Post by: gronned on December 06, 2008, 11:26:00 AM
It's a commercial for Björn Borg, for some reason - http://www.bjornborg.com/en/Love/film/
The video in a little worse Youtube-quality -
I'd be interested to know if you think such a commercial could be aired in american TV?
Post by: gcskate27 on December 06, 2008, 01:06:00 PM
they would never air that commercial on the 3 major networks...
Post by: gronned on December 06, 2008, 12:53:00 PM
I guess they made it as there's a lot of debate about female priests and gay marriage in Sweden. And since they know the vast majority here support the views of this video I guess they felt fairly safe doing it. Still haven't heard any negative opinion on it, which makes me really glad.
If this would ever reach USA, Björn Borg will probably lose a great deal of his fan-base
This is far more important, though.I wish as many as possible would see it!
Post by: Rustmonkey on December 06, 2008, 03:19:00 PM
I didn't watch the video, but I disagree with the statement that something promoting the freedom to sexuality would NEVER be aired in the US - you may beleive that all people of the US are homophobes, but you'd be wrong - many people believe that gays should have equal rights, the same as everyone else - its nobody's business whom marries whom - its just that the extreme Christian half seems to push its views more desperately than those in support of homosexuality - many of our states that have voted to ban gay marriage only passed the vote by a 5-10% margin - so, on a whole only about 55-60% support any type of ban and I fully expect these bans to change within 10 years - it will someday go before the national Supreme Court which will have no choice but to decide on the side of human rights and lift the bans against gays... after all, we can't build a country and government on the ideals of "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" and "All men are created equal" and expect to stomp on the rights of others - it'll change
Post by: buttface96 on December 06, 2008, 10:09:00 PM
QUOTE(gronned @ Dec 6 2008, 12:29 PM) 
You seem pretty sure. That's really sad, as it's such a simple, yet powerful video. One of the most important short videos I've ever seen.
I guess they made it as there's a lot of debate about female priests and gay marriage in Sweden. And since they know the vast majority here support the views of this video I guess they felt fairly safe doing it. Still haven't heard any negative opinion on it, which makes me really glad.
If this would ever reach USA, Björn Borg will probably lose a great deal of his fan-base
This is far more important, though.I wish as many as possible would see it!
I do not see why it would not air here in California, there was a very similar TV commercial airing pre-election time here relating to Prop 8 (The ban on gay marriage which passed here). It was not as blunt and as direct as the video you posted but it had the same concept.
I'm a Christian and I personally believe homosexuality is wrong, however I do think they should have the same rights as everyone else. However marriage is a little bit different. Heck, look up marriage in the dictionary and it will even tell you something along these lines:
QUOTE
the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc.
.But that's just the term "marriage" I do not see why two people cannot be together regardless of sexes, but marriage is what it is plain and simple. What the legislature needs to come up with is a new term with virtually the same rights for homosexual couples, like domestic partnership or something. Trust me, if they call it "marriage" then a majority of the Christian community are going to remain against it, but if legislature or someone can come up with a different term, then there will be more support coming from Christians and more Americans for that matter.
In a nutshell, I believe homosexuals have the right to choose to be together and have the same rights as marriage, it just needs to be called something different.
Post by: lordvader129 on December 06, 2008, 10:33:00 PM
QUOTE(buttface96 @ Dec 6 2008, 09:45 PM)
I do not see why it would not air here in California, there was a very similar TV commercial airing pre-election time here relating to Prop 8 (The ban on gay marriage which passed here). It was not as blunt and as direct as the video you posted but it had the same concept.
I'm a Christian and I personally believe homosexuality is wrong, however I do think they should have the same rights as everyone else. However marriage is a little bit different. Heck, look up marriage in the dictionary and it will even tell you something along these lines:
.
But that's just the term "marriage" I do not see why two people cannot be together regardless of sexes, but marriage is what it is plain and simple. What the legislature needs to come up with is a new term with virtually the same rights for homosexual couples, like domestic partnership or something. Trust me, if they call it "marriage" then a majority of the Christian community are going to remain against it, but if legislature or someone can come up with a different term, then there will be more support coming from Christians and more Americans for that matter.
In a nutshell, I believe homosexuals have the right to choose to be together and have the same rights as marriage, it just needs to be called something different.
well your dictionary definition you have to wonder, are social trends following the dictionary, or is the dictionary following social trends? but i could go on for hours about how the concept marriage is the worst marriage (no pun intended) of church and state still in the world today
to be honest the part of the video struck me the most was that both the grooms appeared to be dressed as catholic priests, is it supposed to be a 3 pronged statement? allow gay marriage, allow female priests, and allow priests to marry?
