May 7, 2008 -
And you thought the GTA IV bashing was over?Silly you...
The Catholic Exchange has jumped into the fray, terming the hit game a "dangerous cultural low." Here's more:
I don’t know the answer to this, but out of curiosity, I have a question: What percentage of car-jacking murdering gang members were committed to this life as children?
...There’s something odd about our culture when we try to prevent children under 17 from seeing violent or sexually overt material in a two-hour R-rated movie, but we’re cavalier about selling the same experience - actually, a more offensive experience since it’s entirely non-judgmental - in an M-rated video game that will be played every night for months.
GP: The unnamed writer apparently fails to grasp that the movie and game rating systems are both voluntarily enforced by their respective industries.
There’s only one word to describe parents who would buy this game for their children: Disgraceful.
But retailers, too, must be pressed to check ID before selling the game to children who most assuredly will seek to purchase it. Legally, stores cannot sell children pornographic magazines or handguns - but they can legally sell video games to children that contain pornographic content or that teach children how to gun down cops.
Comments
It never ceases to amaze me just how willing you are to justify offensive speech directed at people who, quite frankly, have nothing to do with those who are doing this "scare-mongering" or "unprovoked attacking".
It would be far more mature (egads!) for people to just turn away and focus on real issues. It would also make a better impression of the gaming community. As it stands though the mud-slinging and blatantly offensive comments do EXACTLY the opposite of this and demonstrate a low level of maturity in handling.
Your problem, as I consistently see it, is that you're not on the receiving end of these offensive attacks by your fellow gamers based on what you believe. It is one thing to call a single person a hypocrite but when you veer off into generalities about a GROUP then you're really going to hit nerves with a lot of people. Unfortunately, you're pretty blind to this point of view based on your justification of these attacks. It's like an anti-gaming opponent justifying his criticism of gamers to, as you've demonstrated towards people of faith, gamers. It CAN'T be done.
It's not about us being open minded and accepting of criticism -- which should be constructive which it's not in this thread. It's about saying, "Look... It's ok for me to attack you and your beliefs based on the speeches and actions of others." That is EXACTLY what anti-game critics do and when you try to justify it you only make your argument that much less effective.
What's worse is that, unlike anti-game critics, we have something in common: we're gamers. That makes it that much harder to take and when you spout off offensive comments at us. As I'm sure you don't appreciate the criticism you get as a gamer from the anti-gaming community we really don't really appreciate the criticism we get from the anti-faith groups.
It's not as black and white as you'd like to think.
It's not the Church itself, it's a writer for a Catholic organization. It's akin to a college student writing an article for the campus paper-- getting his/her opinions published does not make those opinions official school policy.
AFAIK, the Church has made no official comments on GTA one way or another, aside from the generic "parents have a duty to raise their children well" thing.
Take a joke please. The facts remain and high ranking members of the Catholic church were caught and convicted when not being blocked by the church when the investigations were underway and the investigations are still underway in many cases.
No one here has said, "All Catholics are pediphiles".
Any Catholic who makes a statement should be prepared to defend their stance based on these facts. Period.
If you don't like it, then switch religions.
I don't like how Americans are generalized either, but I understand it and deal with it.
Would it make you feel better if we through in some off topic comments about other religions too?
Please...
Where do you think these Generalizations come from? They come from a large group of people observing the same situations over a long period of time. Thats why instead of getting on somebody for generalizing, you should be working from the inside getting people to break free of any behavior that fits the generalization. I've been the target of enough phsyical and emotional attacks at the hands of Christian Zealots to know that I have to be wary when I am near them. I've had my car vandalized, objects thrown at me, and I've been physically assaulted by "Christians" because I happen to wear my opinion on my sleeve. If that isn't enough evidence to criticize an entire group, than I don't know what is.
There's a massive difference between a joke meant to satirize something and a joke meant to belittle and berate. I take no offense at satirical jokes because they're just pointing to facts which no one can argue with unless they're out of touch with reality. I take offense at belittling jokes because that's exactly what they're doing -- they're making the person who's making the belittling joke look like he/she is trying to act superior and, therefore, taking the holier than thou route.
Again, a satirical joke points out the facts only and doesn't do anything to elevate the joker's position. An offensive belittling joke only serves to make the joker look like a hypocrite -- being the very thing they're accusing someone else of.
