
9/15/2004 09:22:00 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Reuters joins CNN on the bench

Makes room for CanWest to join the majors Kudos to CanWest for calling a terrorist a terrorist . Many, including The Last Amazon , will be happy to hear it. Reuters is among the worst of the major western news services, where I would also place the BBC and the CBC. Unsurprisingly, Reuters is not happy about the changes CanWest made to Reuters wire stories: Our editorial policy is that we don't use emotive words when labeling someone," said David A. Schlesinger, Reuters' global managing editor. "Any paper can change copy and do whatever they want. But if a paper wants to change our copy that way, we would be more comfortable if they remove the byline." Mr. Schlesinger said he was concerned that changes like those made at CanWest could lead to "confusion" about what Reuters is reporting and possibly endanger its reporters in volatile areas or situations. "My goal is to protect
Post a Comment
Read more

Where credit is due

A good'un from Sawyer Brown . Thank God for You Well I've been called a self-made man Girl don't you believe it's true I know exactly how lucky I am When I'm gettin' this close to you It's high time I'm giving some praise To those that got me where I am today Chorus I got to thank momma for the cookin' Daddy for the whuppin' The devil for the trouble that I get into I got to give credit where credit is due I thank the bank for the money Thank God for you A strong heart and a willing hand That's the secret to my success A good woman - I try to be a good man A good job - Lord I know I've been blessed I'm just a part of a greater plan It doesn't matter which part I am Chorus I got to thank momma for the teachin' Daddy for the preachin' The devil for the trouble that I get into I got to give credit where credit is due I thank the bank for the money Thank God for you
Post a Comment
Read more

A very limited form of inquiry

Real Clear Politics is carrying commentary on James Q. Wilson's WSJ article on ID (got that?). Wilson, the respected social scientist, gets it mostly right when he says that ID is not science because it can't be tested: So ID is not science. Does this mean that science, in any way, implies the non-existence of God? No. Does this mean that belief in God is irrational and that we should all be "free thinkers"? No. Does this mean that it is impossible to arbitrate between various theories of the existence/non-existence of God and come to some reasonable conclusions? No. Does this mean that we cannot say that humanity is meant to exist? No. In other words, rationality outside of science is quite possible, and has been around for a long time. How do you think humanity invented science in the first place? We surely did not do it scientifically. Science as we know it is the product of millennia of philosophical debate -- from Aristotle to Lakatos. Science depends upon phi
Post a Comment
Read more