I guess what I am saying is that I do see parallels. I do not claim that the parallels are perfect. I do see your basis quite clearly.
Your criticism does extend, however, to the original book. It is not an artifact of the movie. If we stand against the agression and punishment of the movie, we should also therefore stand against the aggression and punishment of the book.
I stand firmly against aggression and punishment in real life, but find that I cannot so staunchly oppose fictional aggression against (punishment of) fictional characters that likely represent non-anthropomorphic entities.
My personal feeling is that the Rule of Sin over Man did die a kind of death with Jesus' sacrifice and with his resurrection, and thus I do not share your deep misgivings.
I would note, however, that the dismissal of people as NotReallyHuman in order to unflinchinly perpetrate aggression against them is a common human failing with disastrous consequences. That does give me pause.
no subject
Your criticism does extend, however, to the original book. It is not an artifact of the movie. If we stand against the agression and punishment of the movie, we should also therefore stand against the aggression and punishment of the book.
I stand firmly against aggression and punishment in real life, but find that I cannot so staunchly oppose fictional aggression against (punishment of) fictional characters that likely represent non-anthropomorphic entities.
My personal feeling is that the Rule of Sin over Man did die a kind of death with Jesus' sacrifice and with his resurrection, and thus I do not share your deep misgivings.
I would note, however, that the dismissal of people as NotReallyHuman in order to unflinchinly perpetrate aggression against them is a common human failing with disastrous consequences. That does give me pause.