Have you been attacked by people who frequent this blog? Have you been belittled on here?
I have no problem with someone defending their point of view. However, I do take issue when someone justifies their personal attacks on another -- Christian, Muslim, Atheist, Agnostic, Buddhist, etc. -- because there is no reason to attack someone for something you disagree with. I am sorry you've gone through that with the Christians you've met, but it is completely unfair to assume all Christians, myself included, are like that.
It's akin to me saying that all Agnostics and Atheists believe in survival of the fittest and will kill me at the first possible opportunity they get. You know what though? It's not true. I've met and known a lot of Atheists and Agnostics who are hostile toward what I believe but that doesn't cloud my view of those particular groups. I KNOW there are people from those groups who aren't like that and, I guess this is where you and I differ, I know some who AREN'T like that.
Generalities can be made of every group. Just because you have "evidence" to support them doesn't make it true.
If this guy were anything other than Catholic, Christian, Muslim, or something to that effect would the audience of GamePolitics still be attacking his beliefs?
I'll be the first to say that I doubt.
Regardless... IMO... /activateflameshield
Christians and Catholics that take offense to the [historically supported, irrefutable] claims of wrong doing by the church [in the sense of an entity, with figures of control] can quite easily renounce the Church.. and still fervently believe in it's base teachings.
If you don't want the heat, don't stamp a label or a membership card on your forehead. If you're all so different than what we've seen from the Church as an entity, then maybe you should ask yourself why you belong to it in the first place.
This is easy to answer. Christianity isn't about how your acts, it's about your faiths. It's very possible that he shares SOME (not all because some badly interprets) of the beliefs without acting like the bigots who call themselves Christians. You don't have to scream "God will bring salvation to mankind" to be Christian.
Those we give labels or membership card on their forehead like you say are those we hear about. If we hear about them without knowing them, it means that they caused some uproar. And therefore, not necessarily the best models.
When it comes to religion, always take it with a grain of salt.
...when did GTA ever encourage...no when has ANY game encouraged anyone (other than JT) to want to kill cops and prostitutes, just because its in the game doesnt mean its there for encouragement, its just and option to make the RP experience full...loosers.
I thank you for being kind enough to provide me with a suitable and logical discussion on the subject.
@Rhade
I think this is where a lot of people are getting confused at the defensiveness of a lot of Christians/Catholics on here. I take no offense when a joke is made about something that has happened in the PAST. That is, at this point, fact. Those kinds of jokes are satirical and don't affect me since I wasn't there to be involved in any of those events. The only jokes I've taken offense to are ones that represent the PRESENT and actually do affect me.
I have no problem with someone making a point about the Christian Crusades or the Catholic Inquisition because I wasn't there and that is beyond my responsibility or the scope of anything that I'm involved with being as it was centuries in the past.
I only take issue with the present simply because it affects me in the here and now. I appreciate what Valdearg has said to me because, though he doesn't agree with what I believe, has stated and made clear to me that he understands what the point is I'm trying to get across and he wasn't insulting or condescending about his point of view.
I'm very accepting of opposing points of view but the moment that point of view comes across as condescending then all credibility is lost. My feeling, with Valdearg at least, is that he is the unfortunate victim of condescending Christians. What I want is an awareness that not all Christians are like that and I want the condescending and egotistically superior people to stop with their propoganda.
I'm all for pointing out the flaws in what someone says but to attack what they believe as being the source of what they say is not right. Especially saying all people who believe this must be of the same opinion as this person. I'm Christian, I don't agree AT ALL with what this guy says. But it feels like I'm coming under attack on this thread by proxy based on my beliefs.
I just ask for consideration for the others on here who are of Christian or Catholic faith.
Not only is R and M restricted to the same age, but you're more likely to be stopped trying to buy an M-rated game than an R-rated movie. Not once have I not been asked to show ID for buying any M game. But I have gotten into see Rambo and the new AVP movie unchecked.
If you want all this inappropriate material to be kept away from kids than the Bible would have to be restricted to the sale of minors.
Well said. I completely agree with you.
And guys, we don't need another Pandralisk.
Because holding down a button to auto aim and squeezing a second button to shoot is exactly how a real gun works.
If you ever fired a gun, you'd know that's exactly how it works. DUH! :D
But i've only been asked for ID for an R-rated film twice, even though I've seen about 25 R-rated films on my own.
