Larry David found comedy fodder in piety on the latest episode of his series, “Curb Your Enthusiasm.’
On the show’s most recent installment, which aired Sunday, David urinates on a painting of Jesus Christ, causing a woman to believe the painting depicts Jesus crying.
…
During Sunday’s episode, David, who created, wrote and produced “Seinfeld,” visits a bathroom in his assistant’s home and splatters urine on a picture of Jesus. Instead of wiping it off, David leaves the restroom. Minutes later, David’s assistant enters the bathroom and concludes that Jesus is crying. She then summons her mother to the bathroom, where both women kneel in prayer.
I’ve never seen this show, does anyone know if the assistant is recognizably ethnic? Is this “brave” comedian also taking a swipe at Hispanic (or for that matter Italian or Irish) piety? I’m just asking.
Look, there is aways some satirical fun to be had at the expense of those people who find images of religious figures in piece of toast, and in tree stumps and oil stains, but there is also a line. An image of Christ is merely an image, true, but it is an image that is sacred to over a billion people on the planet. Deal Hudson, in the linked article says:
“Why is it that people are allowed to publicly show that level of disrespect for Christian symbols? If the same thing was done to a symbol of any other religions — Jewish or Muslim — there’d be a huge outcry. It’s simply not a level playing field.”
Forget Jewish, forget Muslim. If, let’s say, Kelsey Grammer had done precisely the same thing on his show, but using an image of, oh, let’s just say ferinstance, Barack Obama, do you think he’d still have a career?
Frankly, the idea of an image of a pissed-on Obama “weeping,” and some of his fans falling to their knees over it, would have a lot of satirical value; it would offer commentary both on the excesses of religious and political worship, and offend fewer people than David’s cowardly joke.
It takes no courage for an rich, unbelieving “artist” to piss on Christ. After all, that’s been done before. And Jesus voluntarily submitted himself to much worse, which means nothing an “artist” does to any image of Christ can do anything but reflect on the spiritual poverty of the “artist,” himself. For an “artist” to use Jesus for a cheap joke is about as “courageous” and “bold” as making a joke about George W. Bush before an audience of like-thinkers; it takes no courage at all.
But for an “artist” to make an identical satirical “joke” on Obama and his adorers? That would take great courage. That would be bold, and daring. And it would speak reassuring volumes about free speech in America.
I would not want to see it. I would not want to see the image of any American President so ill-used; he’s my president, too.
But if Larry David could see the humor in pissing on Christ and the excesses of Catholic piety, surely he must see the humor in pissing on Obama, and the excesses of Obama worship?
Haha. It’s all so funny, isn’t it? Are you laughing? Are you not entertained?
UPDATE: Instalanche! Thanks, Glenn!
Deacon Greg: Davis has his moments of brilliance; this wasn’t one of them
Related:
Christians in Exile; The Past is Prologue
Madonna, the DaVinci Code & Milk and Honey
Hot Air has the clip
October 28th, 2009 | 2:14 pm | #1
For a really touching view of Catholic piety (especially in relation to images), you could watch Henry Poole is Here. It had humor, but it was quite respectful of Catholics.
Personally, I’m glad I stay away from most TV, and especially anything on the BBC. Yuck.
October 28th, 2009 | 2:17 pm | #2
[...] ANCHORESS: Would Larry David Piss On An Image Of Obama? Of course not. That would be [...]
October 28th, 2009 | 2:18 pm | #3
Using such “stunts” in a so-called comedy program is quite indicative of intellectual bankruptcy! And ethical poverty.
October 28th, 2009 | 2:21 pm | #4
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by The Anchoress, Barbara McMahon. Barbara McMahon said: RT @TheAnchoress: Larry David finds humor in pissing on image of Christ. Wonder if he'd find joke pissing on O? http://tinyurl.com/yze2bg6 [...]
October 28th, 2009 | 2:31 pm | #5
It offends me. Not the peeing thing, but how damn LAZY that joke is. Nothing more than a cheap laugh for the “sophisticated” set. Basically it’s a fart joke for the pseudo-intelligentsia.
October 28th, 2009 | 2:31 pm | #6
Q: How many Anchoresses does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
A: That’s not funny!
October 28th, 2009 | 2:36 pm | #7
How about a joke where Larry David urinates on the constitution?
Oh wait, his buddy in D.C. is already doing that.
Never mind.
October 28th, 2009 | 2:36 pm | #8
The assistant was an overweight, thirtysomething, white woman who exposed her paunchy midrift
[Oh, so she's "fat and stupid"? -admin]
October 28th, 2009 | 2:36 pm | #9
Great, another show that I used to enjoy even when it irritated me has now crossed the line.
If this were another religion whose name I won’t mention, Mr. David would be sharing a security detail under an assumed name with Salman Rushdie.
But that’s why he chose Catholics, I guess.
October 28th, 2009 | 2:36 pm | #10
I had a priest once explain in a sermon that while Senfeld was “funny” it was at the expense of the characters and audience and therefore, it humor was cruel and actually unfunny if thought about on it’s own (i.e. the Soup Nazi is funny but it funny at the expense of those who must deal with this person). The Senfeld characters were vapid and thoughtless even with each other.
