Obama said, “We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.” Really? Including Piss Crucifix? Including The Davinci Commode? Including Good Christian Bitches? Including Larry David urinating on a picture of Jesus? Including The Last Temptation of Christ? Including Monty Python’s The Life of Bryan? Now don’t get us wrong. We don’t want to censor anybody. We love the 1st Amendment. We just love it in a way that the President does not. In a way that applies to all equally, fairly and without two faced hypocrisy. But what else would you expect from a man who has devoted much of his life to the belief that some are more equal than others.
This post was last modified on September 12, 2012
View Comments (13)
I saw The Life of Bryan at a midnight showing in Louisville years ago. I didn't really get it, but I've never really gotten British humor, though I thought some of the stuff Benny Hill did was funny. In "The Passion of the Christ", Mel Gibson made a movie that will be watched by many every Lent until the end of time. I just don't think Scorcese did that with "Temptation".
Who cares about the shallow words of Obama and Hillary about religious freedom? The HHS mandate shows that they want people's faith to be a weekend only thing that has no influence on how they act during the week. Go to Mass on Sunday but pay for abortifacient drugs for your employees during the week. They're dangerous because they make a pretense of being friendly to faith and religion when they're not and so fool gullible religious voters.
Abortifactants are a whole different category than birth control. I love the way they are trying to sneak them in under the radar as though they WERE the same.
Ok, now wait - Life of Bryan was freakin hilarious. I think. Sometimes. British humor isn't funny sometimes. Or maybe I just don't get it. But some of it was funny.
Regardless, Obama. Hypocrite. Bad. Etc.
Everything mentioned I agree with except Life of Bryan. If anything it showed the ignorance of people and their willingness to follow whoever sells them a good story (i.e. Obama. Kinda poignant well before its time). I found its references to Christ to be actually respectful. During the entire movie Bryan is trying to tell them he is not the Christ but gets crucified in the end anyway because the Govt was also shown as stupid and out of touch. I thought it was pretty well thought out, albeit, I suspect, unintentionally.
It was absolutlly intentional. Based on the Relationship of the Church of England (Anglicans) and the British government.
Have to agree, I sometimes suspect that the overwhelming majority of people who gripe about Brian do so based on the first 3 minutes or so, when we see his birth -- which is quickly revealed NOT to be the birth of Jesus of Nazareth: which we then do see, portrayed in as reverent a manner as any Christmas card. Brian is neither Jesus nor a literary stand-in for Him: at one point, we see Him preaching the Sermon on the Mount, and being misheard by people in the back ("Blessed are the cheesemakers?")
I would even go so far as to defend Last Temptation. The sequence and particular scene which drew such ire are the titular "last temptation": they are explicitly a demonic vision to which Christ is subjected in His last moments of life on the cross.
While it is certainly provocative to picture Jesus in bed with a girl, 1) she is His wife, 2) the old formula is "The world, the flesh, and the Devil, and 3) St Paul tells us explicitly that Christ was tempted in all ways just as we are, and it is therefore more irreverent and anti-Scriptural to assert that He was not subject to sexual temptation as well -- we are certainly told He was tempted by the world and the Devil, up in that exceeding high place, to deny that He was not offered the flesh as well --diminishes-- His mission and His humanity. It is certainly understandable though that the evangelists would have discretely omitted any explicit reference from the permanent record.
I believe it was Cardinal Fulton Sheen who addressed this question tangentially, back in the 50s. A question had been raised, was it necessary that Jesus' mission on Earth required him to be unmarried and therefore celibate? The answer is, absolutely not. As it happened, He was among other things the model of a virtuous unmarried man. There is nothing which would have prevented Him marrying and being the model of a virtuous husband. Of course the successful completion of his role would have left behind a widow (at first -- after Sunday -- ???).
Back to the movie. Whether it >should< have been made may be debated. Whether it is blasphemous per se or contrary to Scripture -- absolutely not.
I too always thought The Last Temptation elevated the idea of Christ. To have the Devil drop on him while on the Cross, with angelic whispers of God's gratitude in his ear, guiding him to a human life brimming with family and fulfillment as reward, only to finally pierce the illusion and veil, and pull himself out of Lucifer's grip, with sheer will and renewed supplication to God. How wrenching was that return to Crucifixion, swarmed by jeers and carrion birds, flanked by thieves, exalting in the coming ascension.
Just amazing.. and that soundtrack too (Passion). Great movie. But I suppose the nature of his carpentry might've offended. Always assumed that was artistic licence
Agreed... and this from a Bible-believing, born-again, theologically conservative, Pentecostal Christian.
The fun pokes at my faith from lampooners don't rile me. In fact, they make rethink what may be meaningless practices and traditions. Atheist jabs at my intelligence don't make me reach for a gun but for books to refresh the understanding of why I believe what I believe. Moslem calls for Sharia Law to be enacted or at least considered in our judicial system do not make me reach for a box of bullets but vote intelligently at the ballot box.
I'm suppose to be the poster child for all that's wrong with the world yet there's so much disparity between my actions and the way I'm portrayed by Christophobes.
My goodness what a hypocrite the president is in calling me a "bitter clinger."
I grew up Baptist. I left that denomination as an adult for a number of reasons, but I will always be thankful for the exposure it gave me to great music and a grounding in the Bible. I still hassle them. Now,,as an Episcopalian, we lambast oourselves about a lot of things. We are secure enough in what we believe to be able to joke about it without getting freaked out. I do find that Christians as a whole are given a bad rap based on the actions of the far past and the recent extremists. Nobody is afraid of hurting OUR feelings about our religion and beliefs. We are fair game. DOn't really get that.
If you looked up eloquence in the dictionary, sir, your post should be included as a perfect example of it. Brilliant.
Thank you, Sir.
Yeah, most everything Monty Python did was pretty hilarious.
Effing A. The party that rejected God and Jerusalim in its platform then rejected the votes rejecting God and Jerusalm would never denigrate any religious beliefs.
Where's the tylenol?