Post by: hamwbone on February 02, 2020, 06:25:00 PM
Post by: lordvader129 on December 07, 2008, 07:06:00 PM
http://www.disgustab...-and-State.html
Post by: gronned on February 03, 2020, 08:43:00 AM
But, none of that really matters to me as I hate religions and how they e.g. make homosexuals feel. Therefore I'm all for gay marriage, as I hope every change in the church will make it weaker and weaker.
Some think it will strengthen the church if they allow gay marriage, but in the end I think people will have a hard time finding the bible reasonable as not very much of its morals are applied in the church or society today. On the other hand I've got no idea how anyone can be so deluded to believe a word of it today.
Post by: Reaper527 on December 08, 2008, 09:30:00 PM
QUOTE(gcskate27 @ Dec 6 2008, 03:06 PM)
they would never air that commercial on the 3 major networks...
agreed. there is NO way that would get aired nationally, and locally, i don't think anyone would air it in my home state of massachusetts, and it doesn't get much bluer than here. this might even be over the top for southern california.
money talks, and there is no company that is willing to offend 60%+ of their fanbase
on a side note, who or what is björn borg? assuming that is isn't the name of a politician or a political group, and that they actually sell something, the ad sucked from a marketing standpoint. that ad didn't even tell me what they sell.
Post by: gronned on December 09, 2008, 03:29:00 PM
Björn Borg is a Swedish tennis player known as the greatest of all time. I do think Federer is or will be considered greater though.
Today Björn Borg is a clothing brand. It, obviously, wasn't their intention to show off clothes, but to make a buzz around this commercial and the brand. I'm positive this will boost their sales far more than actually showing off clothes.
Almost everyone seems to love it, and it's a commercial people talk about. The gay community will certainly buy their stuff.
I have no doubt the company don't care all too much about the political statement they made, but to associate their name with an issue many agree with, ultimately generating more money.
Regardless of their intentions I think they made a great commercial that serves a good purpose.
Post by: buttface96 on December 09, 2008, 04:51:00 PM
QUOTE(gronned @ Dec 9 2008, 03:05 PM)
Almost everyone seems to love it, and it's a commercial people talk about. The gay community will certainly buy their stuff.
If that video did air in the states, I think it would definitely spark more outrage than support. the concept of gay marriage was fine in the video, but the idea of marrying of two gay catholic priests definitely crossed the line in my opinion.
Post by: gronned on December 10, 2008, 08:42:00 AM
QUOTE(buttface96 @ Dec 10 2008, 01:27 AM)
If that video did air in the states, I think it would definitely spark more outrage than support. the concept of gay marriage was fine in the video, but the idea of marrying of two gay catholic priests definitely crossed the line in my opinion.
Sure, and that'd be great! It's about damn time you people wake up.
From an economic standpoint Björn Borg will make it as lots of people will INTENTIONALLY support their clothes because of this. They will probably make more than from any other commercial showing clothes.
Post by: lordvader129 on December 10, 2008, 03:52:00 PM
QUOTE(gronned @ Dec 8 2008, 07:43 AM)
hamwbone: In a sense I agree. If the bible clearly hates homosexuals, I don't really see why a priest that believes in every word of it should be forced to marry them. And even more so, I don't understand why homosexuals would want to be married in church if they're so hated in the bible.
well this is actually a point of debate, homosexuality is listed as a sin under hebrew law, but so is eating pork, lobster and cheeseburgers, and most christians do that without a second thought
its a matter of the modern christian church picking and choosing which laws they like, and which they dont, and many people have different interpretations
Post by: gronned on December 11, 2008, 01:20:00 PM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Dec 11 2008, 12:28 AM)
well this is actually a point of debate, homosexuality is listed as a sin under hebrew law, but so is eating pork, lobster and cheeseburgers, and most christians do that without a second thought
its a matter of the modern christian church picking and choosing which laws they like, and which they dont, and many people have different interpretations
Absolutely, all Christians are hypocrites, but homosexuality is definitely forbidden, so they follow the bible in that sense. That most Christians don't even have a clue it's a sin to eat pork, simply follows their love for picking only the parts of the bible they like. Most Christians don't kill people that work on the Sabbath. Most of them work on the Sabbath themselves.
If they think they follow the bible they should even commit suicide for working on the Sabbath
All the time I hear Christians saying "Let us believe what we want, we don't harm anyone". No, the women that are forced to deliver their babies when they've been raped are not harmed - They just whine. The people suffering from e.g. Alzheimer are not harmed by Christians not allowing stem-cell research - They just whine.
The African Catholics that are not allowed to use condoms and therefore spread HIV instead are not harmed - They just whine.
Religions affect us in the most harmful ways possible, and needs to be terminated asap.