On the other hand, the priest pointed out, Home Improvement (which was showing during the same time Senfeld was) was humor which although self deprecating, was encouraging, en aging moments in a family as the grew closer to each other and people they met. He said he stopped watching Senfeld and started watching Home Improvement.
After that sermon I realized what I hated about watch Senfeld…it was cruel bully-like humor. I stopped watching too. Although I hadn’t seen Home Improvement I tuned in to see what it was like and found it took everyday family situations and with humor discussed issues that families and others address everyday versus the humor at the expense of my best friends oddities.
David’s humor is largely expressed on Senfeld, stupid, demeaning and really lacking in humor (though easy to laugh at because it isn’t you).
October 28th, 2009 | 2:40 pm | #11
This is what happens when a show is going down the tubes. They have to do something “outrageous” to try and get some play. They act like they have balls because they do something like this, let’s see them piss on a pic of MO(pbuh) if they think they got some.
October 28th, 2009 | 2:42 pm | #12
“Mr. David?”
“Yes, what is it?”
“There’s a call from a Mr. J. Christ on Line 2. He sounds pretty upset. He says he’s got your number and that he’s already prepared a ’special welcome’ for you in the next world. Should I ring him through?”
“Umm, errr, no. Uhhh, tell him that, ummm, I’m pitching a movie deal and, errr, I’ll call back. And while you’re at it, call Sprint. I think that guy has been calling my cell all morning and I need to change my number PDQ. Oye vay!”
October 28th, 2009 | 2:44 pm | #13
Seguin, good point. It’s petty bathroom humor for those who consider themselves too smart for that opiate of the masses stuff.
October 28th, 2009 | 2:47 pm | #14
You know a situation is completely hilarious when you laugh less at the joke itself than you do at the people who can’t take the joke.
Maybe if Jews or Muslims had long traditions of seeing Abraham or Muhammad in tortillas, firewood and grilled cheese sandwiches, they would have made logical targets for the satire. But they haven’t. It’s the same reason Groundskeeper Willie referred to the French as “cheese-eating surrender monkeys.” It wouldn’t have made any sense if he had tried to apply the insult to Brazilians or Norwegians instead.
Wikipedia documents this phenomenon pretty well:
Sadly, I don’t think the word “Allah” with a tear on it would have had quite the same believability.
[If you actually read my piece then you know I DID say that there is room to joke about this stuff. There is also a line, and I think my question is a valid one. Would people be doubled over with laughter if the circumstances were as I described them re Obama and the same sort of satire -satire that actually WOULD have a basis in the absurd "He's the One" Messianic excess we've seen among Obama's "true believers". I wonder how well they'd take that joke. I wonder how quick they'd be to accept the advice that they should learn how to laugh at it. My experience with the left is that they mostly cannot laugh at themselves. The right is only slightly better, but better.-admin]
October 28th, 2009 | 3:04 pm | #15
C.S. Lewis addressed this in That Hideous Strength. Remember that our protagonist, Mark, was asked to stomp on a crucifix:
“This,” said Mark, pointing with an undefined reluctance to the horrible white figure on the cross. “This is all surely a pure superstition.”
“Well?”
“Well, if so, what is there objective about stamping on the face? Isn’t is just as subjective to spit on a thing like this as to worship it? I mean–damn it all–if it’s only a bit of wood, why do anything about it?”
“That is superficial. If you had been brought up in a non-Christian society, you would not be asked to do this. Of course, it is a superstition; but it is that particular superstition which has pressed upon our society for a great many centuries. It can be experimentally shown that it still forms a dominant system in the subconscious of many individuals whose conscious thought appears to be wholly liberated. An explicit action in the reverse direction is therefore a necessary step towards complete objectivity. It is not a question for a priori discussion. We find it in practice that it cannot be dispensed with.”
October 28th, 2009 | 3:06 pm | #16
Such “art” reflects an absolute poverty of spirit. We’re supposed to pity such people and consider them better than ourselves. Maybe there’s some saint somewhere who can do that..
We started to watch this series on DVD, but I vetoed it because I found it dumb and unfunny. Looks like I was proven right.
October 28th, 2009 | 3:09 pm | #17
Jeff,
Why would it be the word “Allah” instead of an image of “Allah”?
Oh, yeah. Graven images are punishable by death in the ROP. Maybe a tear on the graven image, then mass beheadings would get a laugh.
October 28th, 2009 | 3:10 pm | #18
Jeff said: “Maybe if Jews or Muslims had long traditions of seeing Abraham or Muhammad in tortillas, firewood and grilled cheese sandwiches, they would have made logical targets for the satire.”
Yeah, maybe if Muslims had a recent history of launching suicide attacks, it would be appropriate to print a cartoon highlighting this violent trend.
Oh, and here’s a story of a nine-month old baby whose birthmark is said to be verses from the Koran (it’s not just Catholics that claim these small miracles)
But I agree any such attempt to parody President Obama would have been met with outrage.
October 28th, 2009 | 3:11 pm | #19
“It’s simply not a level playing field.”
Are you suggesting it should be?
[Are you mistaking me for a Deal Hudson quote? -admin]
October 28th, 2009 | 3:13 pm | #20
Mr. David could have achieved the same point, that is, skewering those who see evidence of miracles in ‘weeping’ statues and pictures, by having the character wash his hands and flick them dry, flicking water onto the picture. Same point without the bathroom vulgarity.
