This song is about a family; an alcoholic, abusive father/husband, a proud woman who tries to stand by her husband, and a child who is abused. The townspeople look the other way and the abuse continues. The wife tries to stand by her husband, but when the father continues to be abusive, the wife burns down the house. The song never states it explicitely, but the abusive husband/father is killed. The wife/mother goes to jail and while the daughter is sent to the county home. Its Independence Day for the mother and daughter as they are now free from abuse.
@chungjik There is no specific mention of abuse of a child in the song, unless you're saying "I always seemed to get in the way" as clear and solid proof of abuse of the 8-year-old kid. And there's no specific mention of the woman "standing by" her husband, Unless you're saying, "Momma was proud and she stood her ground" as clear and solid proof of "standing by her husband". That's one aspect of things in the situation, but the main problems with "Independence Day include this: You must accept the argument that, at the very least, the song is iconoclasic....
@chungjik There is no specific mention of abuse of a child in the song, unless you're saying "I always seemed to get in the way" as clear and solid proof of abuse of the 8-year-old kid. And there's no specific mention of the woman "standing by" her husband, Unless you're saying, "Momma was proud and she stood her ground" as clear and solid proof of "standing by her husband". That's one aspect of things in the situation, but the main problems with "Independence Day include this: You must accept the argument that, at the very least, the song is iconoclasic. It attempts to usurp the title of "Independence Day" which has long been known as a reference to July 4, 1776, when the Second Continental Congress (of the Colonies that had long been beholden to England) adopted the Declaration Of Independence. This song arguably attempts to usurp July 4th, 1776, even if it wasn't actually July 4th on the day the fire happened.
And iconoclasm isn't the least of the problems of this song.
Why is that, you ask?
As I've already written, the song arguably advocates murder.
There is no specific mention that the woman was in the exact situation of trying to defend herself from her abuser. We must ask: Why didn't the woman take her daughter and run away to another town and hide out? Ah, so you're complaining that "Everybody looked the other way". So what? Why couldn't the mother steal a moment from the husband and run away with her daughter? Why? The song never answers that.
So, we have the lyrics. We have the celebratory music. And we have the celebratory video.
And, even before the video begins, we have a girl and a woman reciting "Amazing Grace". Amazing grace? So are you telling me that if anyone says, "God, please forgive me, but I'm about to...." and then what comes next in the sentence? Something horrible and very deadly?
Come to think of it, I actually read a review where the poster/commenter claimed that the song was, or is, Scriptural in many different senses. Really? Seriously? What does Scripture really say?
OK, let's look at the Ten Commandments, which are first spoken of in Exodus, the 2nd book of the Bible, which was written by Moses and which was one of the first 5 books, known as the Pentateuch (from Greek) and also referred to by Jewish people as the Torah. What does it say in the Ten Commandments? It says, "Do not kill".
Oops.
Right there. The sixth Commandment of the Ten Commandments. The defenders of this song, what do they want to do? They arguably want to rip that Commandment out of the Bible, or they want to say that there are supposedly "exceptions to the Command", or they want to say, "It's all in the way you interpret the verse". Really? Seriously?
What about if they argue, "We have to look at things in a utilitarian way." Really? So, does a utilitarian argument somehow trump other arguments?
And guess what: One of the most famous Utilitarians who ever lived on planet Earth, is (was) named John Stuart Mill.
@chungjik The sheer use of the words "Independence Day" is arguably iconoclastic and arguably an attempt to usurp the actual day (date) of July 4th, 1776, when the Second Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence from the mother country (England). When we refer to, and look back approvingly upon, the "Independence Day" of 1776, we realize that it has a special place in the history of the United States of America. It is enthroned in American History as one of the significant nomenclatures but now, with the song "Independence Day" which was written by Gretchen Peters and sung by...
@chungjik The sheer use of the words "Independence Day" is arguably iconoclastic and arguably an attempt to usurp the actual day (date) of July 4th, 1776, when the Second Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence from the mother country (England). When we refer to, and look back approvingly upon, the "Independence Day" of 1776, we realize that it has a special place in the history of the United States of America. It is enthroned in American History as one of the significant nomenclatures but now, with the song "Independence Day" which was written by Gretchen Peters and sung by Martina McBride (and also has been performed by Peters herself) is arguably a wicked usurpation of the title of "Independence Day".
There is a lot we can say, and there are some things we don't know, about the song "Independence Day". For someone to try to dig up a load of Scriptural support for the song, that's really horrible. The woman killed her husband in the fire. The Bible says, "Do not kill". That is the very sixth Commandment, in the book of Exodus in the Bible. There is no evidence that the father killed anyone, but even Martina McBride seems to admit that the woman killed the husband in the fire. (Martina McBride has claimed that the woman doesn't die in the fire -- but she's not the one who wrote the song.)
