The Golden Compass
discussion
doesn't anyone else hate this book?
Nolan wrote: "I want to finish reading this book, but I feel like I need to be a genius to understand the book."Oh no, I was like twelve when I read this book, and I understood everything perfectly and followed plot with no difficulty. Although, I am an advanced reader ;)
Excellent post, Claire!
Personally, I read all three books a long time ago and enjoyed them. I don't remember thinking much about the religious aspects. I also don't care much whether Pullman is an atheist while I'm reading his books, if I'm enjoying them and they make me think a little.The Church I attend wants me to think about my beliefs. It wants me to question them, so I can have an understanding of what I believe and why. If a fantasy novel can help me do that, I say why not read it, even if it is written by an atheist.
I think if a novel like this can make you question your faith to the point of leaving it, you need to read some other books before making that decision, maybe even the Bible, parts of which read like a fantasy or horror novel, so go for it. I would suggest doing it with a discussion group, though. It's pretty dry in places, pretty scary in some and very tough to understand in others.
regardless of any religious views the book has very accurate views of the world and its told with such a wonderful adventure that it seems harmless when in fact there couldnt have been more hard hitting truths. Overall a great way to open up people especially childrens mind to something other than the social norm. I just wish i would have read it younger.
And for those are complely against or have negative views of it i would suggest to research some of the things that dont sit right with you and i mean really dig the truth is always hidden from masses.
What im saying is to do the work and hold your own opinions dont let what others (church, family, authors, friends, or even yourself) keep you from learning something new.
Keep an open mind and youd be amazed at how wonderful the world really is.
chris wrote: "In an interview of Phillip Pullman, he clearly stated; "My books are about killing God." He said so, that's all he had to say on the subject. That's an obvious giveaway."After reading the book, seeing the movie and reading the author's statement, I fail too see why or what the story has to do with God or religion.
Gary wrote: "chris wrote: "In an interview of Phillip Pullman, he clearly stated; "My books are about killing God." He said so, that's all he had to say on the subject. That's an obvious giveaway."After readi..."
You clearly did not finish the book series, there's also the Subtle Knife and the Amber Spyglass, this book is so obviously religious it's hilarious.
Hoche wrote: "unaware of the raging controversy, i read the book and interpreted its story for what it is: a fantasy. it's quite enjoyable if you read it without any prejudices. although why the author called th...""Daemons" was originally a neutral word that meant "spirits" or "souls," without any reference to "evil spirits." Pullman chose to use it in the old sense.
Funny really that everyone appears to think that the main topic of the trilogy is religion. I thought the main thing was about dust and its different manifestations in different universes. Also how humans being humans created the universe equivalent of an ozone hole which they find out too late is potentially lethal for all human beings in all universes. Another message that appears to have gone lost in the above discussions (possibly because it happens in the third book, at which stage most people appear to have stopped reading) that ultimately Lord Azriel and Mrs Coulther give their lives so that their child can live in a better world. Admitted that the officialdom of religion pervades all of the books, but it is background, not central to the real story line.
Can I just say First of all... Pullman Didn't write " the Golden Compuss"- the book is called "The Northern Lights" Secondly, I love the Books. Thirdlly- It is a story. Pullman is using a technique used by many great authors- taking a well known thing and twisting it to be the main feature of his story. He isn't trying to be anti-religion, he's just writng a good book. Can't everyone just get a grip and stop blowing things out of proportion!!! Ok now my rant is over!!
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "Hate? HATE? I DETEST this book! I considered it emergency toilet paper after reading the most boring 50 first pages of my life but when I heard about the whole anti-Christianity thing I got SICK! A..."Well, it's supposed to be a riff on Paradise Lost.
After reading it again and revising my review a tad, I've come to the conclusion that the series had great potential and could have been fantastic. Like I've said before, this series is NOT about 'killing God'. It's about killing organized religion and hypocrisy and tyranny disguised as God (in other words, a false idol). With a premise like that, I was totally ready to be blown away by this series. I really enjoyed the first book, but then it started to go downhill once they introduced that talking piece of granite called Will in The Subtle Knife.
Will was like a fly in a bowl of delicious French onion soup. A fly is just a small thing, but it's mere presence nearly destroys anything that is delicious or wholesome about that bowl of soup. Will sucked the life and intrigue out of every scene he was in with his stoic 'tough-guy' personality (or lack thereof), and he turned that kickass character Lyra into a simpering damsel.
Bah. His Dark Materials could have been an awesome series, had it not been for the introduction of Will.
