Slashdot Mirror
On Religious Violence And Videogame Violence
Thanks to the IGDA for its 'Culture Clash' column discussing the violent nature of many religious texts, and how that relates to religious criticism of game violence. The piece references The Passion Of The Christ, mentioning: "The film's portrayal of the delight these men took in administering the scourging draws an alarming parallel to some claims that video games desensitize young people to violence." It then goes on to argue: "The history of opposition to games is a long one, and religion is often used to justify that opposition, though naysayers tend to ignore the fact that religion itself is a major source of violent acts", before concluding: "Frankly, the arguments for and against violence in games, as in any entertainment media, must be assessed in context or not at all."
more people have been killed in the cause of religion (crusades, inquisitions etc), that have been killed because some kid "learnt" how to aim and shoot with a mouse.
CJC
..is used blankly on just about anything one with religious position wants.
it can be used to justify *any* opinion about *anything* and it has been used too. yealous about your neighbour? well your neighbour obviously did a pact with the devil and must die! well not that straightforward most of the time but you get the point.. one should be wary of any unfounded argument pulled from somebodys hat, no matter who he is(as made up arguments against something are usually just something used to enforce superstition or some to get some personal goal through).
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Okay, let me first start out with what I always argue this with:
You show me a gun that has a mouse and moniter to aim it with, and I'll show you a priest that doesn't molest children.
The fact is that the church simply uses the topic of games to force people to look away from it's real problems. One being that they lost their control over the world's countries. The second being that they have so much corruption in their system that it makes Windows look better alongside a Linux array.
Is there problems in some games? Of course, but that is why they are rated mature. You can't blame a developer like id because they develop a game that 95 percent of their fans enjoy but the other 5 percent is sue happy.
Bottom line, parents make sure your children play the games that are meant for them.
I'm glad my parents didn't enforce this rule on me, and look at me, I turned out alright... yeah...
I'm f#$king magic!
This article is not what you expect. How to tell if someone hasn't read the article: ranting about religion being used to justify political positions.
...do people oppose game violence because they oppose violence, or because they oppose games?
There were two really good points in the article:
I've always thought people who oppose games just don't like to have fun. They see it as wasteful.
And while I'm not comparing the Bible to a video game, it's worth noting that those games which don't get much attention from pro-censors fit their violence into the overall milieu of the game, just as the Bible fits violence into its context.
This is very interesting - the games cited as examples (Max Payne, etc...) do a very good job of making the violence as part of the story line.
-- $G
I've never really seen much of a clash between video games and religion. For the most part, the industry seems to battle more with racial groups, anti-gun groups, and parental groups. Most of the people that back these kind of groups in public are lawyers and politicians, take that for what you will.
In this article, Matt Sakey fails to show how religion is against video game violence in the first place! When it comes down to actually showing hard examples as to how religion is against violence in videogames, he doesn't really have anything. This doesn't prevent him from pointing out the hypocrisy of religion, though. Take for example the quote aforementioned in the Slashdot article: "The history of opposition to games is a long one, and religion is often used to justify that opposition, though naysayers tend to ignore the fact that religion itself is a major source of violent acts". Matt never does say exactly when religion was used to justify opposition in video games.
I'm not arguing against Matt Sakey's article because I'm religious. In fact, I'm an atheist. But, I think that Matt just had a bone to pick with relgion as opposed to a strong debate pointing out religion's opposition to video game violence, an opposition that he never did show to exist.
Until Slashdot fixes the funny modifier, use insightful or interesting. The poster knows your intentions.
The story is there. The one of hope, of faith, of sacrifice. It, however, is not in the forefront. Maybe it shouldn't be. As it is, and as people appear to take it on average, it is basically a thorough record of the grevious injuries Christ suffered as recorded by the gospels with a furniture joke randomly added for randomness. This of course completely misses the point. That he submits himself to the whim of man, which he well knows will treat him so badly that a latin phrase (excruciate) will be used in english to describe a shadow of his suffering, because his God asks it of him and does not tell him why. To trust that which one cannot see, when one has no reason for it. To have an unassailable bulwark of certainty in a world that is by nature perilously uncertain. To have that still point, I can only imagine, must be fantasticly empowering and freeing.
