Champion's both the anti-war movement AND adultery.

Yeah, not to mention miss commie jane fonda being in this film. It makes me sick.

Since when is 'anti-war activism' a bad thing?

What century -- what millennium -- are you living in? Of course, you can believe whatever you want, and think as you like, even though White House spokesman Ari Fleischer warned Americans in 2001 that they need to "watch what they say, watch what they do."

In the late 1960s through the late 1970s, (as it is today, even this very moment), the desire for cessation of senseless killing (or as you so thoughtfully put it, "anti-war activism") had become the prevaling attitude across all strata of American society -- the majority of Americans had simply had had enough of war. The Vietnam conflict, as our durrent involvement in Iraq, had shady origins -- the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which gave LBJ the power to wage all-out war without a formal congressional declaration (sound familiar?) came about because two American ships had allegedly been fired upon by the North Vietnamese. It turned out that no such incident had ever taken place. (Again, sound familiar? As in, no WMDs?)

As for the depiction of adultery that you believe to be "sick and irresponsible," we humans make mistakes all the time. Life is inherently complicated and messy; relationships in particular are extraordinarly complex. My only recommendation is that, when you feel your watching something that you feel is "repulsive in its message," you've got the remote in hand, and can turn it off anytime.

Also, if you really do turn cartwheels for Christ, your beliefs and opinions as put forward in your post stand in contradiction of some of Jesus' best-known teachings.

Did He not say, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone"; "Judge not, that ye be not judged"; and "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God"?

What century -- what millennium -- are you living in? Of course, you can believe whatever you want, and think as you like, even though White House spokesman Ari Fleischer warned Americans in 2001 that they need to "watch what they say, watch what they do."

In the late 1960s through the late 1970s, (as it is today, even this very moment), the desire for cessation of senseless killing (or as you so thoughtfully put it, "anti-war activism") had become the prevaling attitude across all strata of American society -- the majority of Americans had simply had had enough of war. The Vietnam conflict, as our durrent involvement in Iraq, had shady origins -- the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which gave LBJ the power to wage all-out war without a formal congressional declaration (sound familiar?) came about because two American ships had allegedly been fired upon by the North Vietnamese. It turned out that no such incident had ever taken place. (Again, sound familiar? As in, no WMDs?)

As for the depiction of adultery that you believe to be "sick and irresponsible," we humans make mistakes all the time. Life is inherently complicated and messy; relationships in particular are extraordinarly complex. My only recommendation is that, when you feel your watching something that you feel is "repulsive in its message," you've got the remote in hand, and can turn it off anytime.

Also, if you really do turn cartwheels for Christ, your beliefs and opinions as put forward in your post stand in contradiction of some of Jesus' best-known teachings.

Did He not say, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone"; "Judge not, that ye be not judged"; and "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God"?

[deleted]

Wow, what a scary, angry person you seem to be. I wonder what kind of bottled up evils lurk in there that would disturb far beyond "anti-war activism" (God forbid, we use our rights guaranteed us under the Constitution), and "adultery". I'm sure you wouldn't want a film made of your life either!

I just noticed your sign-on name. Now I understand. Better get back to the book burning.

"What's the rumpus?"

Sometimes adultery is romantic. When you love a person because they're lovable is much more romantic than standing by your old-fashioned man. Participatin in adultery can be a mistake, but sometimes they're just mistakes made to correct a mistake of a marriage. That said, I think Bob got a fair shake. Except for his old-fashioned "I don't want my wife to work" comments he was a pretty sympathetic character. After all, in an anti-war movie even the veterans are victims of the war. And who says affairs happen without consequence (even though they do all the time)?

You see the anti-war theme as a subtext? What movie were you watching? The main theme of the movie is anti-war. The affair and sexual liberation was the subtext, not the anti-war theme. How are we introduced to the characters? What are the major plot points? How does the story move along? Luke, Bob and the brother are all worse off because of the war. That's what they're trying to say here. Luke's commentary at the high school meeting wasn't just "tacked on", it was a culmination of his anti-war position. He goes from being angry in the beginning to working through a healing process. It results in his protest at the recruiting depot which was prompted by the suicide of Vi's brother. At the end he's giving the kids the benefit of his wisdom. He's telling them they don't have to go to war and there's nothing wrong if they don't. It's a counter-point to the recruiting sergeant. From a movie-making perspective he's speaking to everyone watching the movie.

What is wrong with being anti-war? I would suggest that there is something very wrong with people who are pro-war.