Pregnant star misses Vatican gala (16-yr-old "Mary" in "Nativity" is pregnant)

BBC News ^ | 11/29/06 | Not listed

[paulat]

Pregnant star misses Vatican gala

Keisha Castle-Hughes has said she is too busy to attend the premiere The teenage star of a film about the Nativity is missing its Vatican premiere because she is expecting a baby with her 19-year-old partner. New Zealander Keisha Castle-Hughes, 16, who was nominated for an Oscar for her role in Whale Rider, plays Mary.

Pope Benedict XVI will also be unable to attend the Vatican's first premiere due to his forthcoming visit to Turkey.

A member for the Papal Council for Culture said the actress was expected to play her part well, not be a saint.

The actress, who is expecting a child in spring, said that she was "thrilled" at the news and had made the film "in a state of grace".

Biblical tale

The premiere of The Nativity Story, expected to be attended by 7,000 people, will take place in the Vatican's Paul VI Hall, which is used for Sunday masses when they are not held outside in St Peter's Square.

The film was shot in southern Italy and Morocco

The film was shot partly in Matera, Italy, the same location used for Mel Gibson's The Passion of The Christ.

It recounts the Biblical tale from the Angel Gabriel's announcement to Mary that she will give birth to Jesus, to the visit of the three wise men to the new baby.

It has been produced by the US-based production company New Line Cinema, which was also involved in the Lord of The Rings trilogy, and will open in the US and Italy next month.

Oscar Isaac, a 30-year-old US actor, plays Joseph opposite Castle-Hughes.

Born in Australia, Castle-Hughes moved to New Zealand aged four with her Maori mother and Australian father. She became a New Zealand citizen in 2001.

Proceeds of the premiere will go towards the building of a school in the northern Israeli village of Mughar which Druze, Muslim and Christian children will attend

[Stone Mountain]

Whether you believe the word comments on the guilt of the parents instead of the child, the word addresses the child's state, not the parents'. That is why many of us do not believe it is appropriate.

Yup. It's not that hard a concept. I personally think Theo must realize at this point that he was wrong to use the term, but he's incapable of admitting fault. So insead, he defends his undefendable position by making intellectually bankrupt arguments about how calling a child a bastard is supposedly just commenting on the parents, accusing me of being in favor of single-parent families, accusing me of being anti-marriage, or accusing me of being from DU, when he was no longer able to argue his position effectively.

[onedoug]

God.

[Theo]

You must win your little argument, hm? Again, two people are responsible for the existence of "bastards" -- the child's parents. It is to their shame that they have thus brought the innocent child into the world. Perhaps if people would consider that their behavior results in illegitimate offspring, they would do the right thing and instead purpose to give their children two married parents.

Perhaps it's because I have an educational and occupational background in words that I don't have a problem using a word whose first definition is simply "a person born of unmarried parents." I admit there's a shameful connotation to that word, but the shame belongs to the parents, not the innocent child.

I'm done. Anyone reading your further comments will understand that I'm casting blame on those responsible, not on the innocent child. I refuse to let you try to tarnish my good reputation.

[wallcrawlr]

I'm more than "typical"...

[wallcrawlr]

youre also vulgar

you just need nicer manners or whoops...sorry... maybe your mommy wasnt around to teach you any


wait, if thats true, that means your a ba...

[motormouth]

Yah, thats what they all say you, you, Bastard. ;o)

MM

[wallcrawlr]

[carlr]

Perhaps it's because I have an educational and occupational background in words that I don't have a problem using a word whose first definition is simply "a person born of unmarried parents."

There is a word that is the definition for a female dog as well,would you use that in general conversation today even if you actually were describing a female dog?

I guess it is just hard to believe you meant "bastard" in it`s strict definition,considering the way it is commonly used today.

[Stone Mountain]

You must win your little argument, hm?

