Christianity Vs. Harry Potter

[hollywollypolly]

I am really pissed off with the people who think HP is demonic which it isn't. I'm lucky because my parents let me read the books and watch the movie and I am catholic.

I saw this photo of these people who were literally buring Hp Books, movies, posters and other things making a big bon fire. For a second I thought I was going to cry because I love the book so much that it's just so frustrating and disrespectful.

[hollywollypolly]

Jul 5, 2012 14:24:21 GMT -5 Kaiserin said:

I do thing that parents should monitor the reading of their children, in part because often children will absorb anything and everything from the world around them including books and they should make sure that the lessons the child is learning are in line with your views. Example parent reads a chapter ahead and when child reads about harry being left on doorstep, tell child that is never right and people can get arrested for it. Silly example but easy. Its the parents that look for a way to just say well, these books are ok these are not. Go read that keep their kids from reading something in their age range.

Oh my god I think thats freaking insane of a parent to do that because you can't protect them from whats out there or tell them what to do because you may think it's wrong when it's right. That thing people do is the reason these things like disallowing a child to read a certain book series is happening.

[kumainpink]

While parents should monitor, I feel that they shouldn't try to shove their beliefs down the throats of their kids. Kids should be allowed to discover and grow as much as possible.

[Dimcairien]

Jul 5, 2012 22:47:50 GMT -5 kumainpink said:

While parents should monitor, I feel that they shouldn't try to shove their beliefs down the throats of their kids. Kids should be allowed to discover and grow as much as possible.

While I agree with you there, I do think that up to a certain age, parents should restrict what their children watch and read. If not for the sake of religion, but simply for the sake of keeping their children's mind's pure. I personally think that parents should be fairly strict with the books, movies, and TV shows a child sees up until about age 11 or 12. At that point, they would generally be mature enough to know their beliefs on certain things and their parents beliefs on certain things and should be able to make a decision on what to read/see. Granted, there still should be some parent involvement as a 11 year old shouldn't see certain movies such as Titanic, but I do think that there needs to be a time when a parent should start to back off (around 11 or 12) and by the time the child is about 17 allow them to have basically free reign with books and movies.

My family leans more on the conservative side, but thankfully not to the extreme. Growing up, my parents were always careful about what we watched and read.

I grew up with Narnia and Lord of the Rings, so my parents were fine with fantasy. However, they didn't allow me to read HP until I was older because of the whole magical aspect. I've mentioned this in the 'how did you find out' thread, but I'm thankful that they did make me wait because of the disturbing scenes in books 4-7. Also, when I turned 12/13 my parents decided that for the most part, I was grown-up enough to decide if a book/movie was appropriate, so they haven't had much control over what I've read/seen. Of course, I'm still careful with what I do because I want to uphold my values.

As for Disney, they were careful with those as well. Yes, I saw most of the princess films, (no Sleeping Beauty, Pocahontas, Mulun, or Anastasia), and things like Pinocchio and Peter Pan. I didn't see Snow White until I was probably 10 or 11 and I have yet to see the full Lion King. I saw Lion King 1 1/2 when I was 13 when I was at a friends house, but other than that, I haven't seen complete movies of that series.

[kumainpink]

Very good points, Dim. I'll have to agree with you there.

[Kitty279]

While Dimcairien is right, I believe that some children can deal with more adult stuff earlier and others need longer. Parents just have to know where the limit is. Mine left it usually to myself, but I didn't read stuff I couldn't deal with, despite reading books for boys from 16 on upwards when I was 9.

On the other hand, there are people who take small children to movies they are waaay too young for. I don't know how it is otherwhere, but here children can get in despite the age limit when an adult is with them. So, technically you could take a 4-yer-old to see HP, even the later movies. Which has to be more than stupid.
When we went to watch Pirates of the Caribbean 3, there was someone with a small boy who was upset already at the beginning with the hanging scene, and it didn't get better. Which parents in their right mind would take a small child in such a film??

Of course, then there are children that act very irrational. Someone once told me that her child freaked out in a child's movie because someone just went down a long slide in the movie. Completely harmless and fun, but the child refused to enter any cinema after that.

[Kaiserin]

I was not refering to teenagers but to younger children. thought Parents should still at least know what authors the younger teen is reading.

[Dimcairien]

I do agree that it has to do with the maturity of the child. I was reading LOTR at about 10/11 and I was able to handle it, though I did freak out when Gandalf fell. But again, parents can usually tell if their child is more/less mature than others their age and can finagle books and movie rules depending on their child.

And yes theater rules are weird, though what I find to be pointless, is that it's nearly impossible to go into an unrated movie if you're under the age of 17. It took my parents a really long time in front of the theater to let us in to see 'In the Shadow of the Moon' which is a documentary about the moon landing! Come on, what bad things are in that king of a documentary.

[Kitty279]

Now that is really ridiculous - this should be a movie that would be educational and interesting, and I can see most boys fascinated by it, regardless of age. When there is no rating for one, then here everyone can go, as easy as that, as then it gets the rating O - which means, technically you can take a baby

[devil101]

My parents played the Harry Potter/witchcraft thing on me and my brother but not long after chamber came out on dvd my class watched it and I enjoyed it so I made my parents watch the first one and we've been allowed to read/watch it.

As for LoTR and CoN - Mum used to read us CoN for bedtime stories and I read the LoTR stories just after the first movie came out. So I didn't have a problem with these.

[kumainpink]

Devil, I love your name! *chuckles*

[devil101]

Really?!?!?!?!

Well, thanks Kuma
It's what happens when it's 2am and I'm half asleep! ;D

[kumainpink]

Heehee yes, really.

[physicssquid]

Jul 5, 2012 23:45:57 GMT -5 Dimcairien said:

Granted, there still should be some parent involvement as a 11 year old shouldn't see certain movies such as Titanic, but I do think that there needs to be a time when a parent should start to back off (around 11 or 12) and by the time the child is about 17 allow them to have basically free reign with books and movies.

I was nine when Titanic came out, and some of my friends went to see it, without their parents, and they loved it. I can understand your opinion, Dim, but I disagree, on that point. Titanic isn't one of the films that shouldn't be watched by anyone younger than eleven or twelve. The Others, on the other hand, probably is, and that film was rated twelve. I watched that with my mum when I was twelve, and while there was no sex or anything like that in it, my mum was terrified, and the fact that there was a lot of suspense was nerve-wracking. We also watched The Sixth Sense when I was thirteen, and that was rated fifteen, but neither of us could see why.