So, to answer the topic question, I loved the first book, but not the rest of them.
chris wrote: "There are reasons for me hating The Golden Compass. First of all, I pretended to like it at the beginning of the year when I actually didn't like it, and then these kids made fun of me because they..."I enjoyed it. I haven't finished the last book.
how can you kill an entity that does not exist. its a fantasy book, if you are that bothered stick to the bible
Sam wrote: "That would be fine if he kept his religion to himself and not make it into a children's book. Do you know the whole reason he wrote the book was to turn kids atheist?"That's the same reason Christian authors who write Christian children stories though?
Jori wrote: "Sam wrote: "That would be fine if he kept his religion to himself and not make it into a children's book. Do you know the whole reason he wrote the book was to turn kids atheist?"That's the same reason Christian authors who write Christian children stories though?"
Don't you know, that's perfectly alright though! :D
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "Jori wrote: "Sam wrote: "That would be fine if he kept his religion to himself and not make it into a children's book. Do you know the whole reason he wrote the book was to turn kids atheist?"Tha..."
People who consider themselves to be 'good Christians' should have no reason to fear 'atheist books'. If they are firm in their beliefs, then a book such as that will simply not interest or affect them (or perhaps it will give them a glimpse at a different perspective, without actually changing their beliefs).
If 'good Christians' are so scared of a book causing them to question their belief in God, then that just means that they themselves already have doubts about their beliefs, and/or haven't 'found' themselves yet and are easily influenced by whatever they watch or read.
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "And that is huge problem when you love a book because it was very good and you don't doubt the intelligence of your favorite author!"I strongly disagree, and I can attest to it with personal experience.
H.P. Lovecraft is one of my favorite writers. He wrote cosmic science-fiction horror that has influenced the likes of Stephen King and Neil Gaiman. I love his stories and the beautifully terrifying pantheon of eldritch alien-god characters that he created in his writing.
However, Lovecraft and I are two very different individuals. Lovecraft was an extreme xenophobe and a racist. He was also an atheist and the male equivalent of a Crazy Cat Lady. I am neither xenophobic nor racist, I am a Christian, and I'm NOT a cat person.
According to your logic, because I love Lovecraft's writing, I would become just like him and agree with everything that he believes. But as you can see from what I typed above, I DON'T agree with everything that he believes. However, I still love him as an author and as an artist.
Just because I don't agree with an artist's or author's beliefs doesn't mean I can't enjoy the beautiful things that they create.
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "Jori wrote: "Sam wrote: "That would be fine if he kept his religion to himself and not make it into a children's book. Do you know the whole reason he wrote the book was to turn kids atheist?"Tha..."
.
This relies on the idea that there hasn't ever been a Christian who had questioned their faith. With or without outside sources. Which isn't so...
If your faith is so weak that you fear reading a book with atheistic themes....
Which if someone does struggle with their faith in God, then it is their choice not to read non-faith based (whatever the religion be) until they're strong enough to do so.
But telling others with a different religion to "keep their religion to themselves" all the while you're shouting/broadcasting/shoving it on others...?????
Peter, I'm kinda loving you now. Well done, YOU! I'd like to add to your comment that it's exceedingly boring in the discussion of a novel to have to listen to/read everyone's personally expressed opinions about religion in general, their religion, Pullman's religion, etc. None of us cares what your faith is or if you have any. Critique the BOOK, people! I personally disliked this book because I thought it took forever to get where it was going, which didn't turn out to be somewhere I wanted to go. I'm not going to tell you my religious beliefs or what I thought of the ones expressed in this book, because that's not the POINT of critiquing fiction! If you want that kind of commentary, go argue with the people on the nonfiction side of the tracks.
Melliott wrote: "Peter, I'm kinda loving you now. Well done, YOU! I'd like to add to your comment that it's exceedingly boring in the discussion of a novel to have to listen to/read everyone's personally expressed ..."This thread starts with the first person saying the story is sacrilegious which brought in religion.
Not only that the world that this book is set in, religion is a huge part of this story. As the place is mostly ran by a theocratic group called Magisterium, who control by suppressing what they view as heresy.
Fantasy is not just "make believe worlds" it is also a way to look at our current world and see things in a different light. In this particular book, the ruling of a religious government -- which people in real life have experienced or even just know about.
Or, know about how religions of wherever they live regularly try to control people by telling them what they can and cannot do -- banning books/discouraging them from reading certain material.
Yes, Jori, I understand all that. The point I am trying to make is that people in this string are not discussing the effect of religion in the book--on the plot, on the characters, etc. They are rather addressing whether the religion in the book has some effect on their own personal beliefs. I am saying that I don't care! Discuss the book. Sure, address the parallels between what's happening in the book and what's happening in the world, if you want...but I don't want to hear about how this impacts anyone's personal faith. This is not the proper forum for that.
