Thought Quotient

Moore’s ‘9/11′ to be released June 25

In presenting his film at Cannes last month, Moore expressed his hope that “Fahrenheit” would hit theaters by the Fourth of July holiday weekend and subsequently be available on home video/DVD by the fall in order to impact the November presidential election.

What’s the point of this film - to inform the public of something they need to know or just to impact the November election? This film is important if the content is truthful and therefore, worthy of a look before a Presidential election. If the film is based on personal animosity, hatred of administration policy, or something of that nature, then the film will be seen as just a really long political advertisement and whatever credibility Moore seeks will be gone.

“On behalf of my stellar cast — GW, Dick, Rummy, Condi and Wolfie — we thank this incredible coalition of the willing for bringing ‘Fahrenheit 9/11′ to the people,” Moore said in a statement

I think it is good that Moore is out in the public eye. The more that he talks or the more films or tv programs he does, the more that people will come to understand where he is coming from. That is important if we are to take what a person says seriously. Is this person trustworthy? Does he have an agenda? Is what he says based on fact or based on emotion? Just as he asks us to take a look at the subjects of his documentary, we can’t neglect our duty to take a look at the source as well.

Public baptism sparks controversy

Apparently religious ceremonies (at least those of a Christian persuasion) are offensive to the general public and should be disallowed. It’s good to know we live in a country that promotes equal rights for all people… well, except for those irritating Christians who refuse to contain their faith within the walls of their church. Perhaps they would like us to eat in the back of the restaurant if we insist on praying?

Shockingly, the ACLU of Virginia are even willing to admit this one:

The American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia also said in a statement: “If the park rules allow people to wade and swim in the river, then they must allow baptisms in the river.”

Still, it is evident from this statement that their enthusiasm is lacking on this particular issue. The statement reads more like a forced admission than an outrage. Had the park turned away a homosexual marriage ceremony, I suspect their outrage would have been blasted as headlines across every major televised and print news source - with demonstrators present on the site within hours. Their heart just doesn’t seem in this one. (more…)