The Price of Free Speech I've been MIA from this austere group - it was conceived by Seth Fisher as a way for some of us that don't get a chance to hang out to get together on a regular basis and smoke cigars (burning leaves, get it?). Last night, not only was I sitting in Johnny's Bar (a total dive, run by an 85 year old German cat with no waitstaff or bartender beyond himself) puffing on stogie's, but Jen, after seeing a short play festival at American Theatre Company, swung by and had a few cocktails as well.
It was really nice - Yeater and Lykins came (hadn't really hung with them since ), and my old pal Jeremy Smith showed up. I smoked an unknown brand stick that Seth brought me, a La Veija Habana Celebracion, and a CAO Criollo Pato. We got home and smelled like a bucket of ass.
The Game of Intolerance Over at the Media Research Center, L. Mel Gibson and the Politics of Bigotry and, in a nutshell, complains that there is a great deal of hypocrisy in that, when Gibson makes anti-Semitic remarks he is castigated without mercy for his racist perspective but when those in Hollywood routinely bash Christians it is simply ignored. "They were nowhere to be found when Da Vinci Code actor Ian McKellen publicly accused the Catholic Church of perhaps misleading us all this time, and stated the Bible should have a disclaimer in the front saying this is fiction.
And what of the movie itself, a bigoted anti-Catholic screed if ever there was one? Any denouncements from them?" "How about the TV show Committed that featured a scene in which the main characters accidentally flush what they believe to be the Sacred Host down a toilet?
Or Judging Amy with its storyline about a transvestite priest? What about the show Rescue Me with its plots about pedophilic priests and the character who has visions of Christ and Mary Magdalene, including one in which Tommy is having sex with Mary Magdalene, Jesus catches them and in a jealous rage tries to blow Tommy away with a shotgun?" He closes the column with this: "Gibson s statements were awful, and deserved condemnation.
But the anti-Catholic bigotry raging in Hollywood is far worse. Those who suddenly proclaim themselves to be shocked shocked I tell you! over Gibson s religious bigotry, but have remained silent all these years as the Catholic Church is mercilessly pummeled, ridiculed and insulted, are frauds.
" My first reaction was that, in order to be a , one needed to be racially intolerant. Not so according to Miriam-Webster which defines bigot as "a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices." The definition adds, though, ".
..especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.
" Brent, in spite of his goofy name and general one-note philosophy (if you go back and read any of his columns it seems the hypocrisy and unfairness of Christian-bashing is a for him) may have a point. The general painting of Christians with a wide satirical brush is pervasive. Some of it is understandable - the portrayal of Catholic priests as monstrous pedophiles is a way to deal with the genuine and earned outrage over the fact that so many have been and, what is worse, the church decided to cover it up.
Given the track record of the Catholic Church when it comes to fucking little boys, while not all priests are perverted shitheads, it's just smart to be wary. Other, less obvious and less deserving traits of the religious right in the US are pretty often the object of ridicule and the icons of the Christian faith are exposed to an inordinant amount of lambasting. Two questions come to mind and need exploring - does L.
Brent have a leg to stand on and if so, why are we so bigoted against the predominant religion in this country? In regards to the former, it is helpful to make a distinction between racist hate speech (which, given his state of mind and what he said at his arrest, doesn't really apply to Gibson. I mean "Jews start all the wars" is hardly a call for their mass extermination) and ridicule of a belief system.
The anti-Semitism exhibited by Mad Max was not directed at the religious beliefs of Jews, but the race; the examples cited by L. Brent are exclusively directed at the beliefs of Christians. In fact, it is impossible to attack Christians on the basis of race because anyone, with no regard to race, can be a Christian.
Brent's argument begins to unravel when one realizes that most of his examples of Christian-bashing is less that than Christianity bashing - a ripping at the fundamental tenets of the religion rather than the people themselves. Granted, this approach leaves us with a tacit accusation that those who believe in Christ are stupid, but the point demonstrates that prejudging on the basis of religious choice is not the same as prejudging on the basis of ethnicity. In spite of L.
Brent basically stretching definitions to fit his "it's not fair" attitude, he does have a point - Christianity is pretty routinely bagged on in our pop culture entertainment. As I've indicated, Christianity is a choice and it is likewise a choice how fundamentalist one decides to be. The more fundamentalist, the less tolerant of others' beliefs Christians (or Mormons, or Scientologists) become.
"A person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices" pretty much describes the extreme faces of the anti-abortion, anti-stem cell research, anti-gay rights, pro-school prayer, pro-FCC fine class of Christians, doesn't it? It's fair to acknowledge that not all Christians fit this extreme fundamentalist approach - in fact, the majority of Christians are far more progressive than one would think. Those Christians "in charge" however, tend to be very vocal with their set of behaviors that they will not tolerate.
And it is fun and appropriate to poke at the intolerant bigots of the world. In fact, it is rare to see more moderate Christians treated with the satirical comic's brush, only those who make the attempt to condemn the behavior of others on the basis of their chosen religion. Tom Cruise was not subject to the ire and ridicule he's received until he showed us his zealous, judgmental, Scientologist side and Mel got away with the perceived anti-Semitism in The Passion of the Christ but opened himself up by bashing Jews after he made a Jew-bashing movie which he denied bashed Jews.
Brent gets his way and all those openly critical of Christianity are shut down, where does that leave us? I'd suggest that the reaction to Gibson is over the top, first of all. While I disagree with his comments (I actually belief that religious fundamentalists start all the wars rather than the Jews and without regard to the specific religion) it is his right as an American citizen to speak his mind.
If he doesn't like Jews, that's his business. I heard him and if I decide that his attitudes prevent me from enjoying his work, I won't support it. I really don't need Bill Maher and Arianna Huffington telling me to boycott Mel, but it is their right to spout it.
If we decide that by merely insulting a choice or group of people, we have violated some tenet of civilized living, then we are in trouble. We've already outlawed "hate speech", the benefits being that a) fewer people use the language of racial intolerance in public, but b) now I don't really know who the bigots are, do I? It was easier when someone spoke of "those niggers" or "that faggot" or "the South.
" Their speech identified them for me and I didn't have to guess or wonder. At a certain point, if all speech that indicates disdain for another is eliminated from the discussion, we'll politely smile at each other and quietly murder each other in the dead of night. I say everyone should simply speak their mind and face the consequences.
If I happen to think that Brandi is a prudish cunt for looking down her nose at Michelle L'Amour in the "America's Got Talent" gameshow, then I reserve the right to not only say it, but wear a t-shirt that proclaims it - if Brandi finds out and sends someone to beat my face in, like all freedoms, my freedom of speech came at a price. If Mel wants to bash the Jewish race, let him - and likewise, let him take the scorched earth policies of those he insulted - he earned the consequences. If religiously fundamental Christians want to ban gay rights, thwart scientific research, and fight against both effective birth control and abortion, then let them take it when South Park lampoons them.
News RSS