I found the Golden Compass to be more anti-religious establishment rather than anti-religious, and that didn't bother me because there have been and are corrupt establishments based on religion. Just because a religion or establishment may be corrupt, doesn't mean God is corrupt. Man is fallible; God is not. That's how I looked at it :)I haven't read the other books, and don't plan on it, mostly because of over-use of profanity in the Golden Compass.
If I recall correctly, I think there were churches/institutions calling this book out because of how one of the characters discusses pedophilia with one of the children, but when I read it, I found it to be in a very respectful and adult manner, with no humor about it. I think people may also have been calling out how Pullman twisted scripture around concerning the Adam and Eve story, but I would need to do some research if that's the case.
Again, it was the over-use of profanity that bothered me the most in Golden Compass. Otherwise, good story.
Huh? What profanity?
Melliott wrote: "Yes, Jori, I understand all that. The point I am trying to make is that people in this string are not discussing the effect of religion in the book--on the plot, on the characters, etc. They are ra..."If you know all that and you're aware that books impact our personal life...then how could this not be the proper forum?
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "No, I just said that if you read an atheistic book without knowing it was atheistic and then you realized it, there's a chance that you would regard the author's beliefs as unmistakable and turn an..."We're all readers of books here, so I'm pretty sure most of us can think for ourselves.
And I started reading Lovecraft BEFORE I knew he was an atheist. When I found out, my reaction wasn't "Egads! Everything I know is a lie!" It was more like, "Huh. Well, whaddaya know?"
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "Jori wrote: "Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "Jori wrote: "Sam wrote: "That would be fine if he kept his religion to himself and not make it into..."How is writing a book with an atheist perspective wrong? How is it any different from writing a book with a Buddhist perspective or an Islamic perspective?
That christian double standard...it never gets old.
Christians are frightened of something otherwise they would be relaxed about other views. It's just a book.
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "Claire wrote: "Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "Jori wrote: "Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: ..."of course it is going to influence people, all books do!! but hey most humans are capable of making their own choices. your belief can't be that strong if you think a fantasy novel will break it.
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "Jori wrote: "Sam wrote: "That would be fine if he kept his religion to himself and not make it into a children's book. Do you know the whole reason he wrote the book was to turn kids atheist?"Tha..."
Your argument is based on the premise that the only non-Christian that have heard of Christianity are ex-Christians, which imho is not quite true b/c Christianity has been a global religion since the 19th century. Also, imho you wouldn't be a very committed believer if your faith can be affected by reading some random book.
As to the book, I find it reasonably well written, but I don't really care about any of the characters in it.
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "Of course not, people who have heard of Christianity might like this book and it won't affect them. I include them to the people who will not be affected by books like this one."So why does your argument only apply to books that propagate Christianity but not those propagating other beliefs? Are you implying that believers of Christianity have weaker faith than followers of other belief systems hence are more likely to be affected by books that are against their beliefs?
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "NO, I just gave an example! Just thinking of something like that makes me realize that no matter what my arguments are, you will always try to find a "hole". Being narrow-minded will not help you! ..."It is possible to find fault in an argument without disagreeing with the conclusion. Also, I never said if I like this book or agree with Pullman's message*.
*: I do not fully agree with Pullman's message esp. his view on religion, but I wouldn't tell him to shut up just because I don't like, or don't agree with what he is trying to say.
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "Claire wrote: "Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "Jori wrote: "Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: ..."Building fences around ourselves and calling other people wrong just because their opinions differ from ours are some of the reasons why wars get started.
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "It'n not about the level of influence. It's about the kind of influence. Influencing someone's religion is just wrong, society does it to everyone so we don't need books to influence people more!"Doesn't every book influence it's readers? Doesn't every author write books to influence his/hers readers? And why is it wrong if it's a "fantasy atheistic book"?
I'm actually very curious.
I'm an atheist myself, and I don't feel threatened when I read books by someone who is clearly religious, so I've got to say that this kind of reasoning is a bit of for me. Quite interesting.
When it comes to the book, I read it when it came out in Norwegian, think I was about 12. I remember liking it. But I've got to say that after leafing through it a couple of months ago it's not as good as I remembered. And that people, is what should matter: Is the story and the writing good. Does it make you think? Feel? Does it make you relax? Or tense up?