I'm not going to stop critisizing those who irrationally attack gamers, gay people, science (evolution), the constitution (separation of church and state). Why should I not be critical of an individual or organization just because it is a religion?
Again, why not focus your anger on those people who make your faith look bad? If I were a Christian, I would be fighting the zealots who are ruining the religion and using it to force their ideals on others.
And are you denying that so many of these anti-free-speech groups are Christian based?
Nobody should be considered above critisism for any reason- least of all because they are religious...
Feel free to criticize all you want, but GP isn't the proper venue for a discussion of your feelings on Christianity. This article was about GTA IV and the reaction of a writer in a religious organization. Please note that the organization was NOT the religion itself, merely a sub-group of people that adhere to it. There's no reason to make comments about science, gays, the constitution, or pedophiles in response to this article.
As a side note, I really think Take Two/Rockstar should start suing pundits and others for lying about their games.
Morality is an issue, but it's not the exclusive claim or Catholics, or even Christians, or even Theists (last I checked, athiests also care about morality, even if their reasons differ).
Did you even READ the article?
.Coasters
.Rolemodels for children
.Substitute parents
.Life lessons
.Snack plates
WOW! IT'S SO SIMPLE, YET NO-ONE SEEMS TO PAY ATTENTION! :D !
Are you saying that Christian activism is not a major part of the "culture war" that is being waged over objectionable media? I missed the atheist protest of the Harry Potter books...
What I am saying is that everyone has a morality to which they feel accountable, and the reason I said that was to illustrate how the points they author was making (right or wrong) have very little to do with the Catholic Church itself.
Again, did you even read the article?
The fantasy novels "The Chronicles of Narnia" were bashed as Christian propaganda.
And GodsLabRat didn't said that Christian activism isn't a part of the culture war (it would be very naive to deny that, almost every party is in it), but it isn't the only one and it's not as huge as you make it sound. The only Christians we can REALLY complain about are the attention seekers (like someone we both know). Bashing the whole religious group is just as pointless as bashing video games and you know it.
He's Actually right there.
Please don't presume to believe that I am not upset with my fellow "Christians" who make the rest of us look bad. To suggest that I don't try to do anything about them is baseless and inaccurate and your arguments against myself and others usual are quite condescending.
Suggesting morals is a religious issue is essentially saying people who do not subscribe to any faith or religion -- Agnostics and Atheists last I checked -- are without morals and the like. Are you saying morals are a non-essential part of society? I'm going to assume that's not what you mean but it sure came across that way.
I'd also cite that there are indeed groups who are anti-First Amendment are that don't subscribe to any faith or religion. You've definitely made it sound like that was something exclusive to religion. Oh wait... a lot of the founding fathers of the United States were religious and they're the ones who decided on the separation of church and state as well as freedom of speech.
I don't disagree with this statement. But this goes both ways. You can't be above criticism but support being able to criticize others for their beliefs. That's hypocritical viewpoint no matter how you try to look at it. Gamers aren't above criticism and neither are you.
If you're going to criticize someone though it needs to be constructive rather than destructive. When you come across as condescending you lose your credibility and your criticism will not be considered constructive. To this point I've yet to see constructive criticism from you.
I appreciate these other individuals I've addressed because they've been willing to talk to me at my level and not pretend they're above me. Your attempts at justification have all been attempts at sounding morally superior to those of us who believe what we do. I don't pretend to be morally superior to you because I am not. I'm not morally superior to anyone on this blog. I do what I can to practice what I preach but I am only human.
"Are you saying that Christian activism is not a major part of the “culture war” that is being waged over objectionable media? I missed the atheist protest of the Harry Potter books…"
I actually LOL'ed at that. That was awesome...
I was raised VERY religiously. However I am no longer a very religious person. Personally, my beliefs are bessed expressed as Appathetic, for which I joking refer to myself as an Appathetican, however that has also been called a political group now, so I need to coin a new word sometime.
I've found that people who try to convert me have trouble following my twisty logic.
"I'm going to hell if I don't convert? I'm sorry, but my religion teaches that those who try and push their views on others will be going to hell. I'd tell you more, but I fear for my soul."
"Have I been reborn? No, I got it right on the first try."
"Have I accepted the lord as my personal savior? I'd think that was between me and him, don't you think? Aren't you just being nosey now? I don't go around asking you what you've done in your personal time, do I?"
