Heads up, this is from a Christian perspetive.
Why do people feel the need to make mock-umentaries about anything they don't agree with? If you don't agree with a religion that is fine, but why make a one-sided "documentary" to try and convince people that their religion is wrong. ChristianityToday.com had an article on this and said that at some point in the film or during an interview the producer/director/whatever referred to religion as "a neurological disorder". I have heard that he has done some work with a professor at a university that does brain scans on people when they are praying, speaking in tongues, etc. Just because brain activity is different when people are doing those things doesn't prove to me it is a figment of their imagination.
My pastor had a sermon a while back about having fun and enjoying Christian living by doing good deeds to help other people out (faith without works is dead, but our faith drives us to want to do such things) and said that someone had studied it and that when people were helping others endorphins were released and gave them a sense of happiness. What I got from it is that God tells us that living the way he wants us to live will make us happy and the bit about the endorphins was something to further validate that stance.
To go as far to say people have neurological disorders for believing in a religion is nothing less than being a completely intolerable jerk. For someone who is anti-religious to say that they are essentially spitting in the face of anyone who believes in ANY religion and at the same time saying that they are without a doubt 100% right. Don't lots of people who are skeptical about religion complain that religious people believe that their beliefs are right? Contradictory perhaps?
You know, I am all for free speech, but I am pretty sure free speech was primarily to keep the government in check through the use of the media, protests, etc. not an excuse to continually insult people on a large scale. If someone doesn't agree with religion why do they feel the need to make a one-sided mock-umentary? If you want to debate religion at least have separate view points. Maybe he is doing sort of that thing, but I find it hard to believe that someone with such a strong anti-religious stance is going to use interviews from deeply religious people in a way that represents a respectful debate. I wouldn't be surprised if they picked and chose interviews that fit their agenda for the movie.
Why do people feel the need to make mock-umentaries about anything they don't agree with? If you don't agree with a religion that is fine, but why make a one-sided "documentary" to try and convince people that their religion is wrong. ChristianityToday.com had an article on this and said that at some point in the film or during an interview the producer/director/whatever referred to religion as "a neurological disorder". I have heard that he has done some work with a professor at a university that does brain scans on people when they are praying, speaking in tongues, etc. Just because brain activity is different when people are doing those things doesn't prove to me it is a figment of their imagination.
My pastor had a sermon a while back about having fun and enjoying Christian living by doing good deeds to help other people out (faith without works is dead, but our faith drives us to want to do such things) and said that someone had studied it and that when people were helping others endorphins were released and gave them a sense of happiness. What I got from it is that God tells us that living the way he wants us to live will make us happy and the bit about the endorphins was something to further validate that stance.
To go as far to say people have neurological disorders for believing in a religion is nothing less than being a completely intolerable jerk. For someone who is anti-religious to say that they are essentially spitting in the face of anyone who believes in ANY religion and at the same time saying that they are without a doubt 100% right. Don't lots of people who are skeptical about religion complain that religious people believe that their beliefs are right? Contradictory perhaps?
You know, I am all for free speech, but I am pretty sure free speech was primarily to keep the government in check through the use of the media, protests, etc. not an excuse to continually insult people on a large scale. If someone doesn't agree with religion why do they feel the need to make a one-sided mock-umentary? If you want to debate religion at least have separate view points. Maybe he is doing sort of that thing, but I find it hard to believe that someone with such a strong anti-religious stance is going to use interviews from deeply religious people in a way that represents a respectful debate. I wouldn't be surprised if they picked and chose interviews that fit their agenda for the movie.
