Another annoying advert....

...from Cillit Bang.

Is it just me or are those adverts intensely annoying? Why do they feel the need for the main actor to shout? Does he not know that the fluffy thing above his head is called a microphone and it will pick up everything he says? I mute the adverts when they come on as I find them most irritating.

Is it just me?

Once upon a time they lived happily ever after

Group urges Da Vinci film changes

As I hope, one day, to be a published writer, stories like this concern me.

I found the Da Vinci code fascinating. I enjoyed re-examining familiar paintings and researching some of the issues brought up in the book. It's fun to have the familiar challenged in an exciting way.

These conspiracies and theories have been rumbling around for centuries and will continue to do so. There is so much history and intrigue surrounding the catholic church and christianity as a whole. People like a mystery.

But, and this is a big but, this is first and foremost a work of fiction. The author has made it clear that it is a work of fiction. Sony Entertainment have made it clear that they view the film as a work of fiction. Fiction takes the familiar, the bizarre, the theories, the myths and, with a pinch of artistic license, weaves them into a story.

It seems increasingly as if authors, script writers, playwrights, etc will be forced to avoid a growing number of subject areas for fear of causing offence.

What a bland and boring world that will lead to.

Cogito Ergo Sum

In continuation of my previous post, the subject that I have decided to study is ... {drum roll} ... Philosophy.

I find many of the big philosophical questions fascinating. My Hubby will agree when I say that I love a good debate on life, love and um ... stuff. In addition, religion is something that I'm becoming increasingly interested in. Not religion in the sense of wanting faith in some higher being but in the sense of why others have a faith in some higher being. The course that I have found has a section on religious morality which should be great fun.

And now, I would like to leave you with this quote that is attributed to Steve Weinberg (I am informed that it was quoted in The New York Times, 1999):
"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things.
But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."

Hmm, makes you think ...

Educating Rhea

As you've probably guessed from the range of things I post about, I do quite a lot of reading on a variety of subjects. I like to learn new things and be challenged by new ideas. I've decided to do an A Level by correspondence course - it's not related to my job, purely for my own interest and enjoyment.

I think I have made up my mind what subject I will be taking but I thought it would be fun to have some suggestions from you.

So, what subject do you think I should study?

People in glass houses ...

Little rambling today I'm afraid but I need to get my thoughts out on this.

I absolutely uphold people's right to peaceful protest. Use your voice, placards and peaceful action to let people know you're not happy with something. But a number of protesters in the UK chose some quite offensive slogans - Cartoon protest slogans condemned.

Now, I want to make it perfectly clear that I understand many Muslims in Britain have condemned some of the slogans used by those protesting about the cartoons published by european newspapers.

I must say that, as a non-religious person, I can't understand why people are so offended by these cartoons but I can accept that their feelings are genuine.

Perhaps it is because I am used to seeing humour and satire being directed towards organised religion and politicians, etc. Perhaps it is because of my personal beliefs about organised religion.

I will make no comment on the cartoons as I have not seen them - perhaps they went too far, I don't know. I have since learnt through this that there is an Islamic tradition forbidding the depiction of Allah or Mohammed, which makes the general reaction a bit more understandable.

But I think this is very important, "The newspaper's culture editor, Flemming Rose, ... has insisted that there is a long Danish tradition of biting satire with no taboos, and that Muhammad and Islam are being treated no differently to other religions."
If Islam was being singled out to recieve this sort of treatment then I could understand the reaction a lot more but as it is, they are being treated like any other religion or group.

However I cannot understand or accept such slogans as "europe you will pay" and "7/7 is on it's way" (slogans being carried on the streets of London); the fact that Danish workers in arab countries have received death threats or that Danish businesses are being boycotted.

I agree with the shadow home secretary, David Davis, who said 'some of the messages on the placards amounted to "incitement to murder".'

One cannot on the one hand ask for respect and tolerance whilst the other hand carries a slogan of hate and death.


-- Edited 13:30, 6th January 2006 --
Sadly, the situation has escalated and four people have been killed.

Offense has been caused. Debate is clearly needed. But restraint needs to be called for.

Defeat for the Thought Police

Thank goodness that common sense has prevailed, even though it didn't happen in the commons. (Did you spot that? nice play on words there I thought!)

The Racial and Religious Hatred Bill will go forward in the milder form as amended by the House of Lords.

Clearly, I would not wish for anyone to feel threatened by others because of their beliefs (or lack thereof), nor do I want people to feel that they can incite hatred against a particular sector of society because of their beliefs, practices, etc.
And it is also that very same line of reasoning which made me feel the defeated form of the Bill went too far.

Respectful freedom of expression is very important for open, enlightened and democratic societies. Comments abound currently about the UK heading towards a nanny state. I believe citizens need to be charged with responsibility for their own behaviour not governed by an ever increasing set of rules. ... you can stop laughing now ... I know it sounds like a niave dream but seriously, the more the government tries to govern our daily lives, the less control we have over them and the less we will care.

In the same way that Christian speakers should be able to spread the good news to jaded shoppers on a saturday afternoon, that Muslim women should feel accepted not intimidated when they wear their chosen form of dress, and that religious meeting places should be safe and respected; then artists, commentators, bloggers etc should be free to criticise or even poke fun at any social institution, including religious ones.

There is a line between criticism or humour and incitment to racial hatred. Sensible humans can see that. But then again, since when have politicians been either of those?

If we continually have to self censor (for fear that the government will do it for us) how will we ever grow, learn, exchange ideas or remove intolerance?