| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 12/30/2004 12:31:08 PM PST by Admin Moderator, reason:
Posted by returning troll. |
Posted on 12/29/2004 11:35:51 PM PST by allymillie
I truly do not understand why these detractors will not let up. Michael Medved accurately pointed out that the REACTION towards Gibson's film, rather than the film itself, would lead to antisemitism and I agree. These protests and denouncements have gone from offensive to downright annoying/obnoxious. I read that Tom O'Neil, another fool who makes inane points about the film, say that the Academy, which he points out is heavily Jewish populated, were cussing and swearing throughout a screening for the Academy Awards. I am very irritated that Bill Donahue got flack for candidly discussing the prevalance of Jews in Hollywood. Political correctness can hinder honest discourse. Weren't these the same people who were screaming "Artistic freedom" for "The Last Temptation of Christ"?? Some Jews need to learn to respect the Christian faith. Also, Rabbi Boteach needs to stop being such a hypocrite. He complained that Christians should "Get a life" instead of protesting the satanic marks and grafitti on the nativity scenes but also declared in the same breath that destruction to synogogues would be wrong. What is the difference? People like him and others are only preventing interfaith communication and respect - not Mel Gibson. Please don't censor this message - i would like to have an honest discussion on this.
Why 'The Passion' still troubles me By ABRAHAM H. FOXMAN
It is now some 10 months since Mel Gibson's movie The Passion of the Christ opened in the United States, and a week since its opening in Israel.
It is a good time to look back at the controversy surrounding the movie, which may be revived surrounding the lead-up to the February Oscar Awards.
We need to distinguish between the movie itself and its impact.
In its depiction of Jews and how it attempts to turn back the clock on the many positive changes the Catholic Church has made in the last half-century, the film could not have been worse.
Gibson not only blames the Jews for the persecution and death of Jesus, but along the way he plays into and reinforces the stereotypes of Jews that have haunted our people for two millennia.
At the core of anti-Semitism, and what makes it different from other forms of ethnic or religious hatred, is the image of the Jew as alien, conspiratorial and mystically all-powerful.
This is the thinking behind medieval charges of Jews poisoning the wells and causing the plague, of the infamous Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, of Hitler's and Goebbels' propaganda.
In his depiction of the Jews as representing the devil, as being more powerful, somehow, than the Romans themselves, Gibson is doing exactly what the Vatican has been trying to get away from.
This is no accident since he is well known for opposing the major changes in Catholic teaching that emerged from the historic Vatican II meetings in the 1960s.
Gibson may well have the modern Vatican as his primary target but, as is often the case, the Jews pay the price.
So the film is what is.
I think it is useful for Jews, including in Israel, to see the film – despite the understandable feeling of not wanting to contribute to Gibson's overflowing coffers. Only by viewing it can one understand how offensive it is.
AS TO its impact, I never predicted that the film would lead to pogroms, of which I have nevertheless been accused.
I did express serious concern – especially at a time when anti-Semitism in the world was surging and where even in the United States one quarter of Americans held Jews accountable for the death of Jesus – that Gibson's movie would reinforce and rationalize old views about Jews that legitimize anti-Semitism.
I am thankful that there were few anti-Semitic incidents in America following viewings. It is rare, particularly in the US, where people are bombarded with untold numbers of cultural images, for any one event to set off bigoted or violent behavior.
The truth is that American attitudes toward Jews have significantly improved. Still, as I repeatedly said throughout the 1990s, when many people were challenging ADL's continuing focus on anti-Semitism as a potential threat, there is no reason to be complacent.
IT HAS been said that Gibson's film represents the greatest tool for evangelization that has ever existed. Indeed, more people will see it than all the passion plays from the Middle Ages to today.
With the release of the DVD, potentially millions of schoolchildren will – through the years – be exposed to the film's vile notions of Jews surrounding the death of Jesus.
Should attitudes toward Jews harden, which has happened before, the impact of the film could play a part.
Meanwhile, the vast majority of American clergymen chose not to speak out about the way Jews were depicted. I understand the reluctance to criticize a movie which deals with Christianity's sacred event, but I am far less patient with the absence of empathy for Jewish distress considering the history of Christian anti-Semitism.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1104291022893
I've heard that. Twice.
