Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Million Dollar Baby: WTF is the fundie's problem with it? (SPOILER ALERT)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
liberalhistorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 10:40 PM
Original message
Million Dollar Baby: WTF is the fundie's problem with it? (SPOILER ALERT)
First of all, if you haven't seen the movie yet and don't want to know the ending, DO NOT READ ANY FURTHER.

For the rest of you, I saw this movie today and loved it. I didn't really think I would, because I hate boxing and I don't like sports movies in general. This was so much more than just a "boxing" or "sports" movie, though, much more; Eastwood has really outdone himself this time. I was actually crying at the end, when he gives her the injection and then walks out for good, never returning to the gymn or his home. And the scene of Eastwood crying in the church while trying to decide what to do was just heartbreaking.

I have to wonder just what the fuck is up with the fundies getting their knickers in a knot over this. It didn't say that every single handicapped person should just do society a favor and kill themselves because they're worthless if they're not whole, that was NOT AT ALL the message. I could understand their feelings if that were, indeed, the message, and I would actually agree with them, but it certainly isn't the message at all. What I got from it was that she had the right to make that decision on her own and that remaining in that situation would have killed her far sooner Eastwood's character did. She had, indeed, seen her dreams come true, unlike so many others in life, and just could not handle living that way. Each one of us, in the end, has the right to make that decision for ourselves should something like that happen. Many will choose to continue to live life to the fullest however they can, and that's great. Many others, however, would simply not be able to deal with it and people have the right to make their own life-and-death decisions.

So why the hell can't the fundies just STFU once in awhile and recognize that their way isn't always the right way and that they don't have the right to dictate people's personal decisions based on their own beliefs. Why can't they understand that the world is NOT black and white, that there are a lot of gray, nuanced areas, and that people aren't criminals if they don't believe exactly the same way?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. You talked right past it.
You say:

Each one of us, in the end, has the right to make that decision for ourselves should something like that happen.

That is precisely the thinking that the fundies disagree with. All of us must be made to artificially cling to whatever "life" we have until finally the scientific options are exhausted and every possible effort fails to keep your corpse "alive."

Amazing, isn't it, how these people who are SO sure of Gawd's will and letting Gawd decide, are perfectly fine with allowing modern medicine and machines to SUBVERT that will?

Seriously, if they were true to their own beliefs, they would never seek medical attention, because if Gawd wants to take them, he'll do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalhistorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Yeah, you're right,
and that's what I don't get. Why can't they just leave people the hell alone? Now, I will agree that the decision MUST be that of the individual, and must be made without any pressure from anyone or anything else. If someone else, or a doctor/hospital, makes that decision because the family doesn't want to deal with it or doesn't consider he/she to be a "real" valuable person anymore, or the hospital doesn't want to be burdened with it, then that's a different story entirely. But that wasn't the case here, or the message at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lindacooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. You're right too
but see, fundies think EVERYTHING is their business. They think they have the right to poke their big ugly noses into any situation, no matter how person. Democrats need to start standing up to these freaks and start telling them to mind their own damn business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xray s Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. an interesting conundrum
who exactly is thwarting God, someone who keeps a person alive through artificial means who is suffering horribly, and would die in a moment, or someone who allows that person to die naturally?

what is the motive for keeping the person alive? because their survivors can't let them go? because the hospital is running up the bill?

interesting questions.

It was a great movie, BTW
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 10:45 PM
Response to Original message
2. How can anyone
hate boxing?

I think it is bizarre that the "right" is upset by the ending of a movie about boxing. I haven't seen it yet, but am more likely to simply because of the ranting right. I love boxing, and usually am disappointed by boxing movies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalhistorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Well, they're not upset about the boxing,
they're upset about the ending and what happens to one of the characters. I won't tell you if you haven't seen it yet, you obviously didn't read my whole post. If you like boxing, I think you'll like this movie and not be disappointed by it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. No, I read it
I meant you: how can you NOT love boxing? I was only partly serious, though, because many people do not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hector459 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. I bet they are upset about the "welfare" scenes.
You know, only minorities try to flim-flam the welfare system.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalhistorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. ROFLMAO!
I hadn't even thought of that, actually; who knows with them, you might just have a point. I did love it when Maggie told her mother that she knew her mother had never signed the papers giving her (the mother) ownership of the house Maggie bought for her and that she could "sell it right out from under your fat, lazy, hillbilly ass whenever I want, which is what I'll do if you ever come back here." The mother and her family were such horrible people that you couldn't help but cheer when she said that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Well, ya gotta admit boxing is a tad bizzarre...the whole purpose being to
beat the snot out of each other for cash. No offense, if you love it fine, but there's plenty of reason for people not to like it. My Dad LOVES boxing and wrestling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. Well,
I fought over 300 amateur fights .... those old "snot-beatings" were mainly for free .... though there is a crooked and under-handed part of amateur boxing, too: promoters can't "pay" amateurs, except "expense money" .... and the winner always gets more expense money. (smile)

I've been training my younger son. I tried to talk him out of boxing, but he wants to give it a try. Every generation of my family has boxed since coming here from Ireland long ago.

I think boxers are the most interesting, kind, and gentle people. It's promoters I dislike, along with most trainers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chookie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Get in the ring and let me...
give you a BIG hug. :hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
9. It's not about choice, IMHO.
I don't even think MDB was about Maggie's choice. She was driven mad, insane from being in that condition (and also, maybe, from being demeaned by her family like that -- maybe that's what freepers don't want you to see, an honest criticism of a poor family from the South that goes to Disneyland for a week while their daughter is suffering like that, and then puts a pen in the mouth of a quadripeligic and begins to move a financial contract giving up control of all her assetts around so that she can make her "mark").

I think the crux of the movie was Frankie's decision to euthenize her. It was clearly wrong. He had the choice to do it, but it was the wrong choice. The priest explained that much. He knew it was wrong, too. Why else would he disappear? Surely, he would face prosecution.

But that's the great thing about it being a fictional movie. It's a tragedy. A beautiful, poetic tragedy.

We all have made choices. And they are the wrong choices. Some as fatal as Frankie's. And that is the beautiful thing. How can you not just love this guy anyway? And by loving him, we love each other and ourselves all the more, do we not?




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalhistorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. An interesting analysis, thanks.
Personally, I don't think Frankie was wrong. Had I been Maggie, I would have likely wanted the same thing. As he told the priest, by wanting to keep her with him, he was killing her. She had even tried to kill herself and would keep on doing so. She had the right to make that decision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-05 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. I think he was wrong, you think he was right.
Edited on Sun Feb-13-05 11:27 PM by Kire
I say it doesn't matter. He has the choice. Not even God can take that away.

Gotta love that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 03rd 2024, 08:38 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC