You do realize that the people in Jesus camp represent a minority in America. There are a good majority who are horrified by these hardcore evangelists.
 

You clearly have not watched the video, and your knowledge shows. Actually, you might still be right on the majority/minority bit, but the fact of the matter is that there are enough Evangelists to sway the election in favour of republicans, and if consolidated, it would really ruin the country. There are many politicians that support these fucking extremists.
 

I haven't watched the video. But, in general, I find these kinds of evangelicals a little too cold-hearted for my liking. But yeah, would like to watch the movie for sure.
 

I haven't watched it, and probably never will. But "documentaries" like this are usually very biased. I'm sure they paint a very extreme picture just to get their point across.
 

Quite the contrary, Jamieson. This is as unbiased as a documentary gets. In fact, if anything, people might think that it's biased in favour of evangelicalism. But it's as even handed as it gets. All it is is a realistic portrayal of what it is all about. the majority of people in the documentary are extremists professing their grace for evangelicalism.
 

Do you think bowling for columbine was an unbiased view on gun culture in america?
 

I know what you're trying to get at, dombass, and no, I think it was quite biased. That being said, I hate the US and their lousy gun control laws, so it didn't make much difference.
 

I haven't seen the video, but imho what matters most is that they're more vocal and cohesive a group than non-evangelicals. Don't know if that's the case here, but usually nons are almost by definition incohesive. Like consumers are majority but non-cohesive, so they have little impact on getting gov't to lower tariffs to get cheaper deals - the producers are a minority but are cohesive and good at lobbying. Or like how the engineering or even H-kin faculties always manage to be heard more clearly at UBC Imagine Day pep rallies than the arts faculty, it's true. Like I said though, not sure if this applies/will apply to evangelicals in america.

On the subject of Michael Moore - I keep hearing rave reviews about him, but I read "Stupid White Men" and it SUCKED so hard. What's the verdict on "Columbine"?
 

I agree with the cohesion factor that you're talking about, Mai. But the problem is that these evangelicals literally worship George Bush as if he were a fucking deity--it's fucking scary as hell, and it really concerns me. I, myself, would fall under the majority of non-cohesive members, in that, I don't really give enough of a shit to get something done on moral grounds, though I wish I did.

As per "Bowling for Columbine" is concerned, I'd say it was a pretty damn good documentary, even if it was biased. That's just Michael Moore's style.
 

Rather than argue for the sake of arguing, after reading some reviews, I will give Gautam the benefit of the doubt on this one even though i haven't seen this movie. I guess I just dislike the POV that the world is going to shit and that the future is bleak -- hence my initial comment. I love post-apocalyptic, totalitarian-future-goverment movies and books, but only as a concept, not a reality.

Here's more proof in Gautam's favour:
http://www.reelviews.net/movies/j/jesus_camp.html

I also want to see this movie at some point.

"Or like how the engineering or even H-kin faculties always manage to be heard more clearly at UBC Imagine Day pep rallies than the arts faculty, it's true."

As true as this is, I sense some bitterness from the former Arts Mug leader.
 

I think I'm actually going to download this over the weekend. Then we can argue some more. :P