Late Night TV In The Year 2030

A MOTHER is preparing breakfast for her family. She is dressed only in a house coat.

The Daughter enters the kitchen. : Pink and blue spiked hair, a ring through her nose, and several more on her ears. She's wearing black leather pants, jacket with a multitude of studs.

MOTHER Ok, well start eating. He'll just have to take his coffee and drink it on the way to school.

FATHER is half shaved. After completely shaving his face. He reaches for an electric shaver and begins shaving his arm pits and chest hair.

There is a pile of clothes on the bed. Father shuffling thought the clothes picks up a woman's bra. He continues to search and finds and inserts silicone pads and slips into the bra.

MOTHER Honey? Your coffee is ready. Hurry don't want to make our daughter late for school on her fist day do we?

Father enters the kitchen. He has on a dress, high heels, lipstick, and a blonde wig. In his left hand he is carrying a leather briefcase. He crosses and gives Mother a peck on the cheek. She hands him a cup coffee, and ushers the two of them out the door.

MOTHER Now drive carefully dear and remember to pick up an adult movie for our party tonight.

WOMAN is laying in bed covered only slightly by the covers. We can see that she is not wearing anything.

Mother enters the room, crosses to the bed, removes her robe, reveling her nude torso. She slips into bed. Woman turns toward her and they embrace in a long and sensuous kiss.

David is now the moderator of a political talk show and he is dressed in drag. Seated across a table from him are doctor ALAN ABRAMS and PAT BUTTERWORTH.

DAVID Our guests today are doctor Alan Abrams a Harvard Law School professor of Constitutional Law and the recipient of the Nobel Peace prize. And Pat Butterworth, who is well known to his Christian television audience as the man who erected a three hundred foot statute of Jesus on his television studio property proclaiming the end of the word unless Americans repent and return as a nation under God. (beat)

DAVID Is it possible for you to be tolerant of others, such as Professor Alan, who is an avowed Atheist, and who does not share your beliefs?

REV. BUTTERWORTH He has the right to believe in nothing, just as I have the right to believe in God. These are mutually exclusive, except as they may result in conduct that is differentiated by Judeo-Christian moral standards. (beat) In fact Atheism is a religion that must be separated from state just as any other form of belief or disbelief. Indeed it takes more faith to be an Atheist than to believe in God.

REV. BUTTERWORTH Consider the Atheist dogma. The bases of their faith is that all things we observe were created by random events.

REV. BUTTERWORTH Not so...We now know that the information contained in a single cell would fill one-thousand volumes. More than any encyclopedia ever published. (beat) The information in a single cell is not random but specific and it takes incredible faith to believe that there was no intelligence involved in its creation.

DAVID You have been accused of being intolerant of Atheists and other non religious beliefs.

REV. BUTTERWORTH First of all intolerance is the hallmark of Atheism. They are can content to disbelieve, they desire that young children in elementary school are taught to disbelieve as well. So who is intolerant? (beat) You have read the book by Tammy Bruce entitled the "DEATH OF RIGHT AND WRONG". Allow me to suggest that your kind of tolerance is the last virtue of a degenerate society where all judgment of right and wrong has been eliminated, and everyone is encouraged to engage in the most bizarre and arguably destructive behavior possible, without limitation as to time or place.

ALAN May I comment? (beat) Obviously the good Reverend has a dim view of intellectual, political, academic, and societal freedoms and would oppose any conduct that is outside the narrow scope of his religious beliefs.

REV. BUTTERWORTH I should remind you that the constitution does not use the word "academic" freedom.

This is a fabrication of left wing socialists who want the right to teach totalitarianism and engage in socialist propaganda.

DAVID Doctor Alan will you give us an example of how the good reverend is intolerant?

ALAN Reverend Butterworth has shown himself to be hostile, judgmental, and opposed to your alternate life style,

REV. BUTTERWORTH (interrupting there one on one conversation) As an alternate to what? The normal, traditional, heterosexual, monogamous, lifestyle engaged in by a majority of the world's population?

ALAN There, you see the intolerance. It is impossible for any liberal Democrat such as myself to get a word in edgewise without being interrupted by scathing accusations coming from these right wing radicals. (beat) If I may continue, the good reverend is opposed to abortion, and in favor of teaching his religion in our public schools. He favors compelling school children to recite the pledge of allegiance, etcetera, etcetera.

(beat) In short the Reverend will sift everything through a biblical screen and throw out everything that does not make it through.

REV. BUTTERWORTH Interesting that the good professor would use the analogy of a prospector who sifts out the dirt and keeps the nuggets of gold.

DAVID (pointing a finger at Rev. Butterworth) But ARE YOU WILLING, for example, to respect the rights of others, when they do not share your moral values? (pointing to Alan) Should those who do not share your limited view of morality, have the right to choose whether or not to continue an unwanted pregnancy, for example?