October 28th, 2009 | 3:13 pm | #21
Jeff, Jeff, Jeff,
Christians (and Jews) can take these jokes and have for a long time, so no marks for originality here. The reason you don’t see the Larry Davids of the comedy world joking about Mohammad is because they are afraid that someone would kill them – they are chickenshits. What does Wikipedia say about killing or threatening someone’s life over a joke?
October 28th, 2009 | 3:18 pm | #22
Seguin—absolutely correct, a joke for the lazy
JJ–it’s called “Jump the Shark”
October 28th, 2009 | 3:19 pm | #23
OK, OK, here. First off, there is a running gag in this show that Larry is completely lost when it comes to his own religion (Judaism) and, whenever Christianity shows up, (his wife/ex-wife and her family are Christian) he usually makes an ass of himself. He has, to date: set a living nativity scene on fire, winds up stabbing some dude through the hands with a Passion of the Christ Nail (I think that was what happens), eaten the cookies baked for a cookie nativity scene and now this.
He has also asked for (and received) from his Rabbi (on the show) approval for a one-time extra-marital affair.
Aside from religion, he has also done such things as pick up a hooker so that he can take the HOV lane, screamed at a blind man, pretended to be mentally handicapped so that he doesn’t have to share office space, refused to use anything other than the term “mulatto” for a mix-race child, screamed at his 12-year old nephew for not teaching him a magic trick, etc, etc.
Like Seinfeld, Larry exists in a world where just about everyone is morally bankrupt, self-involved, and terrible. Unlike Seinfeld, Larry is by far the most morally bankrupt and self-involved person of all.
This show is sort of like a couple of the stories in Cantebury Tales. Everyone is repugnant and their repugnance is generally simply the matter of taking our own flaws and vices and kicking them up a notch.
October 28th, 2009 | 3:21 pm | #24
I laud those cartoonists who mocked Mohammed, especially since they were physically threatened for doing so. Theirs was a brave act which needed to be done.
There’s no glory in pissing on Christ. But I do think if people hadn’t stood up & laughed at the church decades & centuries ago, we would not have the freedom of open belief or non-belief that we currently enjoy. The work of the pioneering atheists, the people who founded Freethinker & so on, is something I also laud. Their mockery, & the likes of Life Of Brian, ended up being forces for good in my view.
I take the paleocon criticism that it was the opening of the floodgates, the beginning of the end etc. But then, is it not the right who are actually largely responsible? Look at that well-known Trotskyist agitator, Rupert Murdoch, one of the main forces behind dumbing down, who was directly enabled in ways that can be proven (& are from time to time cited as great achievements) by known left-wing firebrands like, erm, Reagan & Thatcher.
Damian Thompson’s vicious and crazy attack on Richard Dawkins
I am led to believe Thompson is a pal of yours. He is not really my cup of tea. But I prefer him to “Archbishop Cranmer” (right-wing Anglican), whom I dislike quite strongly.
I have been wondering why social cons defend neoliberalism when it is an agent of the changes they deplore. Though I myself am no friend to popular culture, & don’t have a TV.
October 28th, 2009 | 3:25 pm | #25
Terry, I am pretty sure there are at least a couple Muslim jokes on this show.
October 28th, 2009 | 3:25 pm | #26
Jeff, Muslims got their collective panties in a bunch some years ago, when a graphic used on the lid of Burger King ice-cream cones resembled the Arabic spelling of ‘Allah”, then CAIR got pissed off at Nike’s logo for exactly same reason. Apparently Nike swish was holy too. My favourite exercise in stupidity was recall of “blasphemous” Yokohama tires in Middle East. Allah’s name was spotted amid tires threads. One cannot make it up.
October 28th, 2009 | 3:32 pm | #27
Since Mr Davids is such an ‘icon’ of the entertainment industry, revered for his comedic ‘genius’, a little golden shower on his image (or person) giving him the appropriate odor of Hollywood sanctity would certainly make me laugh.
October 28th, 2009 | 3:37 pm | #28
When Seinfeld was on it was hailed as “the show about nothing.” In the Wikipedia entry it says “Seinfeld focused on minutiae, such as waiting in line at the movies, going out for dinner, buying a suit and, basically, coping with the petty injustices of life.”
Those of a “certain age” recognized that format. For twenty years it was called the The Jack Benny Show. Only Jack was funnier and found a way to be entertaining without resorting to masturbation jokes.
October 28th, 2009 | 3:46 pm | #29
Dry Valleys: lot of name dropping going on there.
I’m not sure who you think these atheists are that “stood up to the Church.” The country with perhaps the strongest protections for religious practices (the US) was founded by a bunch of protestants. Atheists (of the old school, meaning, not Dawkins) worked hard for atheism as a competing belief system (this would be the atheists that started appearing in the 19th cen. Very few open atheists exist before then in western society), which is true. That isn’t to say, though, that by and large competing views weren’t already permitted. New Atheists, like Dawkins, ought to have their positions shown for the little messes of bigotry that they are. I will never forget, being an atheist at the time, the absolute scorn and condescension with which I saw Dawkins treat my Methodist friend at a lecture.
If the right was to blame, then they ought to be blamed. That doesn’t prohibit them from fixing the problem.