Post by: lordvader129 on December 11, 2008, 03:52:00 PM
QUOTE(gronned @ Dec 11 2008, 12:56 PM)
Absolutely, all Christians are hypocrites, but homosexuality is definitely forbidden, so they follow the bible in that sense. That most Christians don't even have a clue it's a sin to eat pork, simply follows their love for picking only the parts of the bible they like. Most Christians don't kill people that work on the Sabbath. Most of them work on the Sabbath themselves.
If they think they follow the bible they should even commit suicide for working on the Sabbath
All the time I hear Christians saying "Let us believe what we want, we don't harm anyone". No, the women that are forced to deliver their babies when they've been raped are not harmed - They just whine. The people suffering from e.g. Alzheimer are not harmed by Christians not allowing stem-cell research - They just whine.
The African Catholics that are not allowed to use condoms and therefore spread HIV instead are not harmed - They just whine.
Religions affect us in the most harmful ways possible, and needs to be terminated asap.
well as i said, its a matter of interpretation, why do christians need to follow hebrew law? the whole point of jesus dying was so that people didnt have to follow those laws for salvation
QUOTE(John 3:16 (King James Version))
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
"whosoever believeth," not "whosoever believeth...and does certain things and doesn't do other certain things"
Post by: Reaper527 on December 11, 2008, 07:55:00 PM
QUOTE(gronned @ Dec 11 2008, 03:56 PM)
Religions affect us in the most harmful ways possible, and needs to be terminated asap.
that's not a very tolerant viewpoint coming from someone demanding tolerance
Post by: gronned on December 11, 2008, 11:02:00 PM
QUOTE(Reaper527 @ Dec 12 2008, 04:31 AM)
that's not a very tolerant viewpoint coming from someone demanding tolerance
That's just a play with words. Unfortunately some people don't see these cheap tricks.
Not that I've explicitly stated it, but yes, I do demand tolerance - of which there is none in the Abrahamic religions.
This is the key point: one cannot be tolerant to what is not tolerant.
If religions were tolerant, I would probably not have been by bothered them in the first place. For example, you will rarely see me speak ill of Buddhism, as it's for the most part very tolerant.
Post by: damam on January 09, 2009, 02:11:00 PM
If you think that this ad would be excepted by the majority of Buddhist world wide then you are ignoring the most common interpretation of the third precept of Buddhism. The Dali Lama, for example, has remained consistent with this despite severe pressure to change his stance by groups like GALA. His general reply goes something along the lines that being a Buddhist is a choice. And I agree with him. So is being a christian, or the church that you choose to go to for that matter.
The only verse that is relevant to this discussion in the bible is Romans 1 (some also say 1 Corinthians 6, but this is an even weaker argument). Most homophobic Christians like to narrow this down to just versus 26 and 27. But I personally believe this is a mistake because it gives a distorted view on the totality of the message. As a christian, I find this part of my religion very frustrating. Jesus never addressed homosexuality. And while paul did talk about it, he never condemned it.
point number whatever: Marriage should not be recognized by the government. This clearly violates the separation of church and state. Marriage is a religious sacrament. End of discussion. I am all for the idea of eliminating all marriages as recognized by the govt. I would entertain the idea of replacing it with a civil union, once a civil union is better defined.
last thing: Swedish Christians appear to be very odd people.
ps: went shopping at IKEA last weekend. Given that sweden is socialist state, i probably in part paid for your internet connection gronne. your welcome!
Post by: lordvader129 on January 11, 2009, 10:18:00 PM
QUOTE(damam @ Jan 9 2009, 01:47 PM)
point number whatever: Marriage should not be recognized by the government. This clearly violates the separation of church and state. Marriage is a religious sacrament. End of discussion. I am all for the idea of eliminating all marriages as recognized by the govt. I would entertain the idea of replacing it with a civil union, once a civil union is better defined.
this is pretty much the exact point i i take in my blog post i linked above
Post by: gronned on January 16, 2009, 10:33:00 AM
QUOTE(damam @ Jan 9 2009, 10:47 PM)
If you think that this ad would be excepted by the majority of Buddhist world wide then you are ignoring the most common interpretation of the third precept of Buddhism. The Dali Lama, for example, has remained consistent with this despite severe pressure to change his stance by groups like GALA. His general reply goes something along the lines that being a Buddhist is a choice. And I agree with him. So is being a christian, or the church that you choose to go to for that matter.
last thing: Swedish Christians appear to be very odd people.
ps: went shopping at IKEA last weekend. Given that sweden is socialist state, i probably in part paid for your internet connection gronne. your welcome!
Why mentioning whether Buddhists would accept it, or not? Am I a Buddhist because I quoted Buddha?
