Posted on 02/16/2004 7:22:27 AM PST by rface
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:11:38 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Please note that I am not suggesting that you are implying any of the above - I am suggesting that Cathy just might be. After all, she believes that Gibson is deserves the criticism that he is getting from people who seem to hold exactly the positions that I have described.
The charges Ms. Young attempts to make are baseless and puerile, and completely ignores the holocaust that was perpetuated upon early Christians while forwarding a subject that has nothing to do with the story of "The Passion".
It's a ridiculous attempt to smear and promote hostility towards Mel Gibson IMHO.
You seem to have missed that part.
On the whole you seem to have missed the point conveyed by many Freepers through sarcasm. I imagine you're simply not sensetive to the feelings of Christians who are overwhelmed by the onslaught of negative publicity regarding the crucifiction of a man who's only crime was to preach profound love to his fellow man.
Tell us, does tying the ridiculous arguement of Holocaust denial being tied to the release of this film seem the slightest bit ugly to you? Why didn't you address that before you condemned any of these Freepers?
I'd suggest that this alone tells me all I need to know about you. In addition, rest assured I can be a Christian and still judge you to be an ass.
After careful consideration, I have decided to decline your request.
"Whatever happened to the left's mantra, "If you don't like it, don't watch?" That doesn't impugn the woman's character, nor define her politics.
It certainly appears to presume her to be from "the left". If that was not the case, I'd appreciate clarification on how it doesn't.
And I certainly don't need a nanny policing my posts.
You're obviously mistaking me for the moderators. That's *their* job, not mine. Stating my opinion on your post and others in this thread is hardly "policing" them, nor being a "nanny". You stated your opinion, I stated mine.
That said, however, yours was admittedly one of the more mild comments. I included it not because it was offensive (as some of the others were), but because it was one of the many which seemed to automatically presume that any form of criticism towards Gibson or the film must "obviously" be from "the left". You know what they say about assumptions.
By itself I'd never have bothered to reply to your post, or even really thought twice about it. But there was such a barrage of "leftist/socialist/communist" accusations on this thread that I found it remarkable enough to comment on.
Since this was sent to me, among others, I'll respond. I do not owe this woman an apology. In addition, I would kindly ask you not tell me how to think or post.
Nowhere did I say it was sufficient. Nor do I beleive the punishment is completed.
Umm, the Soviet Union massacred thousands of Poles at the start of WWII before Hitler double-crossed Stalin. And then there was that short 45 year period of a totalitarian Soviet puppet state in Poland following WWII. Do you really want to argue about which inhumanity was worse?
My point was:
Human and war atrocities were perpetrated throughout the 20th century by several totalitarian states and were visited upon people of all ethnic groups, and not just Jews. To debate who had it worse is pointless. The victims remain dead, infirm or dispossessed.
This is relevant to Gibson's comment regarding all of the 20th century atrocities and his implication that none of them were predicated upon blaming Jews for the death of Christ. The PC columnist had a problem with Gibson not kowtowing to the exclusive right of Jews to victimhood.
I don't agree with Young's conclusions (that Gibson is guilty of "frightening moral obtuseness") but I don't think it's wrong of her to mention his choice of words either. When I read his answer to Noonan's question, my very first thought was "Uh oh, Mel. You're going to get nailed for that."
I'm not saying Gibson was wrong. I think under the circustances his response was perfectly reasonable. He had spent years of his life making a movie to really show the sacrifices that Christ had made for all mankind. And whenever the subject of his movie came up, all that people could talk about was whether it was anti-Semitic or not. For the last six months he'd been relentlessly attacked by Abe Foxman, the ADL, assorted rabbis, Frank Rich, and legions of other writers-with-agendas. I wouldn't be surprised if in addition there had been threats against his life and declarations from people he knew in Hollywood that his career was over, his movie was a flop, and he'd never work in this town again.
Then Noonan comes along and says, "the holocaust happened, right?" I think he was thinking "Do I look like an idiot? Of course, it happened. The guy who taught me Spanish was a Holocaust survivor. I have friends whose parents have numbers tattooed on their arms." But his pride was hurt. His dander was up. He felt, I suspect, like some schoolboy who was ordered to stand and recite the catechism--yes, it was the worst tragedy in history. Yes, nothing ever happened like it before. Six million. Yes, the Catholic Church paved the way. etc.
And Gibson had too much pride. He just wasn't going to do it. He wasn't going to perform like a trained seal for the same people who had been calling him an anti-Semite for the last six months. Instead, he said, war is hell, lots of innocent people get killed, some who died were Jews and many Ukrainians died as well.
I don't know what Gibson really thinks. Perhaps he feels the Holocaust was the worst man-made disaster ever to hit the planet. Perhaps he feels the Holocaust, though horrific, really wasn't all that unusual given man's long history of regular genocide. Either way, he could have made his case in a way that didn't give easy ammunition to his enemies. But I think his pride got in the way. I think he said to himself, "They're telling me if I want to make my movie I got to say the words." And he just wasn't willing to do it. The result is, his enemies are now pointing to his own words as proof of his alleged anti-Semitic additudes.
It is of course too late to change anything now, but what I wish he had said to Noonan is something like this: "The Holocaust was an unspeakable disaster and my greatest hope is that my movie will help ensure that such a thing could never happen again."
Even Abe Foxman would be hard pressed to make an issue out of that.
No, they don't. Maybe they need to see a movie.
I don't think that is why Mel Gibson made this movie or is marketing it.
I urge our Christian brothers and sisters to reign in those of a more extreme nature so they do not write anything that is hateful, ugly, vulgar, and malicious.
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.