CAPAlert in financial trouble!

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2008-01-09 10:09pm

About a half a year ago I donated $25 to the website. I'm going to be sad to see it go because it is extremely entertaining.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-01-09 11:08pm

It's oddly amusing to see how ridiculous he is. The idea that he's raising 10 kids is pretty depressing, though.

Straha · Post by **Straha** » 2008-01-10 12:10am

Sometimes I think they have spies amongst them ridiculing themselves. I post the first paragraph of the Johnny English review as proof of this:

Blind as bats, they are - the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). Blind to what is AND is not wholesome and moral for our children. Blind, I tell you! That they think it is acceptable to expose your young adolescent children to long-contact rear male nudity is blindness to God's morality. Oliver Ford Davies (playing the archbishop) is not a carton character on the screen. He is a real actor showing your kids his real backside without any clothes [**] . What would you do if some adult male came up to your 6 year old daughter, dropped his pants a shoved his posterior in her face? Oliver Ford Davies will if you take her to see Johnny English. And larger than if someone did that in real life. Since God refers to nudity (nakedness) as dark, restricted, undesirable, shameful, etc. 47 times in the KJV from Genesis to Revelation, what on Earth do the MPAA think makes it okay for children in a theater? God even advised against climbing the steps to an altar while wearing robes to avoid exposing others to nudity [Ex. 20:26]. Your children will also see Rowan Atkinson do pelvic thrusts in his boxer underwear, making it obvious he is male. And get this. This film is a Rogue Male Films Ltd., United Kingdom production as reported by the Internet Movie Database . Also, the UK is reported to be a crossroads in child sexual trafficking. You do the math.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2008-01-10 01:48am

Are there ANY movies that these people purport to like?

Also, HOLY SHIT some of their stuff is terrible. Their "commentaries" section includes a passage on "spare the rod, spoil the child."

I could fill reams of paper with additional suggestions of what to do and what not to do regarding correctional and supportive taps, but each would be at best a guess for your child as are the suggestions herein. It is not possible within the scope of this article to tell you how much arrogance is defiance or how much defiance is rebellion. No one can know your child as well as you, and no one can know your home life as well as you. Many professionals can help by applying the "average," the "average of averages," the "most expected," and the "based on observation, data, and findings" to your particular situation, but none of them can know your home as well as they who live in it.

Then why the fuck is your entire website dedicated to helping other people raise their own kids?

It is up to you to find the best and most effective technique of administering supportive and correctional . And Jesus can help you find the best methods in the most effective way in the most timely manner.

You've gotta be kidding me....

Pray on this matter, then listen to your heart as you ponder or apply correctional taps. He may be telling you to "stop," or He may say "you're doing fine."

What.

The.

Fuck.

Zablorg · Post by **Zablorg** » 2008-01-10 01:52am

So they raise their kids by listening to the voices in their head? That explains so much.

Zablorg · Post by **Zablorg** » 2008-01-10 02:35am

I can't believe they didn't pick up on the blantantly fucking obvious sexual reference in Road to El Dorado.

lance · Post by **lance** » 2008-01-10 05:33am

Does he actually believe what he says? With his costs being 75k it seems like he is trying to err... not work and get paid for it.

Post by **NecronLord** » 2008-01-10 07:23am

Correctional Taps? A tap does not hurt. What you're talking about are correctional slaps.

Later, when an opportunity to spend some time on the Galapagos Islands to study in the name of science the never-before seen or cataloged flora and fauna, the doctor again tried to push Aubrey into a certain compliance with his naturalistic demands, but Aubrey forcefully set the doctor in his proper place by telling the doctor he had no time for his hobby.

Maybe he sees Darwin in this, hence advocating flogging...

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2008-01-10 09:41am

Master of Ossus wrote:Are there ANY movies that these people purport to like?

Prince of Egypt

Mary Poppins

Gods and Generals

The Passion of the Christ

To name a few I remember them praising.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-01-10 10:56am

If you read a few of his "analyses", it becomes obvious that he thinks every film should depict absolutely nothing but Christian fundamentalists living in perfect (and celibate) harmony. To him, anything else is "bads" (he actually pluralizes "bad" when he tries to explain how he writes his "analyses").

The fundamental problem with his thinking is that he believes children will be damaged if they are allowed to know that sexuality, violence, hate, cultural diversity, or even disrespect exists anywhere in the world. No notion of trying to teach the kids about these things and how to understand them; oh no, the kids must simply be treated like mushrooms: kept in the dark and fed a load of shit. This guy totally believes in the Bubble Boy model of childrearing. I'm sure he home-schools his gaggle of kids.

Mind you, I knew plenty of fundies like this. It's really not that unusual, but this guy is obviously more keen than most, because he went and created that batshit insane website of his.

Junghalli · Post by **Junghalli** » 2008-01-10 06:27pm

Of course, it makes sense that religious fundamentalists would take an approach to media and education that treats information as something that needs to be administered like medicine; only in strictly controlled conditions, and by an expert. The most powerful tool any propagandist can have is the ability to simply deny his audience access to information that might lead them to question what he's telling them. The more uncontrolled outside information children (and people in general for that matter) are exposed to the higher the likelyhood that they'll see something that might make them have naughty thoughts that will tempt them away from their religion.

