Good sense thus prevailed. Christians upset with the film, which portrays Jesus Christ and the Church in a negative light, did not get everything they wanted but accepted the majority decision of the review panel with good grace. Local movie fans who have long anticipated the worldwide release of this big-budgeted thriller get to enjoy it fully.

It is understandable that some Christians are upset about the claims made in "The Da Vinci Code" that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and had descendants and that the Catholic Church and its obscure Opus Dei religious order are at the centre of a vast cover-up.

The decision by the makers of the film and its distributor to include a disclaimer is seen as a gesture of respect towards the figure of Jesus, the history of the church and the religious beliefs of viewers.

An earlier demand by local Christian groups, including the Coordination Committee of the Protestant Church of Thailand and the Evangelical Fellowship of Thailand, for the censorship panel to ban the movie altogether was certainly excessive. But even their proposed 10-minute cut would have been too invasive, because it would have compromised the cinematic work's integrity and deprived movie-goers of the opportunity to be fully entertained in the manner of their choosing.

Local Christian groups have a right to express displeasure at the film's mixing historical fact with unsubstantiated myth and even outright lies. But the disclaimer should be enough to meet their concerns, and for them to claim that "The Da Vinci Code" constitutes a slander against their prophet, undermines their religious beliefs and therefore should be interpreted as harmful to public morality is too far-fetched.

Christians who subscribe to such ludicrous ideas only dignify this movie with their strong response. Commercial films are made for mass entertainment, period. Individual followers of Christianity, or of any other religion for that matter, must deal with doubts or beliefs in their respective faiths. Any assumption that a mere movie like "The Da Vinci Code" could cause followers to lose their faith is nonsense.

To Christians who are angered by the movie or the book and want them banned, we would advise them to concentrate more on their own religious faith, which belongs within their personal sphere. Attempts to impose their religious beliefs on the public are tantamount to violating the freedom of expression of the filmmaker and the author - not to mention the rights of others to choose whether or not to see the film or read the book.

In a way, there may be some truth to suspicions voiced by some Christians that they are being singled out for humiliation. This could certainly hold true in some Western countries that have become mainly secular societies.

But it is generally accepted that today's Christians are among the most tolerant religious adherents in the world. There have been no death threats made against Dan Brown or anyone involved in the making or distribution of this movie or the book by violence-prone religious fanatics. The same cannot be said about certain other of the world's great religions.

We are not worried about Christianity and its followers. They can take care of themselves - with or without the threat, real or imagined, from Dan Brown. We are more worried about our censorship committee's lack of clear-cut criteria and standards with which to base decisions that our society relies on for that delicate balance between freedom of expression and the need to safeguard public morality.