But why shouldn't they? I've seen plenty of other peoples say the same about this book, some have even said that they didn't even read the book because "their church had banned it". Thats censure! And even worse, its telling people WHAT to think, saying that they can't think for them selves. Isn't that bad?I did like alot in this book, but I have no problem seing that other people doesn't like it. His style is a "love it/hate it"-styl =P
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "That's what is bad about this book. It influences their opinion. They should choose their religion by themselves!"Are there any good books that do not try to influence people's opinion? How exactly can one "choose for themselves" if one do not know the positions and arguments on all sides? Also, people can find enjoyment in works they don't fully agree with. Many atheists love Narnia, many Christians love Discworld (which BTW is an example of good atheistic fantasy), and one does not need to be a Muslim to like the poetry of Rumi or Iqbal.
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "Oh, and I'm not saying that a book is bad because of the religious influence it may have to the readers, I'm saying that the act of intentionally writing such a book is wrong."Wrong because it doesn't coincide with your beliefs? That's still not a very good reason to declare that writing an atheist book wrong.
Eventually, you just have to brush yourself off and deal with the fact that not everybody in this world is a Christian, and therefore not everyone is going to write Christian (or neutral) books. People have differing viewpoints, and they wish to express those differing viewpoints using whatever mediums are available to them, be it film, literature, music, etc. In Pullman's case, he expressed it via his writing.
And really, what's so wrong with that? Other than "I'm a Christian, so every viewpoint that differs from my own is wrong."
chris wrote: "In an interview of Phillip Pullman, he clearly stated; "My books are about killing God." He said so, that's all he had to say on the subject. That's an obvious giveaway."It doesn't really matter what he says after the book has been published for public audiences. The "killing God" aspect is very symbolic to me of doing away with a lot of the archaic, dangerous, and intolerant aspects of organized religion.
There is so much wonder, love, loyalty, determination and yes, despair, on display in this trilogy. It has a lot in common with many religious texts in that way, and others. This book in no way preaches or promotes atheism, agnosticism, or any anti-religion vibes.
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "That's what is bad about this book. It influences their opinion. They should choose their religion by themselves!"We're influenced by uncountable things, including books that support our current thinking and books that challenge it. That's how we choose beliefs, including religious ones.
Pullman is not being deceitful if he doesn't state his opinions outright. That is the nature of the novel, I believe. That's what we like about them: the ambiguity, the opportunity to infer.
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "Yes, but there are people who believe in God and since it's a religion and not some widely accepted fairytale, it's not right to write a fantasy book that "kills God"."Why is it not right? There are many sci fi/fantasy books about the end of the world. No one wants the world to end, but we can still explore it through fiction.
And what God are we talking about? Pullman is obviously referring to the Catholic church throughout his work, but it is an alternative universe; the God he is describing does not exist in our world, no one worships this figure in our world.
And I really don't understand your problem with him sharing his opinions in the form of a fantasy novel. Brave New World and 1984 say more culture/people's relationship with their government today than anyone could have imagined when they were released. What is wrong with speculative works of fiction taking on serious, real world matters?
And perhaps you have addressed this in prior comments, but I think the presence of Dust is Pullman's way of showing that their is nothing wrong with spirituality and faith. There are scientific elements to Dust, but for the most part it is an energy all living things are made of and return to in death. Sounds a bit religious, doesn't it? And it sounds a whole lot more peaceful and accepting than the horrors organized religion have commanded throughout history, the real issue Pullman is working against
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "...it's a religion and not some widely accepted fairytale..."What's the difference?
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "It's expressing his opinions using fantasy WITHOUT making it clear that bothers me. And I think that especially for religion, that's wrong."I think he made his opinions pretty clear without having to be preachy or overly obvious. Would you really want an author to spoon-feed his/her message to us like we're babies? To declare in bold print THIS IS THE MESSAGE THAT I'M TRYING TO CONVEY AND I'M SPELLING IT OUT FOR YOU IN CASE YOU WEREN'T GETTING IT.
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "It's expressing his opinions using fantasy WITHOUT making it clear that bothers me. And I think that especially for religion, that's wrong."I don't know why the topic of religion needs to be treated differently. What about the movie Wall-E? It clearly has an environmental message but it is not blatantly written on the screen. Is religion (an extremely broad term, really) in some way more important than our planets environment (if you believe in religion, the earth is among the greatest gifts God[s] ever gave us)?
You are also implying that religion simply cannot be written about in a fictional setting. No book has ever featured a 4th-wall breaking moment where the author says "Hey, this is EXACTLY what I mean." Art is to be interpreted. There is nothing sneaky going on here, it is the nature of a novel to tell a story while delivering themes and reinforcing established motifs in a tactful, aesthetically pleasing way.