Sometimes, you can have fun, as long as you don't take it too seriously.
Fair enough, but you side stepped my point.
If you can't take it get out of the proverbial kitchen. We ALL take shots based on more than just religion... Ethnicity, native country, sex, etc. all play into stereotypes that have been drawn by society as a whole.
If what's being said effects you then you need to deal with your own internal demons on the matter. Take that as you will.
I really wish they'd go away what good do those guys even do anyway?
But oh well religious bible-thumping idiots concerned parents and/or morality police complaining about grand theft auto. Nothing new.
Anyway can someone refresh my memory what type of church was it that blew a fuse over Resistnace? (I know that they're completely unrelated to this story and I know it was the church of england but are they protestant catholic methodist or what?)
I think it should be said that I actually EXPECT to take pot shots based on my beliefs. Does that mean I have to like it? No. It's not the pot shots that really truly bother me though. It is when someone feels it is necessary to JUSTIFY their pot shots at me that irks me. The pot shots are easily ignored because I just associate them with the maturity of the individual or their seriousness in dealing it out. When an attempt is made to justify why I deserve to criticized however, especially when the person doesn't even know me, they're simply mimicking the very behavior that they criticize others who believe what I do of doing to them.
I respect what you have to say and I find your point to be logical enough. I apologize if it sounded like you were the one I took issue with. I only take issue with someone who feels that they can justify their abrasive and openly offensive attitude toward others. If they're trying to justify it to me then they are demonstrating that they believe they're morally superior.
I don't expect people to agree with me on anything, but I do expect a certain level of respect as a human being and for my decision to believe what I believe. That said, anything posted on here only affects me insofar as my willingness to come here and keep myself updated on what's going on in the world of gaming politics and communing with my fellow gamers. I'm not going to go on a crusade because of a comment someone leaves here. It's their opinion and I'll put in my two cents because I can -- just like everyone else -- and I'll do what I can on my part to have a civil and logical discussion.
I do appreciate your taking your time to respond to me in a civil manner and discuss things with me in a mature way.
While I admit this isn't the best place for this I think the main reason this cracks are made about catholocism is because of the church's lack of action when they knew what was going on
1. on many occasions they did not dismiss the offending priests
2. they moved the priests around to other churches to protect them
3. they did not attempt to restrict the priests access to children
4. they did not alert the police as to what was going on
5. they paid off victims so that they would keep quiet(sounds like Michael Jackson doesn't it?)
that's where a lot of this comes from, the idea that the church doesn't care that some of their members are sick fucks and that they protect them anyway.
I’ve found that people who try to convert me have trouble following my twisty logic.
“I’m going to hell if I don’t convert? I’m sorry, but my religion teaches that those who try and push their views on others will be going to hell. I’d tell you more, but I fear for my soul.”
“Have I been reborn? No, I got it right on the first try.”
“Have I accepted the lord as my personal savior? I’d think that was between me and him, don’t you think? Aren’t you just being nosey now? I don’t go around asking you what you’ve done in your personal time, do I?”
Mogbert, you officially ROCK TEH INTERWEBZ
why won't my posts show up I'm trying to cite my goddamn source...
oh, best not take the lords name in vain in this thread
shit my mate glen had better watch out eh? Honestly... there is no way i would be able to murder another human being in cold blood... and no videogame, no matter how violent is likely to change that.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases)
why is this this game unsuitable for kids? when was this line drawn that tells me i cant play gta because of my age? i have played gta and guess what? i found it mildly tame .... i understand if it contains hardcore porn but vilence? i am unfased by virtual vilence its just a game
This is rich comming from the organization who's current leader in his last position went to great lengths to keep child rape accusations quiet until the statute of limitations expired in applicaple countries, who's current leader is a former Nazi, an organization that believes in imaginary sky pixies, who pays lip service to "judge not yet ye be judged" but is quick to condemn others while in "dont worry, we're getting ready to be infallible all over again" mode, and preaching "sinfulness" of condom use in places of the world where AIDS are at epedemic levels killing more people than they ever have (and this is the catholic church were talking about, thats ALOT of people)
Remember kids... if a religious organization says it's wrong. Odds are it's proberbly right
Oh well when you don't have anything good to write about complain and moan about a game (hopefully) knowing that the only way to legaly get rid of the game would be to tramble the very thing that let's you report what you please.