This song is about a family; an alcoholic, abusive father/husband, a proud woman who tries to stand by her husband, and a child who is abused. The townspeople look the other way and the abuse continues. The wife tries to stand by her husband, but when the father continues to be abusive, the wife burns down the house. The song never states it explicitely, but the abusive husband/father is killed. The wife/mother goes to jail and while the daughter is sent to the county home. Its Independence Day for the mother and daughter as they are now free from abuse.
@chungjik There is no specific mention of abuse of a child in the song, unless you're saying "I always seemed to get in the way" as clear and solid proof of abuse of the 8-year-old kid. And there's no specific mention of the woman "standing by" her husband, Unless you're saying, "Momma was proud and she stood her ground" as clear and solid proof of "standing by her husband". That's one aspect of things in the situation, but the main problems with "Independence Day include this: You must accept the argument that, at the very least, the song is iconoclasic....
@chungjik There is no specific mention of abuse of a child in the song, unless you're saying "I always seemed to get in the way" as clear and solid proof of abuse of the 8-year-old kid. And there's no specific mention of the woman "standing by" her husband, Unless you're saying, "Momma was proud and she stood her ground" as clear and solid proof of "standing by her husband". That's one aspect of things in the situation, but the main problems with "Independence Day include this: You must accept the argument that, at the very least, the song is iconoclasic. It attempts to usurp the title of "Independence Day" which has long been known as a reference to July 4, 1776, when the Second Continental Congress (of the Colonies that had long been beholden to England) adopted the Declaration Of Independence. This song arguably attempts to usurp July 4th, 1776, even if it wasn't actually July 4th on the day the fire happened.
And iconoclasm isn't the least of the problems of this song. Why is that, you ask? As I've already written, the song arguably advocates murder. There is no specific mention that the woman was in the exact situation of trying to defend herself from her abuser. We must ask: Why didn't the woman take her daughter and run away to another town and hide out? Ah, so you're complaining that "Everybody looked the other way". So what? Why couldn't the mother steal a moment from the husband and run away with her daughter? Why? The song never answers that.
So, we have the lyrics. We have the celebratory music. And we have the celebratory video.
And, even before the video begins, we have a girl and a woman reciting "Amazing Grace". Amazing grace? So are you telling me that if anyone says, "God, please forgive me, but I'm about to...." and then what comes next in the sentence? Something horrible and very deadly?
Come to think of it, I actually read a review where the poster/commenter claimed that the song was, or is, Scriptural in many different senses. Really? Seriously? What does Scripture really say?
OK, let's look at the Ten Commandments, which are first spoken of in Exodus, the 2nd book of the Bible, which was written by Moses and which was one of the first 5 books, known as the Pentateuch (from Greek) and also referred to by Jewish people as the Torah. What does it say in the Ten Commandments? It says, "Do not kill".
Oops.
Right there. The sixth Commandment of the Ten Commandments. The defenders of this song, what do they want to do? They arguably want to rip that Commandment out of the Bible, or they want to say that there are supposedly "exceptions to the Command", or they want to say, "It's all in the way you interpret the verse". Really? Seriously?
What about if they argue, "We have to look at things in a utilitarian way." Really? So, does a utilitarian argument somehow trump other arguments?
And guess what: One of the most famous Utilitarians who ever lived on planet Earth, is (was) named John Stuart Mill.
And John Stuart Mill was an atheist.
@chungjik The sheer use of the words "Independence Day" is arguably iconoclastic and arguably an attempt to usurp the actual day (date) of July 4th, 1776, when the Second Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence from the mother country (England). When we refer to, and look back approvingly upon, the "Independence Day" of 1776, we realize that it has a special place in the history of the United States of America. It is enthroned in American History as one of the significant nomenclatures but now, with the song "Independence Day" which was written by Gretchen Peters and sung by...
@chungjik The sheer use of the words "Independence Day" is arguably iconoclastic and arguably an attempt to usurp the actual day (date) of July 4th, 1776, when the Second Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence from the mother country (England). When we refer to, and look back approvingly upon, the "Independence Day" of 1776, we realize that it has a special place in the history of the United States of America. It is enthroned in American History as one of the significant nomenclatures but now, with the song "Independence Day" which was written by Gretchen Peters and sung by Martina McBride (and also has been performed by Peters herself) is arguably a wicked usurpation of the title of "Independence Day".
There is a lot we can say, and there are some things we don't know, about the song "Independence Day". For someone to try to dig up a load of Scriptural support for the song, that's really horrible. The woman killed her husband in the fire. The Bible says, "Do not kill". That is the very sixth Commandment, in the book of Exodus in the Bible. There is no evidence that the father killed anyone, but even Martina McBride seems to admit that the woman killed the husband in the fire. (Martina McBride has claimed that the woman doesn't die in the fire -- but she's not the one who wrote the song.)