A “social con” of certain strains may defend neoliberalism. Catholic social cons sometimes fall into this category, but it’s been my experience that, with the exception of pundits who are clearly in it for the ideology and not the dictates of their perceived vocation as Catholics, there are few informed Catholics who take neoliberalism as the ideal, though perhaps as the best system possible at the time. Both the current and previous Popes, often considered harbringers of a new conservative Church movement by folks on the left, expressed a lot of discomfort with capitalism itself, much less neoliberalism.
October 28th, 2009 | 3:51 pm | #30
If we get too upset about things like this are we not almost rewarding people like Larry David with our outrage? He WANTS to provoke us, does he not?
October 28th, 2009 | 3:55 pm | #31
You know a situation is completely hilarious when you laugh less at the joke itself than you do at the people who can’t take the joke.
No, the joke was stupid because it was insulting – I could rewrite the scene to make it less insulting in two seconds -
Rather than pee, he could simply accidentally splash water on it while washing his hands, some dilemma as he decides whether he should try wiping it off and risk smearing the picture, or just leave it as it is.
But then, he probably doesn’t wash his hands.
October 28th, 2009 | 4:00 pm | #32
I applaud the earnestness of this conversation, as it demonstrates the seriousness and respect with which conservatives treat culture, even semi-hostile popular culture.
I can’t always watch “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” for the same reason I occassionally couldn’t watch “Seinfeld:” the squirm-inducing behavior of many of the characters.
However, I disagree with the majority view. First of all, and most importantly, Larry David’s character is someone who endeavors to do the right moral thing and frequently does, but is torn to pieces by his own petty selfishness and self-obsession. The great thing about it is that it is all right out in the open, a caricature of every man and woman’s daily struggle to behave morally.
In that sense, it’s a step up from “Seinfeld,” the closing episode of which, for those who remember, featured an hour-long trial of the four characters on charges of violating a “good samaritan” law, and watching apathetically a woman getting mugged. Every person whom they had wronged in the past testified against them, and they were all sentenced to a year in jail. The final scene showed them in a cage, waiting to be transported away.
Larry David wrote that episode and was one of the few people who thought it the perfect ending to the show. Frankly, I think CS Lewis would have loved “Curb Your Enthusiasm.” Think of Screwtape’s advice of ensnaring mortals with the temptation, sin, egoism, and self-justification of the everyday, the prosaic, and the quotidian.
Equally, however, humanity can find salvation there too. One of my favorite episodes is when Larry brings all manner of trouble upon himself by refusing to give candy to two older teenage girls on Halloween, because they weren’t wearing costumes. When challenged, one says, “I’m going as my sister.” He still refuses, though his wife insists he give her candy. Overnight, they trash his house. He calls the police. “Why didn’t you just give them the candy?” the ask. He explains, but they look at him incomprehendingly.
All of one season was of the compications incurred when Larry and his wife take in an entire family made homeless by Hurricane Katrina.
It’s a very subtle show, but also very moral and honest–and obsene and at times disgusting. Essentially, it’s the hopeful Jewish comic version of Flannery O’Connor.
[See, if I watched tv, I might be inclined to look into that...sounds interesting. -admin]
October 28th, 2009 | 4:01 pm | #33
Oh, and by the way, I’m sure he’d love to piss on a picture of Obama.
October 28th, 2009 | 4:15 pm | #34
The funniest–and most honest–comedy about Christianity was in the BBC series, Coupling. The episodes in which Jane dated a Christian (season 3, sample) treated Christianity with respect. The Brits seem to be able to be funny about it without turning the Christian into the joke.
October 28th, 2009 | 4:22 pm | #35
Enough already with the passive-aggressive tactic of pissing on someone and then indignantly asking, “What’s the matter? You can’t take a joke?”
October 28th, 2009 | 4:32 pm | #36
I agree with Jeanie; the Brits have one up on us when it comes to humor. It seems as though a lot of American humor is based on vulgarity.
October 28th, 2009 | 4:34 pm | #37
What a sad small self-loathing little jewish man. I’m not concerned at all, Jesus isn’t either.
October 28th, 2009 | 4:35 pm | #38
PS- I understand that social cons may be against socialism, & there are ideologies which go out of their way to persecute religion & are thus worse than classical liberalism- but this, as a staunchly individualist creed, is something I’d find it hard to reconcile with Catholicism- which I’d think was easier to fit with a Rod Dreher- esque belief or paleoconservatism.
These atheist pioneers I was talking about are people like my model, Bradlaugh. His persecutors claimed to be Christians, but were exploiting religion for political gain. They were slapped down by Gladstone, a fervent believer who preferred honest doubt to fraudulent religion.
I know that popes are sceptical of unfettered capitalism. I would expect nothing else. But I see little more than token nods in that direction here. Yes, yes, it’s possible to have doubts about neoliberalism & still totally oppose Obama’s agenda (paleocons manage it) but I see amongst right-wing Catholics more a celebration of status-quo capitalism as it is.
Myself, I am quite sceptical about the state as I think it is not very efficient & often does more harm than good & is an unacceptable incursion into individual liberty. But I am not dogmatically anti-state & am not a libertarian. Thus, & because I am socially liberal on every matter except immigration, I identify with “the left” rather than “the right”, inasmuch as those terms mean anything.