Zablorg · Post by **Zablorg** » 2008-01-10 07:35pm

There can never be a perfect movie in their eyes, because all movies require a conflict of some kind. And any form of conflict whatsoever is put under "Imputence/Hate".

I was somewhat offended when I looked up that pokemon movie for shits and giggles, and one of the offending quotes was "The circumstances of ones birth do not matter". I suspect veiled rasicm.

IIRC, that quote was followed up by the guy saying that it is what you do with the life you are given that counts.

Junghalli · Post by **Junghalli** » 2008-01-10 08:03pm

Zablorg wrote:There can never be a perfect movie in their eyes, because all movies require a conflict of some kind. And any form of conflict whatsoever is put under "Imputence/Hate".

I suspect they'd have no problem with films where:

1) It's very obvious who the villains and heroes are and there's minimal moral ambiguity.

2) The good guys are all good God-fearing Christians and the bad guys aren't.

3) All moral messages one can glean from the film are something they'd approve of.

Basically what a Christian-Taliban propaganda bureau would approve, because that's basically what CAP-Alert is, only thankfully with no real power.

Zablorg · Post by **Zablorg** » 2008-01-10 09:59pm

Junghalli wrote:
Zablorg wrote:There can never be a perfect movie in their eyes, because all movies require a conflict of some kind. And any form of conflict whatsoever is put under "Imputence/Hate".
I suspect they'd have no problem with films where:

1) It's very obvious who the villains and heroes are and there's minimal moral ambiguity.

2) The good guys are all good God-fearing Christians and the bad guys aren't.

3) All moral messages one can glean from the film are something they'd approve of.

Basically what a Christian-Taliban propaganda bureau would approve, because that's basically what CAP-Alert is, only thankfully with no real power.

Prince of Egypt was just like that, no? Yet they still mentioned it's downsides as having evil things in it. Even when the evil things are not trying to be passed off as acceptable, they are still evil.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-01-10 10:10pm

The only ones he seems to give REALLY high marks to are those insipid Veggie Tales cartoons. I remember my kids watched some of the first few episodes, when the religious messages seemed kind of generalized. Later, the cartoon got more and more fundie, until it basically became Sunday School in cartoon form.

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2008-01-10 10:33pm

Darth Wong wrote:The only ones he seems to give REALLY high marks to are those insipid Veggie Tales cartoons. I remember my kids watched some of the first few episodes, when the religious messages seemed kind of generalized. Later, the cartoon got more and more fundie, until it basically became Sunday School in cartoon form.

I think he gave Mary Poppins a perfect score. Seriously.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-01-10 10:45pm

Ted C wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:The only ones he seems to give REALLY high marks to are those insipid Veggie Tales cartoons. I remember my kids watched some of the first few episodes, when the religious messages seemed kind of generalized. Later, the cartoon got more and more fundie, until it basically became Sunday School in cartoon form.
I think he gave Mary Poppins a perfect score. Seriously.

Odd, since she engages in what can only be called witchcraft. I guess he has a double standard for films he loved as a child.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2008-01-10 11:34pm

Darth Wong wrote:Odd, since she engages in what can only be called witchcraft. I guess he has a double standard for films he loved as a child.

He thinks she's an Angel, not a Witch.

Zablorg · Post by **Zablorg** » 2008-01-10 11:50pm

Gil Hamilton wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Odd, since she engages in what can only be called witchcraft. I guess he has a double standard for films he loved as a child.
He thinks she's an Angel, not a Witch.

There's a difference of course. He's just not sure what it is.

SylasGaunt · Post by **SylasGaunt** » 2008-01-11 02:38am

Do check out the Beowulf review, it's hilarious.

Like the fact it loses points for someone having tatoos, or repeated references to nudity (referring to Grendel's mom.. when all the bits that qualify it for nudity are covered).

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2008-01-11 03:05am

SylasGaunt wrote:Do check out the Beowulf review, it's hilarious.

Like the fact it loses points for someone having tatoos, or repeated references to nudity (referring to Grendel's mom.. when all the bits that qualify it for nudity are covered).

Remember, we're talking about an idiot who fervently hopes humanity will return to the "good old days" when bare kneecaps and ankles were considered "obscene".

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2008-01-11 03:22am

edit: seriously, the guy complains about "suggestive eye movement" in his deductions for sexuality on some films.

Eris · Post by **Eris** » 2008-01-11 03:47am

Darth Servo wrote:edit: seriously, the guy complains about "suggestive eye movement" in his deductions for sexuality on some films.

His opinions on sex seem to be... extreme. Not only that one, but in the Wallace and Gromit review he dings the sexual immorality on account of showing a "male character with a flowery purse."

DaveJB · Post by **DaveJB** » 2008-01-11 06:44am

I can't find it anywhere on his website right now, but I'm pretty sure this guy was campaigning for Hollywood to re-instate the Hays Code at one point.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-01-11 12:14pm

Honestly, the guy's behaviour makes perfect theological sense. The Bible is absolutely chock full of exhortations to mercilessly destroy any temptation to live any life other than that which the Bible prescribes for you. Both OT and NT are equally clear on this point: Jesus once said that God would make people suffer if they taught heresy to children, and that you'd be better off being chained to a rock at the bottom of the ocean than to face God's wrath in that case.

It's just funny when you see a Christian that's honest. There's no better way to mock a truly stupid belief system than to express it clearly and honestly, even if the mockery is inadvertent.