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

Wordpress

My move to Mac has been very happy except for two issues - gaming and blogging. For websurfing and multimedia, a Mac is of course a terrific machine. Games on the Mac platform are often ports of games made for the larger PC market and that means a Mac gamer will have to wait for the port. I'm not a heavy gamer by any means but I am very happy that the Mac port of Civilization 4 is finally here. Well, my copy isn't here quite yet - but it has been ordered and ought to be here soon. The blogging issue is more complicated. I'm not fond of writing my posts in a browser window. This goes back to when I was first blogging and I lost one or two large posts into the ether. After that I moved to w.bloggar - a great little app that let me compose on my desktop and then click send when all was said and done. I have not been able to recreate that experience on my Mac, and not for a lack of trying! I looked at Marsedit , but that forces you to compse while staring at a bunch of HMT...
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