Christianity forsakes icons, perhaps rightly, as they distract one from one's relationship with one's God, and their spiritual emotional connection. Yet how many Christians are walking around with WWJD, crusifixes, stupid little alpha fishes, and now crusifix nails. Instead of a story about a man who, though he did not completely understand, chose to save the world at the cost of his own life, who questioned God, but never doubted, it's a story about some dude who was like wickedly beatdown and totally killed by ass-hats and what's worse he would have totally given us presents. And to focud not on the gift of a life free from regret, not on the power of faith, but on a the wicked beat-down, is to lose the message for the image. And a shame.
And as an Atheist, can I just say how fucked up that is? One's a story of generosity and hope, like an adult version of a "Secret Wars" comic, and the other is a lament that one was two millenia late to a party.
I sought out a similiar set of rules for Christians in my Bible, and this is what I came up with:
.. " (1 Timothy 4:1) [Illustrating Christ's Kingdom on earth begins with his appearing.]
"But Jesus said to him, 'Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.'" (Matthew 26:52)
"Jesus answered, 'My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here.'" (John 18:36)
".. the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom
Is it fair to ask then why (if Christ's Kingdom isn't established yet) Christians have been fighting at all?
(It's a different case to discuss with Old Testament Israel who, according to the Bible, was actually a nation representing the Kingdom of God at that time.)
Aye matey! Well said. There was a study I heard about on the radio recently (how's that for credibility?) that suggested the school gun rampages we've been hearing about happened predominantly in smaller communities with high levels of intolerance for difference. I've 'done time' living in bible belt communities and the mental homogeneity gives me the creeps, it's no wonder people crack.
Another huge issue in small-town and rural middle america and canada: sexual abuse, particularly incest, is much more of a problem than people realize, as these homogenized communities are also very good at secrets. Now where did I put my [virtual] M16?
Don't worry, be happy.
Damn those pesky terrorists
While I understand the futility of speaking in spiritual terms to someone who does not relate to spirituality (much like trying to talk math with an Art professor), I have to ask for clarification on at least one of your points:
After reading the text in question, I see no reference to rape. In fact, not even the Skeptic's Annotated Bible entry on Joshua has a reference. Could you perhaps give a more succinct citation?
Happiness is relative, Based upon the way we live.
All right, let me begin my noting that I am not against violence in video games and I play my fair share of very gory and meaningless FPS games. The reason I am posting also is due to the incredible slant in this forum for violence and against religion.
On the topic of the Crusades: the Crusades were politically motivated. The people who started and controlled the wars were not in it for God, Christ, or religious altruism. They were in it for themselves. I could go out and kill 20 people and claim that Christ ask me to do and I could doubtlessly find a bible passage that seems to give me the power to do it, but the bible is a text written by humans inspired by God and like all things it is far from impossible to misinterpret it. So just because I say religion give me the power, the truth of the matter is, particularly if you are Christian, only God has the power to take life.
On the topic of the goriness of the bible: The bible is graphic because as a whole it is a fairly descriptive book. It is attempting to paint the scene which occurred. The key to the bible though is its motivation and meaning. Its motivation is to make people realize the frailty of humanity and the power of God and impress upon them that they must care for their neighbor and love their God and show their neighbor the path if they have stepped of it. NOW, I don't care whether or not you agree with this intent; just realize that this or something close to what I have described is the intent. When it comes to games violence is there purely for entertainments sake, heck that's why they are called games. The problem here is that people who would like to see less violence in society believe that this violence for entertainments sake, in graphic visual and audio description, makes kids who get access to these games more likely to commit these actions in real life because their exposure to it has jaded them. (And kids will get access even if you restrict sale to 18+ and have solid parenting.) I personally don't know if this is true, I've played quite a bit of quake, doom, unreal, and half life but I also enjoyed the classic adventures games. And I am far from a violent or hateful person. The moral of my story is: it's unwise to judge whether games do or don't have an effect on children and teens yet. But it is an important issue. Much of the Slashdot community tends to believe wholeheartedly that children AND ADULTS are not affected by what they are exposed to and I argue then what are they affected by. My solution is not the removal of violence from games, but a balance of violence with other themes. Max Payne was still a little too violence focused, the story being revenge. The Bible tends to be fairly balanced describing violence and then arguing that despite all of this we should have compassion for all.
Not as fun as your idea, but still quite funny: The Brick Testament. Give it a careful read.
Prescriptive grammar:linguistics