As for Dawkins himself. I like his books. I have not seen this arrogant, dismissive attitude others identify in him. I think his brusqueness is due to frustration at people ignoring what he says & misrepresenting him, & because he has a genuine passion for a naturalistic worldview & is exasperated. I wouldn’t view him as a natural authoritarian.
I prefer him to the Hitch. As a liberal universalist, I am (for example) on the side of the Iranian opposition or the Afghan women & girls doing battle against the Taliban. But under the influence of Larison etc, I have become more sceptical about military means & American presence being teh ways to deal with these. I am not well disposed towards the Republican attacks on Obama for not being hawkish enough.
[See, I prefer Hitchens...but that could simply be because I think he is a hell of a writer -admin]
October 28th, 2009 | 4:37 pm | #39
Larry David is probably the funniest guy on TV. I love Curb and love(d) Seinfeld. I’m also a God loving, practicing Christian. I vote republican. While I can see the offense and do not excuse it, in the context of the show it fits right in with every episode of Curb – ugly, uncomfortable misunderstandings. No, Mr. David probably wouldn’t piss on an Obama pic. And, yeah, it was probably on purpose that he chose an image of Jesus Christ to offend. But, as a Christian, this sort of thing rolls off my back. It should yours too. We’ve been taught that this is what unbelievers do. It’s part of our calling. Does that mean I can’t laugh at a genuinley funny show? Heck no. I’m thankful that I have a belief and God that lets me appreciate offensive idiot humor even at my expense. God plays his own jokes, after all. Larry David’s left-wing wife left him and took half his money so she could be with some rugged deadbeat “republican” bloke. Enough with this immediate lashing out. Trust your faith, your savior, yourself. Stop worrying or bringing attention to people who want nothing more than to offend you and garner your caterwauling. Larry David is very funny. But he’s also a miserable man whose wife left him for his philosophical antithesis. If you must, take solace in that.
[Longtime readers know I am not easily offended...nothing Madonna does, or Ron Brown writes, bothers me, and I found the chocolate crucifixion to actually be a beautiful bit of sculpture. Like you, I figure this is part of what Christians should expect from the world. I merely wonder what the reaction would be if David played the same scene with an Obama picture in an Obama-loving household. I somehow doubt that would be shrugged off. admin]
October 28th, 2009 | 4:39 pm | #40
Comment has done a runner- I was responding to what PS said.
It is good for me to be challenged- I sort of sometimes forget that there are other people besides me. I suppose it is because my reading material is different to yours, & there’s no good reason why you’d care about the books, magazines & blogs I peruse, so it is wrong for me to assume fluency in things that don’t matter to you
It is funny that I have acquired an interest in America, whereas I neither know nor care a great deal what happens in most other parts of Abroad
October 28th, 2009 | 4:45 pm | #41
[...] Would Larry David pi$$ on a photo of Obama? Comments [...]
October 28th, 2009 | 4:46 pm | #42
The question answers itself about Obama.
The symptom of some underlying diabolos is a loss of things like courage and humor.
We should make fun of Obama now, and we would – if people didn’t sense that there is a dark malevolent power or powers at work here, maybe even deeper than Obama, where he is just their tool. Don’t know.
But we won’t poke fun at him now when it could do both him and us some good.
Later, when it is too late, people will want to p*ss on his picture – and the few who do will disappear.
Still later, people will p*ss on his picture the way the Romanians did on Ceaucescu, or else after he is gone and they are under the boot of some other foe.
History is pretty clear on how such matters work out over time. We’re all in for hell I’m afraid.
October 28th, 2009 | 4:47 pm | #43
Marty,
Dang! You got to my point first!
Lanny, Lanny. You do things like this because you KNOW you can get away with them. No one here is going to demand your proverbial head on a platter. Unfortunately, things like this have a way to come back to bite you in the behind… or maybe even crush your head… You don’t seem to know what you can unleash with this kind of thing. Don’t you have any judges at the gates, so to speak, which would detain you from doing stupid things like these? (FYI, read Deuteronomy. Jesus made A LOT of references to it, and to the Torah, of course… but maybe you never cared about that…)
I’ll up the ante on you, Lanny. Try doing that with a picture of Mohamed. You might well start World War IV.
But again, that’s “nothing”… or is it?
October 28th, 2009 | 4:50 pm | #44
As for whether Lanny would do that to a picture of Obama…
A good link from OpenSecrets.org should answer that question easily.
October 28th, 2009 | 4:53 pm | #45
“Later, when it is too late, people will want to p*ss on his picture – and the few who do will disappear.
Still later, people will p*ss on his picture the way the Romanians did on Ceaucescu, or else after he is gone and they are under the boot of some other foe.”
No hyperbole here!
October 28th, 2009 | 4:55 pm | #46
I don’t know, maybe y’all are onto something here. I think the world is now ready for “Piss Obama.”
October 28th, 2009 | 4:57 pm | #47
I can’t believe how offended some people are pretending to be in this forum. In the episode, he was on some medication that caused him to urinate forcefully – causing backsplash which happened to land on a Jesus painting, leading a character to later see it as a miracle. It, along with various other occurrences, was part of a setup for a final scene at the end of the episode which ties everything together. He didn’t “piss on a picture of Jesus”.
Actually the real target of David’s comedy was chubby people who wear revealing clothing – not superstitious Christian miracle seekers. Any intelligent person could have figured that out having watched the episode.