;O)
That's sad.
Hey, it was worth saying twice (smirk).
The ADL bills itself as a civil rights organization and has an "education" tax status which contradicts its activities to aid and abet intolerance of the Christian faith in the public square.
Seems to me the ADL's tax status should be questioned.
The ADL is more a pressure group, and has been in the forefront of legislating "hate-crime" laws aimed at Christians which have led to Christians being arrested for preaching the Gospels.
The ADL also receives federal tax dollars to train law enforcement---including the FBI---on how to recognize and prosecute "hate crimes."
Problem is the ADL alone owns the dictionary that defines "hate crimes."
Evidenly it's not enough for you to believe, but the jewish people have to believe too!
How respectful of you.
Maybe her Jewish friends should return the favor.
How special. Just in time for the Christmas holidays.You signed up today just to post this. To vent all about "Passion" and Jews for the umpteenth time. Did you get your rocks off?
Chill baby. You still got the numbers and the power. There are only 12 million Jews on this planet and 1.5+ billion Christians. Stop getting so wound up when Jews don't toe your party line.
He really gets angry, doesn't he? Even the fakers on professional wrestling don't get that mad. If he were a few decades younger, his school would almost certainly prescribe Ritalin.
Hey Liz, do you know that the new RNC head is a Jew? It's true! He stood at Karl Rove's side to help reelect President Bush. :) Isn't that great?
To be fair, the insensitive ones are lefties and/or secularists (though it is nearly impossible to be a conservative secularist). Those leftists who use the accusation of anti-semitism to silence their opposition are no different than the lefties who use the word "racist" in every sentence.
I see that "other" lives mostly in the Great Lakes and ocean.
Sure you would.
The honest truth is that many people thought that The Passion was a flawed movie, to say the least. Among those people were Christopher Hitchens, the movie critic at The Christian Science Monitor, and other critics.
But in the end the movie was enjoyed by many, disliked by some but had no grand effect on anything in the culture. It didn't raise the level of anti-semitism, though it was a subject anti-semites used to try and incite others.
Mel Gibson made a lot of money from the movie and the marketing, and that's what Hollywood is all about.
People have a right to like or dislike any movie. That's about it.
I've heard Gibson explain this a million times. The people who did some of the nasty deeds in the movie were not nasty because they were jewish. They were nasty people who happened to be jewish because that's the part of the world into which Jesus was born. If he'd been born in Africa, Scandinavia, or Korea, he'd have been treated exactly the same.
I've never understood the anti-Semites who blame "jews" for the death of Jesus. Jesus' persecutors must be representative of all mankind for his forgiveness to have any relevance to the rest of us. When he asked God to forgive "them", I don't think he was just speaking for the particular jews and Romans who played a role in his death. He was speaking for all of us.
Some anti-semites need to get a life and stop whining about Jews.
You have Jewish friends?
I usually send religious Christmas cards to everybody on my list. One year, a very dear Jewish friend apparently couldn't take it anymore and said to me ----very testily---"Why do you send me religious cards, you know I don't celebrate that day?" I replied, "I was hoping that as my friend you would share with me a day that is very meaningful to me, that's why."
So it's all about you. Is that what friendship is about?
I happen to love Victorian Christmas art, so I always send Victorian style Christmas cards to my Christian friends.
I do it to bring them pleasure, because to me, that's what friendship is about. Making others feel good. It's called the spirit of giving, and I hear that's what Christmas is all about.
That's your conclusion. I conclude that people who make sweeping generalizations like that are anti-semites, Jewhaters, take your pick of the verbiage that suits your fancy.
The nonobservant Jew has only antisemitism to act as a rallying point. Without antisemitism the nonobservant Jew has no core value to delineate him from the rest of society.
It's Christmas time. The best time of the year for this newbie poster to complain how Jews don't obey her wishes on "The Passion". She's opened her presents, returned what she doesn't like, so now it's time to unleash some "Passion" oriented psycho-babble.
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.