You can't say you weren't warned.
Posted on 05/28/2010 6:34:29 PM PDT by Daniel T. Zanoza
Throughout civilization, there have been those who have attempted to find humor at the expense of others. This has been the case in American history as well. People who are different because of their social class, skin color, ethnic or religious backgrounds have often been the butt of the most vile so-called humor.
However, supposedly, we now live in a time of tolerance. Yet it is clear there are certain groups who apparently are fair game to be the recipients of mean-spirited attacks which have little to do with levity.
Recently, an episode of South Park -- a cartoon which airs on the Comedy Channel--fanned the flames of controversy by insulting those who practice the Islamic faith. The same episode insulted Christianity by presenting an image of Jesus Christ which also was defamatory in nature.
It has often been said it is a losing proposition to take on contentious issues which result from cartoons or comic strips. But though it may not be politically prudent to question the appropriate nature of such satirical venues, the First Amendment provides the right to do so.
Matt Stone and Trey Parker, the Creators of South Park, have made a living off of their irreverence with the series. Christianity has often been their target. Of course, Stone and Parker will deny this fact. They will say South Park is only satire, not meant to demean or be hurtful to anyone.
Unfortunately, American society has bought into this notion in recent decades. Jokes that were once told in backrooms are now appropriate in public venues, depending on who or what the subject is. It is obvious Christianity does not fall within the boundaries protected by political correctness or tolerance.
To say South Park has been the only source to assail those of the Christian faith through the so-called use of humor would be unfair and inaccurate. But Stone and Parker were only criticized for their irreverence by the mainstream media for the episode which depicted Muhammad in a bear costume which is contrary to Islamic doctrine that the prophet never be drawn. However, Stone and Parker needed attention due to the fact that in today's culture conflict results in controversy, and controversy leads to fame.
The problem is those on the far left--which dominate the mainstream media--either do not understand or do not care whether what they do is hurtful. This mindset hardly follows the definition of tolerance. According to Webster's Dictionary, tolerance is defined as "a tolerating or being tolerant, esp. of views, beliefs, practices, etc. of others that differ from one's own". The term is not selective. The meaning of the words is not subject to political correctness or the fad and fashions of the times.
When Stone and Parker depict Jesus Christ in an unflattering way, a vast majority of Americans take offense. They do so because they believe Christ is their Savior who suffered the most grievous of pain, before being hung on a cross to die for the sins of mankind. Is it possible the creators of South Park do not truly understand the tenets of Christianity and Christ's sacrifice? To the contrary, the opposite is most likely the case. Stone and Parker fully understand because irreverence has been a means to their success.
Perhaps South Park and its creators don't deserve all the blame for their irreverence. Our society has given them the license to be hurtful.
But there are dangers we should take from history which result from this lack of sensitivity. In Nazi Germany, propaganda films depicted the Jews as rats which infested the Third Reich. These images did not suddenly appear. They began incrementally with baby steps which led to the creation of the final solution to the "Jewish problem".
South Park is an infantile, poorly illustrated cartoon which carries an inordinate amount of social significance. The program truly reflects the intolerance of our times which stems from an underlying motive, some self-serving, some sinister.
There is good advice that comes from the left regarding such so-called artistic expression. Americans can change the channel. They can also send letters to sponsors who pay the bills which allow cartoons like South Park to remain on the air. Perhaps those who are offended most can take equal blame by staying silent and doing nothing--while their faith or culture is insulted.
You can't say you weren't warned.
After 14 years??...You are pretty funny. It is more popular than ever, and I enjoy every liberal sticking moment.
Sir Irony, I'm glad you exist. I like South Park. Plus, I can spell. ;)
I hate you Kenny.
Agree. One of the best shows on TV that is not afraid to make fun of anyone and everything. They eviscerate liberal sacred cows.
Disclaimer: I have never watched a full episode of South Park.
"Poorly illustrated" is in the eye of the beholder; I'd simply say "simply illustrated" but if the writer prefers "Avatar 3D" animation for everything so be it.
But one could accuse Baloo's comics with being "poorly illustrated" though the only "fault" (it's not) is a keen simplicity.
"Infantile"? Maybe; I do not know. Too crude [different from infantile] for my liking, though it seems they're not afraid to go after various protected liberal species. I have seen bits & pieces of South Park from time to time, but it doesn't hold my interest.
Its all fun until one’s personal ox gets gored, right?
Oh, please! Go watch “Team America” and break open a six-pack, wouldja?
Thanks for the correction!
I enjoy many things South Park has done, it has no problem skewering liberal sacred cow topics either. Such as global warming, hybrid cars, scientology, hippies, liberal excuse makers, illegal immigration (the goobacks from the future), Algore and Manbearpig, barbra streisand, Bono, the tarp bailout (margaritaville), Richard Dawkins, the BATFE (F Troop) and Janet Reno, the pedophile priest coverups, Paris Hilton (Stupid Spoiled Whore), Disney’s selling sex to kids, Michael Jackson, San Francisco and liberal smugness, the rainforest, PETA, The Sea Shepherd “pirates”, stupid activist groups that don’t make any impact on kids, etc.
Yes they sometimes go after topics and things I would rather they not go after. Taking God’s name in vain isn’t good. Neither is depicting Christ as ineffective or weak. But I would say after watching the episodes that it does not appear to be as biased in the subject matter they will go after, as say the ‘objective media’ or even SNL is - South Park often go after more liberal/leftist ideas and groups. And I believe they do this primarily because the leftist groups and people and ideas they are going after are just more inherently funny and deserving to be made fun of.
“Personally, I happen to think that the Good Lord has one hell of a sense of humor coupled with a great appreciation for the absurd.”
Yep. Me too. Though I think the Virgin Mary South Park episode was fairly stupid. Still, “Red Sleigh Down” really drove a point home when it comes to the true meaning of Christmas.
Another movie that wrongfully gets slammed is Monty Python’s “Life of Brian”. That movie sums up everything that is wrong with religious zealots all over the world. I swear, the Jesus I was taught to love would probably crack up laughing at that movie.
Religion is a beautiful thing. It’s flawed human arrogance that perverts it.
Get a life.
Pretty much the When, How, What, Why of Humour. Levity is needed to counter excesses of Gravity.
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.