Before you criticize something, its important to view it first if you want any credibility. Larry David is not one to shy from criticizing anything – be it lack of decency in one’s attire, ridiculous worship of idols, or whatever. I could see him making fun of Obama worshipers too.
Lighten up people.
[Yeah, the real target was the fat, stupid Catholic girl. Pissing on the image of Jesus and making fun of piety was only a secondary thing. People should lighten up and take the joke, dammit. And ignore the whole point of this post, which was not about being offended but wondering how well the joke would play among Obama fans, if it was his portrait being peed on and kneeled before...admin]
October 28th, 2009 | 4:58 pm | #48
Admin said: “I merely wonder what the reaction would be if David played the same scene with an Obama picture in an Obama-loving household. I somehow doubt that would be shrugged off.”
I suspect it would get Curb Your Enthusiasm the most attention ever. I also agree with Joe Y’s superb post. Upon further thought, and also after reading Joe Y’s later amendment, I’d have to agree that I COULD see Larry David peeing on an Obama pic in a black household. It would fit perfectly with the show. Especially, considering the recent context of the show, in this season. It’d probably be among the funniest episodes ever. If someone could suggest to him that he follow up the episode with the Jesus picture with the Obama picture under the same circumstance, I’m sure he’d laugh out loud.
October 28th, 2009 | 5:04 pm | #49
By the way Anchoress, I did not mean to address any posts or responses to you or at you directly. I very much like what you are doing here. When I say “you” or any variation thereof, I mean and meant “christians” or even “readers”. I’m genuinely sorry if anything I’ve written seemed directed at yourself, your thread, or any single person. That was not my intention. The context is all.
[Not at all, and I agree with your point. I just thought I should make it clear that this is not a habitually offended site!
-admin]
October 28th, 2009 | 5:11 pm | #50
Jeff, shows what you know about Muslims seeing the name of Allah in “tortillas, firewood and grilled cheese sandwiches”: link
October 28th, 2009 | 5:27 pm | #51
Ok, that does it. Larry David is now officially
crazier than Michael Richards, which is no mean feat!
October 28th, 2009 | 5:43 pm | #52
Anchoress’ original question was: (correct me if I am wrong, Anchoress) If this is a funny scene then would it be equally as funny if it had been the President?
As I said earlier, the scene is funny but it is funny at the expense of someone as is all of David’s humor–some here have said it’s fat people others Christians and I could argue office workers and women that he is making fun of (it’s his “assistant” who both an office worker and a female who instantly thinks “miracle” versus bad bathroom practices and considering she has a picture of Christ over the toilet in the first place he may also be poking fun at the over the top religious, pick any religion).
However, it’s still humor at the expense of another human being and because of his character’s amazing lack of understanding that other people actually have feelings (the show is always about his self-centered inability to cope with humanity in the very mundane occurrences of life–like peeing in someone else’s home and not knowing what to do–we all would know what to do , why doesn’t he, well because…he doesn’t actually care until after it becomes a problem for him.)
As I said, I used to watch this kind of humor but now find it quite unfunny.
I dislike what our current President is doing and hate both his tactics and his attack people but I wouldn’t find this scene funny using Obama either–it’s mean and mean-spirited and worse, David thinks it’s funny because it’s all about his character’s misogyny. Sad really.
October 28th, 2009 | 5:48 pm | #53
I confess, when I hear of such performances I – although I’m 60 years old – get so furious. My heart starts beating at a very unhealthy pace and I have to work hard to get myself down again. However, in these moments, how much would I prefer to just join a protest-shouting crowd in my city, letting everything off – just like the muslims do all over Europe.
They defend their territory.
Alas, we do not, although we will loose the kingdom of Christ if we do not defend it. The kingdom of Christ has to be defended, just like any other Kingdom.
October 28th, 2009 | 5:58 pm | #54
I consider myself relatively “tolerant.” (Gag.) I also have enjoyed and looked forward to “Curb” every Sunday. I found myself trying to talk myself out of being offended by the show Sunday night. I gave up. It was plain gross watching Larry pee all over everything, let alone have some of his pee end up the “tear” on the face of Jesus. Lame. Not funny.
October 28th, 2009 | 5:59 pm | #55
As I’ve been thinking about it, what instigated the entire episode was the chubby girl’s insistence on baring her midriff, because she’d lost 68 pounds and was proud of her body. Jerry and Larry were trying to get her to dress more appropriately, but Larry’s alternatelty subtle and irritated attempts to get her to wear more business-appropriate attire infuriated her, so she quit. This outraged Julia-Louis Dreyfuss, who had hired the girl in the first place and was worried that this would cause the girl’s unstable mother (and Mrs. Dreyfuss’s former Nanny) to harm herself. This alarmed Larry, who drive immediately to the girl’s house, where he debased himself until the girl agreed to come back to work.
It was when he had to use the bathroom that his drug-induced powerful urination caused a drop to go directly under the eye of the poster of Jesus. He looked at it very, very carefully, and decided it was probably part of the painting and was there already. All I can say, Anchoress, is that if you don’t have a TV, see if you can get someone to record the episode for you (it reruns all week) and at least watch the first part to see what actually happens.
As far as PC racial politics goes, the Hurricane Katrina season in which the Black family, a black family–wait, need I say anything more? That season made any bodily fluid and a picture of Obama very small beer indeed.
