No Smoking in a Movie, Either

Our esteemed colleague, “Jessicafischerqueen,” who lives and works in South Korea, reports that due to “some new law,” images of smoking have been censored out of movies–even movies that have already been made–by “blurring out” cigarettes, cigars, and pipes. She first saw this in a movie she was watching on TV.

“The movie was also filled with gratuitous violence and sex,” she said, “which is not at all blurred out.”

Well, they have to do that, don’t they, or next thing you know, people will be smoking in the cemeteries.

Are these people quite all there?

So it’s okay to show people in a movie committing adultery, incest, rape, murder, armed robbery, etc., but heaven forbid we allow the audience to see anybody smoking!

What does that tell us about our rulers’ priorities? Nothing good.

Liberals are always yawping about censorship, and “trying to impose your stupid morality on everybody else”; but they’re always the first to employ censorship, and the very first to impose their stupid morality upon the rest of us. Can you say “transgender bathrooms”?

We really ought to be ashamed of ourselves, allowing our nations to be governed by such hypocrites.


3 comments on “No Smoking in a Movie, Either

  1. I really am ashamed of our nation for allowing so much hyprocicy and downright stupidity. In fact, I am ashamed of the whole world that sits in
    the face of our Creator. If it grieves us this much, imagine how grieved He must be.

  2. I find it ironic that if one holds to biblical standards of morality they will be ridiculed and accused of trying to force their morals upon others, even if they don’t do that. But, on the other hand, the liberals have their own moral standards which are at least as rigid as those of even fundamentalists and they impose their standards on us.

    Now I’m no friend of smoking, but it doesn’t offend me to see it in a movie. If you ever saw the A&E movie, Ike: Countdown to D-Day, there was smoking throughout, but that was because Eisenhower smoked four packs a day and they were portraying a historical fact.

    Here’s how I see the whole thing; it comes down to where we obtain our standards. The Creator’s standards give us many benefits. For example, holding to marriage as a lifelong commitment strengthens families. Having sex be permitted only in marriage saves us from the deadbeat dad problem, STDs, adultery, teen pregnancies and a host of other problems.

    Human standards claim to offer greater freedom, but the history of just my lifetime demonstrates that this freedom comes with a price. Social conditions are not better now than they were when I was born and the decay of morality is a driving force.

    There was a time when I envied the so called freedoms I saw around me, but now I don’t. At 62 years of age I am thrilled that I have no illegitimate offspring, no STDs, no former paramours that hate me, etc. Sticking to biblical morality has paid off in the long run.

    So, which would people rather have; moral standards from a loving Creator that are based upon knowing our true nature and our true needs, or human standards that won’t allow us to see smoking, but will hasten to display immorality.

    1. As R.J. Rushdoony said, the only freedom our masters mean to leave us is the freedom to sin–and that’s fake freedom, because it comes with such a high price.

Leave a Reply