And finally, as I stated earlier, Pullman's opinions have nothing to do with these books. He is a writer. He wrote. Now the book is removed from him and free to be enjoyed by anyone in the world, who can derive their own understanding from the text. There is literally a scene in (the third?) book where God dies; yet I, a self-professed unbeliever, never felt the writing advocated atheism or spoke down on religion.
Organized religion with political power is a scary thing, whether you believe in a higher power or not. That's what these books, in part, are about, and I do not think that is a deceitful or inappropriate message.
Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "Yes, but there are people who believe in God and since it's a religion and not some widely accepted fairytale, it's not right to write a fantasy book that "kills God"."only in your opinion. in my opinion its a fairy tale, you can believe in whatever gods goddesses you want to and thankfully i don't have too. just because a lot of people seem to believe it does not make it true. Pullman has a valid view and a free world in which to express it.
I never said that I fear reading an atheistic book I just said that writing an atheistic book is wrong! Why is it anymore wrong than writing a book from a Christian perspective? YOU may consider it wrong but others may consider Christian books to be wrong. Because to them, the bible is nothing but a storybook.
Personally I think religion should be kept out of this.
The other poster is right, this is not the appropriate forum to be debating whether or not atheist views/books are inherently wrong. It is a work of fiction that just so happens to be written from a point of view different from your own. Get over it and see it for what it is. A storybook. If your kids faith is so weak that a book can turn them atheist, they would have turned that way anyway.
If you are going to criticize it then kindly base those criticisms on something solid and not something as silly as its standpoint on religion.
Books do not impact our personal lives. They may make us think sometimes but they do not actually have any real impact.
I will give you an example. I am not religious. I do not believe in God and I think if he did exist I would hate him and there are many things I would never forgive him for. Therefore I do not believe he exists and even if there were some God, he is clearly not the benevolent and loving God we are lead to believe. I have come to the conclusion that any God we once had died long ago and was probably not in fact a God but a mortal and very good man. Now despite these beliefs I do not shirk books and movies with a religious theme. I watched the chronicles of narnia and while I was watching it, I genuinely enjoyed it and it got me thinking and for that 2 hours I happily believed that Aslan was real and that he was God. But it has not changed my values or beliefs in any way. It was a film. A very good and thought provoking film but and film nontheless and a work of fiction. Do you see where I'm going with this?
I haven't read the other books, and don't plan on it, mostly because of over-use of profanity in the Golden Compass.
I also do not remember any profanity. Can you indicate what lines you are referring to?
Anamika wrote: "Claire wrote: "Babafaba(Hypnos)((Awesome Bob))(((Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore))) wrote: "It's expressing his opinions using fantasy WITHOUT making it clear that bothers me. And I think t..."Well, God appears in the books and dies. No one kills him, but to be fair that does happen. But again, I think it was much more symbolic of the old concept of religion being forgotten, not literally killing god.
Zachary wrote: "Well, God appears in the books and dies."Someplace on this thread someone mentioned that it is not God who dies or is killed, but only an angel claiming to be God. I read this a few years ago, but that's what I remember too: not actually God.
That difference is significant...
Jonathan wrote: "Zachary wrote: "Well, God appears in the books and dies."Someplace on this thread someone mentioned that it is not God who dies or is killed, but only an angel claiming to be God. I read this a f..."
Yes, you are right, and I think it just supports my interpretation of what the scene is trying to convey. That entity was never God in the first place, and in its old age made the mortal mistake of putting Metatron in charge of Heaven. Wow, I may need to reread these books, it's been awhile! So good.
This is fiction. So it is not real. I don't think you can condemn it because a few crazy Christians kill people. Have you read a book where a black person kills a man. Yes. And is that racist? No.
Then how is he being racist to Christianity if it's the person who commits the crime, not the religion?
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
The Subtle Knife (other topics)
His Dark Materials (other topics)
The Subtle Knife (other topics)
The Golden Compass (other topics)
H.P. Lovecraft (other topics)
Stephen King (other topics)
Neil Gaiman (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
A Chance Beginning (other topics)The Subtle Knife (other topics)
His Dark Materials (other topics)
The Subtle Knife (other topics)
The Golden Compass (other topics)
Authors mentioned in this topic
Christopher Patterson (other topics)H.P. Lovecraft (other topics)
Stephen King (other topics)
Neil Gaiman (other topics)
Rising up against tyrants, seeking the truth and destroying false idols, a well-intentioned relig..."
Wonderfully put! Bravo. Why can't I like this or something? Lol. Seriously, I hope people read this if they are thinking about reading these stories but worried about this whole religious debate.