Charles Darwin film too controversial for religious America

[captainwillies]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6173399/Charles-Darwin-film-too-controversial-for-religious-America.html

>A British film about Charles Darwin has failed to find a US distributor because his theory of evolution is too controversial for American audiences, according to its producer.

>only 39 per cent of Americans believe in the theory of evolution

well. I'am at a loss for words at the moment. ill probably edited this later after my brain starts working again. just thought you should know.

EDIT:

Movieguide.org, an influential site which reviews films from a Christian perspective, described Darwin as the father of eugenics and denounced him as "a racist, a bigot and an 1800s naturalist whose legacy is mass murder". His "half-baked theory" directly influenced Adolf Hitler and led to "atrocities, crimes against humanity, cloning and genetic engineering", the site stated.

wow. just wow. its only a movie and yet such hate and arrogance is displayed on the christian side. I'm not flamming christians but jesus they linked an 18th century naturlist to "Hitler"? goddamn.

 

[TheLastCylon]

Odd, I thought I saw a trailer for this movie in a U.S. theater.

 

[UnearthedArcana]

And here in the UK we've got Charles Darwin on our money. :3

 

[Skeleon]

39% isn't enough of a possible audience?
I mean, come on, films like Watchmen don't have the broadest probable audience, either, and they're still successful.
Well, whatever. I'll watch it.
Also, controversy is good advertisement!

 

[GodsAndFishes]

three letters for this

W
T
F

 

[dweomermaster]

...I'm moving to Antarctica.
Fuck America.

take me with you!

 

[messy]

And here in the UK we've got Charles Darwin on our money. :3

That's right every time we "drop a ten-bill" we help the cause for science.

According to Dawkins (aka atheist God) even the Pope believes in evolution to some extent (his one qualm is when the human soul was injected) so it goes to show these Americans are out of touch with their own religion (which has to be said, the catholic side of things at least, is a little out of touch already)

 

[Emphraim]

Only 39 percent? Where are these people?

I know that everyone in my school believes in evolution. Then again, I live in New York City. I assume most of the people who don't believe in the theory live in the south.

 

[Smudge91]

My days why is 39% stopping a film being made. If creationists are going to be offended well they just don't watch it...simples. its like monty python's life of brian again people are going to be offended by something they haven't seen.

 

[FROGGEman2]

What.



WHat.
WHAt.
WHAT.
WHAT!
WHAT!
WHAT!
WHAT!
WHAT!
WHAT!

Dude.

What.

 

[internutt]

As a Scottish Christian I see no problem with this film. Completely denying Darwin's theories is silly. Man trained wolves an over the centuries these wolves we bred became the dogs we know today.

Evolution taught in Scottish schools beside creation in Religious, Moral and Philosophical Studies. In this course teenagers are taught about different beliefs from science and various religions around the world. Without any bias.

From what I've read up on American Schooling(I wasn't in America long enough to go to high school/Middle School) is that parents are wanting Creationism taught in SCIENCE class*. Religion and Science are apples and oranges. You can prefer one over the other and enjoy them in the same meal.

*Could any American's verify this for me?

 

[lostclause]

Depressing. Oh well, I suppose that a sympathetic depiction of a great scientist is too much to handle. Come on, they've had dramatisations of Hitler and other villianous figures but a man who does no harm to anyone and was in many ways quite progressive for this time is somehow unacceptable.

 

[DrunkWithPower]

Oh goddamnit, I was wanting to watch this film. Why, why, WHY does the "Passion" get to come out without any heat, yet they can't show the other side of the story?

edit: Wait, why doesn't Loins Gate pick it up? The did everything for Religulous.

 

[Leftnt Sharpe]

Why is it that America is so hypocritical? The people who are essentially blaming Darwin for the Nazi atrocities are probably the same people who want Obama's healthcare reforms to fail, which I consider indirect murder.

I truly feel sorry for Americans who face-palm every time something like this happens.

 

[Vlane]

What's wrong with a movie being controversial? Last time I checked this was a good thing.

 

[Emphraim]

*Could any American's verify this for me?

Yes, you are right. Even now, some states want creationism to be taught alongside evolution or even replacing it.

But I still don't understand this. Even if only 39 percent of Americans believe it, that's still a significant portion for the movie. No need to cancel American distribution.

 

[Sonicron]

....Ehhh. Why do so many things seem to work in illogical ways in America? Half-baked theory my ass. Choosing to believe in a fairy tale (albeit a religious one) instead of accepting empirical biological facts is the point where religion turns into full-blown superstition. Sad.

 

[captainwillies]

As a Scottish Christian I see no problem with this film.

yes thats all good but i now really wanna know what the thing is that seperates you from someone who starts throffing at the mouth at the slightest mention of Darwin.

 

[Vrex360]

Jesus that's sad. I honstly find it hard to believe there still exist people who can think of creation as valid science (believe what you want, just don't try to prove it) I mean I'm honestly trying to imagine the worst that could happen if this movie was brought to the American cinemas. I mean yeah the Creation Science groups will call it 'evolutionary propaganda against the bible' but is that really enough to justify withholding a movie like this? I mean surely there is still enough media power in the country to allow the theory of evolution to be given some level of respect.

EDIT: Also I wish people would stop making the hachett job on Darwin... when he said favoured 'races' he meant 'races' to mean the equivalent of 'species'. I am sick of people saying he was a racist with a half baked theory, because the word 'theory' does not mean opinion when put into a scientific context. It has multiple meanings. Also even if he was racist (which so far the only evidence to suggest he was is now kaput) so what? Everyone in that era was slightly racist because there was still a class system back then, there was no such thing as a person 'not racist' back then... racial segregation was part of everday life. It was a bad thing but the reality nonetheless.

EDIT: We have found countless sources of evidence for evolution by this point by the way. We can pretty much trace our entire fossil history through the fossil record and there are other aspects of evolutionary biology that we study everyday.... by this point I really don't think there is any scientific debate.

EDIT: I respect the beliefs of those who have religious preferance however.