Is Sweden a socialist state?
Our right-wing government may disagree with you! Don't american companies pay taxes as well? I probably paid all of your internet connection then, given all the american companies here! At least you got some nice furnitures, if you managed to understand the manual
Last thing: All christians are odd people! Would you care to elaborate why ours are worse than yours?
Post by: gronned on January 18, 2009, 02:25:00 PM
Do they deserve respect as their branch of christianity is true, or because you find it more pure? It's bullshit nonetheless.
Check out the video to Rush's song Malignant Narcissism - http://www.youtube.c...feature=related
Post by: buttface96 on January 19, 2009, 12:59:00 AM
QUOTE(gronned @ Jan 16 2009, 10:09 AM)
Last thing: All christians are odd people! Would you care to elaborate why ours are worse than yours?
Here's a tolerant view for you,
All Gay people are odd people.
How about that?
Post by: Reaper527 on January 20, 2009, 06:28:00 PM
QUOTE(gronned @ Jan 16 2009, 01:09 PM)
Is Sweden a socialist state?
Our right-wing government may disagree with you! i felt a little sick to my stomach reading a claim that sweden has a "right wing" government. if you honestly think your government is anywhere near conservative, you have gone so far left that you can't see the middle any more.
Post by: Mikesshunk on January 21, 2009, 02:34:00 PM
QUOTE(gronned @ Jan 16 2009, 07:09 PM)
...Don't american companies pay taxes as well? I probably paid all of your internet connection then, given all the american companies here!...
That makes little sense given that our government does not pay for our internet connection.
Post by: gronned on January 21, 2009, 06:27:00 PM
QUOTE(Mikesshunk @ Jan 21 2009, 11:10 PM)
That makes little sense given that our government does not pay for our internet connection.
Do you think my "socialist" government pays for my internet? Exactly - that's why I mentioned it.
Reaper527,
True, they're not right-wing in american politics, but they're far to the right in Swedish. Liberal parties are considered right-wing here. The leading party (moderaterna) is officially a conservative party, but they're very liberal in reality. I find them too right-wing for my liking. Anyone who thinks Sweden is a socialist country needs a proper reality-check, even when the social democrats ran the country.
Post by: damam on March 20, 2009, 05:42:00 PM
QUOTE(gronned @ Jan 16 2009, 07:09 AM)
Why mentioning whether Buddhists would accept it, or not? Am I a Buddhist because I quoted Buddha?
i submit that the majority would not, and i mentioned it because you said this
QUOTE(gronned @ Dec 11 2008, 07:38 PM)
If religions were tolerant, I would probably not have been by bothered them in the first place. For example, you will rarely see me speak ill of Buddhism, as it's for the most part very tolerant.
QUOTE(gronned @ Jan 16 2009, 07:09 AM)
Is Sweden a socialist state?
Our right-wing government may disagree with you! this statement really made me shake my head. your right wing govt is still further to the left than even barak obama. Sweden is about as socialist as it gets. There was a time when you fully embraced this, I am suprised by your response. Perhaps you want to see more leeching and mooching of your income?
QUOTE(gronned @ Jan 16 2009, 07:09 AM)
Don't american companies pay taxes as well? I probably paid all of your internet connection then, given all the american companies here! At least you got some nice furnitures, if you managed to understand the manual
no. i dont have an internet connection. It was either that or gymnastics lessons for my daughter ( i chose the lessons). the govt offers no subsidies for it either. I also live in a conservative state that does not really believe in social programs.
but, yes, i did gets some nice looking furniture. IKEA engineers are a clever bunch. They should turn there skills towards designing oil platforms so we can build them cheaper and faster too.
QUOTE(gronned @ Jan 16 2009, 07:09 AM)
Last thing: All christians are odd people! Would you care to elaborate why ours are worse than yours?
because i have listened to you talk about christians over the last (how many?) years. I have come to the conclusion that given your prospective on christianity, and what you think all christians believe, that the majority of christians in sweden must be very odd people. Its also clear that you dont understand the american interpretations either (I wont pretend to understand the swede christian interpretation). Eating pork, for example, is not a sin for christians for at least 2 reasons. And most american christians are well aware of both of those reasons.
having said all that, and as a i said before. Homosexuality as it pertains to christianity is a frustration of mine. I have heavily researched this, and have really come to the conclusion that it is not forbidden in christianity. I know i am in the minority on this, but I am working from within to change it too.
Post by: damam on March 22, 2009, 12:58:00 PM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Jan 11 2009, 06:54 PM)
this is pretty much the exact point i i take in my blog post i linked above
good to know i am still in good company
i get nothing but arguements on that topic where i live.