October 28th, 2009 | 6:00 pm | #56
Larry David wrote several Seinfeld episodes where peeing was a mainstay of the story.
In one episode, a friend of Kramers pees on Jerry’s new white sofa; in another episode Jerry is arrested for peeing in a parking garage, and another episode is all about Elaine “borrowing” a urine sample from Jerry’s mother.
Q: Does Larry David have a urine fetish?
A: Depends.
October 28th, 2009 | 6:01 pm | #57
The point I was trying to make at the beginning, before I wandered off, was that it was the girl’s vanity, narcissism, and sense of entitlement that instigated the problem, and Larry’s own moral sacrifice that got him in such trouble.
October 28th, 2009 | 6:06 pm | #58
I haven’t seen the show in question, but I have an opinion on this whole sort of “culture.” It is cowardly and it is lazy.
Christians, as one commenter said, are expected to let this “roll off their backs,” and I suppose we should. It doesn’t hold a candle to Christians being burned alive in Nero’s gardens. Still, I can call it what it is.
There is nothing less transgressive than someone who is “transgressive.” Such people only transgress the boundaries they already dismiss, or those that will win them safe, comforting applause from their peers. Then, when someone truly crosses a line (like the Danish cartoonists), they run squealing like debutantes.
Or did I miss Larry David’s courageous defense of those under fatwa from radical Islam?
October 28th, 2009 | 6:25 pm | #59
[...] All That Needs To Be Said About Pissing On Christ October 28, 2009 Posted by taoist in Hypocrisy. Tags: Curb Your Enthusiasm, Religion trackback And “Curb Your Enthusiasm”. [...]
October 28th, 2009 | 7:32 pm | #60
Many Jews in Hollywood are obsessed with Jesus in a twisted way. I think deep down they know that he is their Lord, but are unwilling to accept it for behavior-related reasons. That aside, Larry David and all these other people would never, ever have the guts to piss on an image of Muhammad, let alone Barry Obama.
October 28th, 2009 | 8:02 pm | #61
NanB, have you ever seen the British comedy show, “The Black Adder?” It’s hilarious, but veeeeeery vulgar!
As deeb says, we should all “lighten up”—so I’m sure he won’t be offended if someone goes ahead and makes a show about an Obama picture being peed one, or otherwise indulges in crassitude directed at The One. Hey, it’s all humor, and we should all lighten up, and not be offended, right?
It’s sad, what’s happened to comedy; most of us outgrow potty humor around the age of, oh, 8 or so.
October 28th, 2009 | 8:07 pm | #62
Hollywood, Jewish, gentile, and everything in between seems to be obsessed with Christianity, and Christian iconography, in a very—well, a very strange way. I sometimes wish they’d pick on Zororastrians or Zen buddhists, just for a change of pace! (Not because I bear any ill will towards either religion. But, sheesh, guys! Get some new material!)
Or. . . here’s a thought! They could try being actually funny, without wee-wee jokes or insulting Catholics, or fat people! Of course, that would require actual talent.
October 28th, 2009 | 8:10 pm | #63
[...] http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/theanchoress/2009/10/28/would-he-piss-on-an-image-of-obama Sphere: Related Content Share on: Facebook | digg_url = 'http://www.redstate.com/vizbiz/2009/10/28/would-larry-david-pee-on-an-image-of-obama/'; digg_title = 'Would Larry David pee on an image of Obama?'; digg_skin = 'compact'; | Reddit [...]
October 28th, 2009 | 8:28 pm | #64
Andrew B,
That’s much too presumptuous. Exceedingly so when admitting never having seen the program we’re discussing. You use the words “cowardly” and “lazy”. Must I then “dare” you to watch a full season of “Curb Your Enthusiasm”?
Surely you will not. That’d require the “courage” and “action” of another – per your post.
As a Christian we must be made of sterner stuff.
It is not some weak societal relativism, fatalistic nihilism, nor pop-cultural aloofness that should inform us. It is precisely our trust in God that gives us our temporal awareness, our ephemeral concern, our shoulder-shrugging dismissivness of the present. Sure, we should fight for what we hold dear. But we should also recognize, as we are taught, that it is, as foretold, an inevitably losing battle. People with no faith, no love, no reality, no real concern or responsibility – they will always be more adaptive than those with principles and faith. Why fight them. Let them have their Marxist maxim – that “religion is the opiate of the masses”. At least it gives us hope. While they that mock us have neither faith, nor hope, nor any understanding of anything beyond them. And worse – they’re consumed by their own opiates – by the ounce and gram, the needle and line, the drink and drug – all while condemning us merely for our faith.
October 28th, 2009 | 8:36 pm | #65
[...] Would he piss on an image of Obama? The Anchoress [...]
October 28th, 2009 | 9:03 pm | #66
[...] Would he piss on an image of Obama? ————————— I’m both getting over a cold [...]
October 28th, 2009 | 9:07 pm | #67
From IMDB “In the 5th season finale “The End”, Larry discovers who his real parents are, and flies to Arizona to meet them. After a life-changing religious revelation, Larry decides to give Richard Lewis his kidney.”
Larry’s real parents are Christians. When Larry visits with them, he finds them and their world to be the opposite of the craven world he inhabits.