REV. BUTTERWORTH I'm against murdering unborn children, and have to pay for it thought my taxes. (beat) Liberals, such as you however, are not willing to pay for the support of religious schools though your taxes. (beat) Who then are the intolerant ones? I'll tell you who they are. Those who want to separate the faithful from the state, and they are the same people who decree that abortion is right and legal. If a woman wants an abortion I should not have to pay for it because it violates the practice of my religion.

DAVID Let me ask you directly. Are you intolerant of my choice to change my sex from that of a man to a woman?

REV. BUTTERWORTH I will tolerate your right to dress as a woman, to change your sex identity, no matter how absurd that seems to me. You want to force me to watch your ridiculous abnormal behavior and dress yet you refuse to tolerate any appearance of God in public buildings, or to preserve the life of an unwanted innocent baby in the womb of a voluntarily pregnant woman. (beat) Once again I will ask you. Which one us is intolerant of the other?

ALAN I have to interrupt. I've been quite politely silent thus far, but now you have gone too far. The presumption that a fetus in its early development is equivalent to a human life is simply idiotic and not supported by the medical evidence.

DAVID (addressing Alan) Are we, as Reverend Butterworth believes engaged in a spiritual battle between good an evil?

ALAN Assuming that as a nation we continue to apply modern notions of cultural morality to our interpersonal relationships...

REV. BUTTERWORTH I know your concept of modern morality, and it includes infanticide, permitted by Judicial enactment. (beat) Even though the weight of public opinion is opposed to abortion, the legislature is prohibited from enacting statutes that outlaw it. (beat) How's that for religious intolerance?

ALAN That's not an example of intolerance. The courts are merely interpreting the constitution.

REV. BUTTERWORTH The courts that are not beholding to the electorate, their judicial enactments violate the beliefs of a large majority of Americans who oppose abortion. I would venture to say that a majority of Americans, are opposed to anal intercourse, yet that dangerous and unhealthy practice among homosexuals is now sanctioned in the form of gay marriages. (beat) Thanks to the left wing liberal judges that have been appointed by the Democrats. (beat) Is there any wonder that the majority of Americans believe that the Democrats are empty vessels devoid of all moral values?

ALAN With all due respect, the Reverend's eighteenth century concepts of science and morality are as out of date as the notion that the sun revolved around the world. We must catch up to our science and protect our environment, prevent global warming, defend and protect the right to privacy of the person and thought...

REV. BUTTERWORTH Except if it's the right to practice or preach one's religion on government property, but you insist upon the right to preach abortion, gay sex, and distribute condoms to young impressionable minds in public schools. (beat) And when conservatives object, you condemn us for being "intolerant".

ALAN Our government does not represent the will of the majority who are poor. They are denied a share in the vast wealth of this nation that is now controlled by relatively few of its members, both individual and corporate. (beat) We need a judiciary that can do what politicians will not do. To progress we must create minority rights. Create rights for gays, lesbians, atheists, and we must also redistribute the wealth.

REV. BUTTERWORTH I can assure you that if we "progress" as you have suggested not only will capitalism will not survive, but our nation will not survive. (beat, to the moderator) May I remind your viewers. (beat, to the camera) all the great societies of the past, including Rome, Russia and Jerusalem are no more. Is this what you want to happen to your country?

REV. BUTTERWORTH To laws that force tolerance without restraint or reason, of all kinds of debauchery and immorality, and to no small measure, abortion...

ALAN Wait just one minute. You seriously consider the fall of the Holy Roman Empire to be in large part attributable to abortion?

REV. BUTTERWORTH Under Roman law a fetus was not a person but merely what they termed "spes animantis" or future man, and although granted the right to inherit, there was no penalty for killing unborn children. This was all part and parcel of a greater problem, which was the disintegration of the family as the basic unit of a civilized nation.

Both David, the moderator and his guest Doctor Allen are seemingly squirming in their seats about to interrupt.

REV. BUTTERWORTH (continuing; holding up is hand to stop the interruption) You want to know how the liberal establishment in the media, press and education is destroying America? I offer you gay marriages as a start, and the corruption of educational institutions, where immorality is taught not as an elective, but in almost every class with the possible exception of math class. We are undergoing the same metamorphosis as all failed forms of government before us, and in addition we are experiencing the watering down of patriotism in favor of an international view of world government, the demoralization of our military and diminution of their capacity to wage war.

(beat) In the end it is the corruption of our Judiciary and their unlawful usurpation of authority that will destroy our government. (beat) Judges have placed themselves above the Constitutional law of the land, and I submit that they have either through design or mistake, misinterpreted the plain meaning of the language of our U.S. Constitution.

