Very relevant for America today

Make that three. It's amazing that this novel was written in the 1920s and is as relevant today as it was 80 years ago or 45 years ago, when the film was made. Religious hucksterism, like the poor, will always be with us, but I felt most for the genuine believers who only had their faith shaken time and again.

The more things change... indeed.

Don't you snap your finger at ME, lady.

[deleted]

NOT believing in Christianity does NOT automatically mean a person believes in NOTHING (and only a fundy could even think that way, anyway). Many of those who don't BELIEVE in your precious religion, ACCEPT the beauty and wonder and discovery afforded by science (which allows for DISAGREEMENT and CORRECTION and FALSIFIABILITY), which time and again over several hundred years now, keeps forcing the religious (and Christians in particular) further into their idealogical corner to "reformat" what they believe in so that they can, in their own minds, keep it flourishing among like-minded people. The only thing that one could argue ELMER GANTRY (the film) wavers on is the title character's own BELIEF in the B.S. he shovels. THAT is the problem with religious fundamentalists the world over today, particularly the evangelists: many may start out with Gantry-like awareness that there's a willing audience - often with deep pockets - for this pabulum, but eventually they've cross that psychological divide and actually start BELIEVING it themselves, which of course only makes the sale that much more convincing to the great unwashed. And nice try associating ONLY the Catholics and the Anglicans with wanting to merge church and state. The U.S. recently, even as recently as you posted) underwent a wonderfully watchable trial in which, at long last and with amazing ease, the School Board of Dover, Penn. was told it could NOT teach Intelligent Design (PROVEN in several ways to be reheated creationism) to its students as an alternative to evolutionary theories (which, of course, are rooted in testable EVIDENCE and FACTS). The proponents behind the ID movement are MOSTLY fundamentalist agendists from the Prostestant cults - full-blown Elmer Gantries who honestly believe what they've been sold in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary - "if I FEEL it's true, IT'S TRUE!. PRAISE JAY-SUSS!" It would all be laughable if it weren't for the fact that all of this magical religious hoodoo has stunted the educational maturity of far too many Americans up to now, making them pale in comparison to their European, Asian and Canadian counterparts when it comes to the sciences. Many people who CHOOSE not to be Christians, or don't have it forced down their throats from the moment they're spiritied out of the maternity ward so no evil influences can befall their precious little play-doh minds, still suspect the existence of a god - but often he's simply the force behind the Big Bang, after which he left things alone to EVOLVE. The fact that he isn't identical to yours doesn't make their thoughts any less worthy. Others may indeed choose NOT TO ACCEPT the existence of God, but this in no way means they DENY THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. The two concepts are exclusive, but Christians and other religionists can't wrap their minds around the separation, just as they can't when it comes to religion and politics.

". . . no one is so backwards and out for them selves [sic] as in this movie" -- oh, really? Perhaps someday you'll wke up and compare, as example, Bush's words with his actions. One of the Christian Commandments -- not equest, Commandment -- is "Thou shalt not lie". Care to try to defend the fact that every time Bush opens his mouth a lie falls out, only to be followedd by another, and another, and another?

Though the novel, and the film, are "fiction," the reality is that it is based upon fact, upon reality: "religion" has been used since its advent for all sorts of ends, including the suckering of "true believers" into doing any number of despicable things -- contrary to their "religion" and conscience -- in the name of their "religion". Can you say "Crusades"? Can you say torture in the rhetoic of "liberation"?

In the name of "religion," Bush illegally invaded and occupied a non-threatening sovereign nation. And with the same emotionalism which substitutes for "faith" and "religion," the true believers swallowed it unquestioningly, went along with it, and in many cases still support it.

Certainly there are Christians who actually live according to the values they espouse; but that does not mean they all do -- see above re. Bush.

As for "believing in nothing": that isn't possible. That it is possible is one of the lies -- or illiteracies -- sold by the extreme right wing religioliars --that they have "values" while everyone else does not. In fact, everyone has "values" -- it isn't possible not to have them -- regardless whether one likes them.

Go back and view the film again -- but this time with an open mind, instead of one which rejects it out of hand even before watching it. There have always been, and are today, religious hucksters who will pick your pocket while telling you to "repent," exactly as the film depicts. Look at such as Bennett, Falwell, and Robertson (recall the latter calling for the assassination of a democratically elected head of state? what happened to "Thou shalt not kill"?)

That's why it rings true for many: because, for them, they haven't their eyes closed, and aren't defensive against seeing through liars who tell you what you hope is true and want to hear.

PROVE your assertions about the Catholic and Anglican churches, please.

Thank you for your interest in our film "Canaan Land." We're in preproduction. For more info visit this website: http://www.gofundme.com/canaanland