Outrage--SNL Insults Christians, Pro-Lifers

Montag

[montag813]

Did anyone see the disturbing (and quite unfunny) "TV Funhouse" segment on SNL this evening?

They were attempting (one supposes) to insult Pat Robertson, but succeeded only in ridiculing Christians and those who value life and the unborn.

They portrayed a fictional Robertson-sponsored cartoon, in which "embyonic cell" and "Ted Trimester" (1st-trimester fetus) characters were placed in a work environment, as if they were high-powered workers. The characters were unintelligable, yet the other adult characters responded as if those two were geniuses. Also interspersed were a "Mr Parkinson" man seeking to kill the fetuses for their stem cells, who, upon being shown Jesus' image by the the "cell" character, ripped up a homosexual porno magazine (the "Robertson" scharacter asserts that if someone has a disease like Parkinsons it must be because Jesus is punishing them for being gay) and gives up his gun.

The message was clear: it is absurd to suppose that life begins at conception, because it is absurd to suppose that fetuses could function in the workplace. Also the piece asserts that one would have to be an extremist, homophobic Christian to value the unborn or have a problem with harvesting fetuses for stem cells.

Christianity is mocked and absurdly portrayed throughout the piece, which received very few laughs from the audience (do they really expect it to be funny?)

My wife and I were shocked by this, and the more we thought about it, the more disturbed we became.

montag

[3catsanadog]

Who can forget the Loopner's broken Norge refrigerator!?!

[OneWayToGo]

Ditto! It makes me laugh to hear people talk about how horrible television is and then the next person says "why are you watching tv anyway?" ...as if surfing the internet is a much better way to get around crudeness. Guess what...if you don't punch www.hotsex.com you won't see any porn...just as if you don't set the dial to NBC on Saturday night you won't see SNL. Get a life.

[Behind Liberal Lines]

Robert Smigel is a comedian/writer and cartoonist who does a lot of work for NBC. His most famous creation would be Triumph the Insult Comic Dog.

[bobzeetwin]

Well said. BTW...How come the moderator eliminates so many posts on this site?

[NC Conservative]

Did not see it. But I did see a SNL rerun on comedy central with Charlie Sheen on it. Someone in the audience asked him if he would run for president.( This was right after election) He said I can't because I have abused coke, been arrested and am not too bright. No one would vote for me. Apparently knocking Bush. But they are libs who cares.

[IronJack]

Weekend Update: SNL has been insulting anyone with an IQ greater than instant mashed potatoes since Belushi and Akroyd left. If you're still watching the tripe, you've got no reason to complain. It's like going on the Tilt-A-Whirl and them complaining that you're nauseated.

Vote with your feet, like so many millions have done. TURN IT OFF!!!!

[TexasNative2000]

While no one is forcing anyone to watch anything, broadcasters should not be allowed to broadcast their liberal propaganda when it assaults the sensitivities and sensibilities of religious.

At least you are consistent with your FReeper tag. Wrong, but consistent.

[Moleman]

boo whoo I am offended. It's a TV show, get over it. All this " I am offended" crap is sounds liberal to me

[ReaganGirl]

Do you feel the same way when SNL or any show for that matter, parodies Al Gore, Janet Reno, homosexuals, African Americans, etc....or is that funny because it's not about you or people that you support?

Just curious.

[drjimmy]

This is true, but I liked the OLD SNL, with James Belushi, and Chevy Chase and Gilda Radner, once they were gone, I watched every once in a while, but it just was NOT the same.
For most folks who feel this way, I suspect what they consider the "glory days" of SNL coincided with their college pot-smoking days. Samauri tailor just isn't as funny when you aren't stoned.

[drjimmy]

For 200 years we lived quite well and successfully without the DNC, the ACLU, and the LP approving of the most degrading and vicious of pornography. To allege that the Founding Fathers fought and died for the allowance of pornography is ludicrous.
And for 200 years we lived quite well without Glocks and "sniper scopes" and "cop killer" bullets (as the gun control crowd calls them). Yet just as the second amendment doesn't make limitations on what qualifies as "arms" that we have a right to bear, the first amendment doesn't say what kind of "speech" we have the freedom of.

[MissEdie]

You mean people still watch SNL?

[DaGman]

I thought it was hilarious. Especially Mr Parkinson. ROFLMAO!

[ppaul]

.....this is a sample of how bad it truly has become.....

SNL has sucked, big time, ever since John Belushi died.

[RckyRaCoCo]

Why do you watch television?

What's television?

[Restorer]

I saw the show and have several comments:

1. Did anyone else notice the three white chicks parodying Destiny's Child? They were portrayed as remarkably stupid and inarticulate. I have no idea if this is accurate, but I do think that a few years back such a portrayal of blacks would have been considered unacceptable.

2. The abortion skit was a deliberate attack on conservative Christians. I have no particular problem with their doing so, except I didn't think it was funny. What I would like to ask is why they don't produce equally forceful attacks on the core beliefs of other religious groups. A portrayal of Mohammed as a drunken, pork-eating pedophile would doubtless be about as funny as the skit in question. Although I would suggest a VERY low profile for those involved with the show after airing it.

3. As usual, most of the skits were WAY too long.

4. I have never seen anybody use a TelePrompter as poorly as Gwyneth Paltrow, not even GW. She was frequently looking off at a 90 degree angle from the person she was supposed to be conversing with. I'm no fan of hers, but she was absolutely awful last night. Could she have been on something?

[jlogajan]

How come the moderator eliminates so many posts on this site?

Well, this is a conservative forum run by conservatives. Therefore the posts they censor are things they don't want you to see.

I just assume a deleted post was an outstanding rebut of a conservative positional weakness that conservativism can't figure out how to answer. If the censors don't want to leave that impression, they should leave the post undeleted so that our own individual minds can assess its quality.

[Restorer]

Now you're being silly. It is very easy to find lots of articulate anti-conservative postings on this site.

Posts are primarily deleted for being violent, racist, obscene or for containing content that is sensitive now that we are at war.

If such posts are not deleted, others use them to show how terrible FR and the people who post on it are. Frankly, I'd prefer it if they were left up with a note from the moderator attached that FR rejects their point of view.

But this site is private property. Those who don't like the way it is run have the option of starting their own site which will be run by their rules.