ALAN If I may David. (beat) Reverend you opposed the removal of the Ten Commandments monument from the Supreme Court building in Alabama, as ordered by Federal Judge Myron Thompson,

REV. BUTTERWORTH May I remind you that the liberal judge who ordered the removal was appointed by Jimmy Carter, the president for whom you worked as a cabinet member.

DAVID (to the Reverend) And you blame not only the courts but you place primary blame on the A.C.L.U.

REV. BUTTERWORTH The American Civil Liberties Union is attempting to blind lady justice completely. (beat) Let's consider what it has done to America. (beat) It sued the schools in southern Ohio, and they are now Ten Commandments-free, but not drug- free. Which is more important?

The gay director of the ACLU sat in his Chelsea section of Manhattan apartment commanding his force of volunteer attorneys who emerged from court victoriously, and now the Elkhart Indiana Municipal Building is no longer debased by a Ten Commandments display, which as a matter of fact had been inconspicuously displayed since 1958. (beat) His army also moved through Richland County Common Pleas court to remove a poster of the Ten Commandments, yet did nothing about the prominent display by New York judge Elliott Wilk of the portrait of Communist revolutionary Che Guevara. (beat) The A.C.L.U saw nothing wrong with the portrait of a bearded communist revolutionary on display in the Court House, but objects to even the mention of Jesus Christ.

ALAN (angrily, to the Reverend) You're looking through very narrow glasses, and you're genetically incapable of understanding any view except your own. (beat, regaining his composure) The decision to remove the Ten Commandments was in accordance with well established precedent.

Judge Thompson, who as I have said was appointed by President Carter, made a decision, and that decision is clearly against the plain meaning of the first amendment, though it arguably is in accordance with the prior unlawful decisions of the U.S Supreme Court that have continued to follow the absurd construction given to the 14th Amendment and the second clause of the First Amendment of the Federal Constitution.

DAVID So you say that the issue involved in the removal of the monument is really the unlawful order of Judge Thompson. Is that correct?

REV. BUTTERWORTH Actually the real issue here is whether this Federal Judge has the authority to determine the validity of a provision in the Constitution of the State of Alabama upon which Justice Moore relies for his authority.

REV. BUTTERWORTH The plain meaning of the language of the U.S. Constitution gives the individual states the right to determine to what extent religion will be exercised within it boundaries. (beat) If you were to actually read the The First Amendment to the Constitution and you would find it states: "CONGRESS shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion. (beat) We're not talking about an act of Congress here, this is a Judge not a Senator or Congressman.

ALAN You realize that what you are saying is that our Supreme Court has been wrong for decades? That's simply out of the question.

REV. BUTTERWORTH I didn't expect that you would agree since you are obviously satisfied with the result that has grown out of the seeds of judicial tyranny. (beat) What I'm saying here in this interview I realize is outside the boundaries of your tolerance.

REV. BUTTERWORTH One grain of salt can not season a continuous lake of propaganda. (beat) But, to continue my reasoning, the 10th Amendment to the Constitution plainly states that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people" (beat) It is clear that only "Congress" shall make no laws establishing a religion, but there is absolutely no prohibition by the individual states of the union. Unless of course their constitution contains such a prohibition. (beat) Therefore since this right to establish religion has been explicitly withheld by the states from the Federal Government, it is reserved to the states and its citizens. (beat) Isn't that exactly what it says?

ALAN Yes you quoted that correctly. But then there's the 14th Amendment due process clause to consider isn't there?

REV. BUTTERWORTH The First and Tenth amendments reserve to the states the power to establish religion. The Supreme Court has rewritten the constitution to eliminate state's rights in this area. (beat) You must concede that this is a very liberal interpretation of the Constitution, yet you liberals only complain about activist judges when they stick to the constitution and by doing so deny women the right to murder an unborn child. (beat) You defend her right to kill the child because it has not come at a convenient time, or was not the intended consequences of a voluntary sexual intercourse.

DAVID We're not discussing abortion. (beat) I'll have to ask you to stay on the subject of Religion

REV. BUTTERWORTH The nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court are acting now as an oligarchy of nine men. (beat) Because of liberal activist judges we are experiencing major dissension and disagreement in our country today.

REV. BUTTERWORTH Really? What if I say to you that you can believe in rain, but you cannot wear a rain coat? Will your belief keep you dry?

REV. BUTTERWORTH Whenever a liberal such as yourself has no answer to a question he pleads ignorance.

DAVID But doesn't the establishment of one religion violate the individual rights of say an Atheist who does not share a belief in a supreme being?

REV. BUTTERWORTH There is no guarantee under the U.S. Constitution that an Atheist’s right of disbelief will be protected against the rights of believers to practice their religion, be it Christianity, Judaism, or some other belief in a higher spiritual authority.