Only when I'm correct. At least I'm not afraid to discuss the actual argument, as opposed to throwing out bs straw men and accusations of being a DU member, being in favor of unmarried parents, or not being in favor of marriage. But go ahead, call little children bastards to show how wonderful your command of the language is.

Your argument about the definition is weak. We all know the technical defintion of bastard. We also all know how that word is used. As another poster mentioned above, I wouldn't call you gay if you looked happy, despite the original meaning of the word. What matters linguistically is current usage.

I'm done. Anyone reading your further comments will understand that I'm casting blame on those responsible, not on the innocent child.

Yup. You're casting blame on the parents. And calling the innocent child a bastard, thus slurring the child as well.

I refuse to let you try to tarnish my good reputation.

LOL! Now THIS is funny! You accuse me of being from DU and all that other crap you accused me of, and now it's ME trying to tarnish YOUR 'good' reputation? Funniest thing I've heard all day...

[Antoninus]

She is a 16-year-old girl in love with a 19-year-old boy who impregnated her. That is what gives me shudders.

In some states here in the US, they'd have a different word for her "partner"--that being "rapist."

[Antoninus]

And your solution is to insult the people who don't bring up a child in the way that you agree with?

Geez, you're all over these "alternative family" threads, aren't you?

You do realize that a 19 year old having intercourse with a 15/16 year old in many states in the US could be brought up on statutory rape charges. Or is that whole age of consent thing one of your other hang-ups?

[Stone Mountain]

Geez, you're all over these "alternative family" threads, aren't you?

So are you. What are you trying to say?

You do realize that a 19 year old having intercourse with a 15/16 year old in many states in the US could be brought up on statutory rape charges. Or is that whole age of consent thing one of your other hang-ups?

Say what? Can anyone say non-sequitur? Worst strawman ever! I don't think we should be calling innocent children bastards. That's all I've ever said in this thread. You think it's cool to call children bastards?

[Antoninus]

That's all I've ever said in this thread.

No, it's not. I responding to this assinine statement:

And your solution is to insult the people who don't bring up a child in the way that you agree with?

That statement minimizes the fact that this young woman would be considered a rape victim in many US states. Do you agree? Or is this relationship "just another way to bring up a child" as you said? That's where my age of consent question comes from. In your opinion, do you think age of consent laws should be lowered in the US?

And while we're at it, please state clearly whether, in your opinion, these two young people have done a good or bad thing by conceiving this child out of wedlock.

[Stone Mountain]

And your solution is to insult the people who don't bring up a child in the way that you agree with?

No, it's not. I responding to this assinine statement:



Damn, you're right. I hate when that happens. It was an honest typo though - if you look at my other posts, you'll see that. I meant to say "And your solution is to insult the CHILD whose parents don't bring him in the way that you agree with? The discussion started with my response to post 6.

You'll notice that my other posts are unequivocal in putting the blame where it lies - with the parents. Really, my only reason for posting to this thread was the major problem I have in calling innocent children bastards. I would have thought we would be beyond crap like that by now.

I will say that I think insulting people in general is counter-productive. I don't think attempting to shame people has a deterent effect, and with the people being shamed, it's already too late.

And while we're at it, please state clearly whether, in your opinion, these two young people have done a good or bad thing by conceiving this child out of wedlock.

Obviously not the greatest thing. But children have been born under worse circumstances and perservered.

[Antoninus]

I will say that I think insulting people in general is counter-productive. I don't think attempting to shame people has a deterent effect, and with the people being shamed, it's already too late.

I agree. In a healthy society, people naturally feel shame and humiliation when they've done something horribly wrong. There is no need for society to impose shame upon them. In our sick, conscienceless society, wrongdoers brazenly promote their wicked acts and become angry if society does not embrace them.

Obviously not the greatest thing. But children have been born under worse circumstances and perservered.

Hey, I have nothing but sympathy for the child. I have nothing but contempt for the obnoxious and contemptible actions fo the parents.

[Stone Mountain]

Fair enough - can't argue with any of that!