REV. BUTTERWORTH I'm saying that the Constitution prohibits the Supreme Court from establishing itself as an oligarchy. (beat) The Supreme Court consists of un- elected individuals who have the power to impose on the entire nation a uniform stance on religion at every level of government.

(beat) Their power derives from a misinterpretation of the rights vested under the Constitution?

DAVID Well doesn't the constitution give these judges the power and the right to make such determinations?

REV. BUTTERWORTH Once again I presume you do not understand my point. (beat) The 14th Amendment prohibits the states from depriving any person of life, liberty or property without the due process of law. (beat) Note it doesn't say anything about religion, because religion was clearly within the province of the state. (beat) In Nineteen Forty in the case of Minersville School District versus Gobitis the U.S Supreme Court got it right. A student refused on religious grounds to obey a state law requiring him to pledge allegiance to the flag, the U.S. Supreme Court held that this was purely a matter for the State and that the Federal Government had no right or authority to interfere. (beat) Unfortunately liberal Ivy League Justices have turned a blind eye to the terms of the constitution, and to precedent, and in the process they have usurped the fundamental right to decide establishment issues. (beat) And not only a fundamental right, but THE fundamental right as evidenced by being first in order, and the right, if violated by the government, would in all probability result in passionate dissension.

REV. BUTTERWORTH When judges take away religious freedom from the people, the federal judges and justices depart from the republican form of government. They impose, in religious matters, an oligarchic regime upon the states. They therefore violate, in letter and sprit of Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution. This section declares that "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government"

REV. BUTTERWORTH The federal judges and justices cannot be acting lawfully when they based their authority upon the Constitution - since the Constitution forbids any federal interference with the establishment of religion.

DAVID I still say an order is an order and it must be obeyed if we are to be governed as a nation of laws. (beat) Our time is up. (beat, speaking to the camera) We would like to thank you for watching public television. This forum is supported by your tax dollars and the generous contributions of those who realize what an important role public television plays in forming public opinion. (beat) Good night with love and kisses to all of you who stayed with us throughout this broadcast.

(beat) Tomorrow we will be interviewing Michael Moore an American icon and talented documentarian. (beat) Good night and thank you for participating.

Late night TV in the year 2030? It seems more like daytime TV in 2005!

This is chat, bloggery, or something. What it is not is funny, particularly. I'm at a loss to understand the reason you posted it.

An episode of the cartoon 'Postcards from Buster' features a trip to Vermont and celebrates gay marriage!!

Taxpayer funded TV

5 posted on 02/02/2005 8:50:54 AM PST by GeronL (2-7-72 is my birthday, in lieu of gifts, just send me cash)

6 posted on 02/02/2005 8:51:07 AM PST by fredhead ("It is a good thing war is so terrible, or we should grow too fond of it." General Robert E. Lee)

Michael Moore will be drooling into a styrofoam cup by 2030.

Oh, wait, he probably is already.

7 posted on 02/02/2005 8:51:48 AM PST by JennysCool (I was so naive as a kid I used to sneak behind the barn and do nothing. -Johnny Carson)

9 posted on 02/02/2005 8:53:39 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)

Transgendered robot smashing a watermelon?

You mean (drumroll...) Gal-lagher?

(Rimshot, dull thud)

10 posted on 02/02/2005 8:54:01 AM PST by JennysCool (I was so naive as a kid I used to sneak behind the barn and do nothing. -Johnny Carson)

May, 2030? I'll probably be busy writing for the "Macaulay Culkin Show" where Mac plays a crazy widowed grampa up to his hiney trying to raise a hilarious brood of mixed-race, multicultural, nuclear attack orphans. Hey, it's a living.

15 posted on 02/02/2005 9:13:02 AM PST by JennysCool (I was so naive as a kid I used to sneak behind the barn and do nothing. -Johnny Carson)

One of the requirements of humor is that it is funny.

Really? And how funny is killing unborn infants?

"I'm at a loss to understand the reason you posted it."

Satire, and educational value? Of course I don't expect liberals, communists, teachers, and democrats to understand it.

"What about when the transgendered robot smashed that watermelon on stage? You're telling me that wasn't funny?"

Oh yeah that was hilarious, anything that mocks conservatives is funny. Isn't it interesting how serious humor seems to elude some people. Do you think it's just because sitcoms on TV are so well written? Hmmm I wonder?

"big yawwwwwn....." And?

Are you watching "reality TV". I bet you love it? Well in 2030 reality TV will be a hidden cam in public rest rooms. The liberal judges already have thrown out a criminal charge against two homosexuals who were having sex in a mens room stall.

How's that for a big yawwwwn?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.