Larry finally finds out, he is indeed not adopted, and therefore Jewish (while headed to the OR) and reverts back to the petty, self-obsessed person he was before visiting his ‘real’ parents.
So, Larry David is at worst an equal-opportunity offender.
October 28th, 2009 | 9:17 pm | #68
[...] three’fer: – The new cookbooks are here! The new cookbooks are here! – Waste of skin, redeux. – Would these same men have been saved five years from [...]
October 28th, 2009 | 9:43 pm | #69
Larry David seems to have many neuroses. I’m going to pray for him.
October 28th, 2009 | 9:53 pm | #70
“No hyperbole here!”
Correct. There is historical form for things going as I said. In the particular case, Obama already has form in going after people personally. That is unreal…and you mock.
The fact of the matter is that there is zero, none, nil nada form or history for Obama being a tolerant, decent person.
None.
If you think there is, name it.
October 28th, 2009 | 9:57 pm | #71
There was an interesting comment in WSJ’s “Best of the Web” that this was a spoof of Serrano’s idiotic “Piss Ch—.” I think he may have something there. It sounds very Larry David.
October 28th, 2009 | 9:59 pm | #72
[...] All the cool kids jackasses are doing it! The Anchoress makes a good point: Forget Jewish, forget Muslim. If, let’s say, Kelsey Grammer [...]
October 28th, 2009 | 10:04 pm | #73
For Larry’s next foray into the edgy, he will do the same thing to an image of the prophet, Mohammed.
Not.
Larry’s no fool. He doesn’t want to see chopped off the head his creative brain and his clever mouth reside in.
October 28th, 2009 | 10:35 pm | #74
I take great satisfaction in the scripture that says that on that great day of judgement, every knee shall bow. That includes this low life “atist”. I take great awe in the grace of God that if this artist asks Christ to forgive him of his sins, He will simply do so. And if he doesn’t I fear the moment on that great day of judgement when Christ looks upon his poor soul and says “I never knew you”.
October 28th, 2009 | 10:54 pm | #75
A friend of mine told me I should watch that clip as posted on Breitbart. I only made it halfway through the clip. I thought it was childish and pathetic. When I first got satellite TV in 1996, I had a trial subscription to HBO. I couldn’t believe that anyone would actually pay to watch that crap. It makes me grateful for all the money and time I’ve saved over the years by not subscribing to HBO.
October 28th, 2009 | 11:43 pm | #76
> On the other hand, the priest pointed out, Home Improvement (which was showing during the same time Senfeld was) was humor which although self deprecating, was encouraging,
HI was relentlessly anti-male, to the extent they deliberately had his wife reading a Susan Faludi book on-screen. I basically stopped watching the show when they had Tim’s wife berating Tim because Al wasn’t behaving correctly with regards to a date he had had but wasn’t interested in pursuing. They started with Allen’s humor, which was self-deprecating, but before long perverted it into male-bashing.
You’ve just been brainwashed to not recognize it for what it is.
Now go back and watch a series of 5-10 episodes (first, with newly open eyes, looking for it) and tell me I’m wrong.
You’ll start to grasp that what started as poking fun at male foibles became “women are as Godesses, men are all neanderthal troglodytes”
October 29th, 2009 | 12:38 am | #77
big difference between “pissing on christ” and accidentally splattering a painting. as for the people who believe in crying paintings, they are in the same league as those who see jesus in their burnt tortilla. the mild jab they got here is more than deserved.
oh.. and david DID do an episode about a muslim woman in a burkha that he sets up with a blind guy to hilarious results. so all you ‘persecuted’ christians can calm down.
[Just curious; how would you be about David "accidentally splattering" a painting of Obama? -admin]
October 29th, 2009 | 2:54 am | #78
My daughter, in her 30’s, tried to explain to me why Steinfeld was funny. Finally, she just frankly told me that her generation found it ironical and humorus when three or four people could be so incredibly mean and heartless to one another, repeatedly, and still come back for more. “I guess they were all morons.” It seems that some people like to see others hurt and find it incredibly entertaining.
October 29th, 2009 | 8:07 am | #79
Don’t we refer to them as senile, dribbling, old men? Not artists.
October 29th, 2009 | 8:42 am | #80
We used to call them senile, dribbling old men and sorrowfully shake our heads.
October 29th, 2009 | 8:42 am | #81
[...] David have no problem pissing on Christ and Christians? By datechguy A: Because he knows we won’t kill him for [...]
October 29th, 2009 | 10:05 am | #82
Anchoress
I understand totally your issue here. But I’m a longtime fan of the show and all I can say is that you really need to have watched the episode (many episoides) to understand that Larry is basically a dopey “character” that routinely gets into/gets put into asinine over the top situations.
The double standard is real and it exists. All I can tell you is that Larry didn’t do it out of malice
October 29th, 2009 | 10:16 am | #83
Oh, if I may add one more thing……as someone noted above, Larry David doesn’t exactly do us Jews any favors the way he acts either. Equal opportunity offense!
I guess now’s not the time to mention the episode where his father is showing up and he has to nail a mizzuzah to the door immediately and the only nail available is his devout Christian in-laws “authentic” nail taken from Jesus cross? And as mentioned, the Muslim/Burqua episode as well- not to mention various new-agey type stuff have come in for it on that show.
As for your question about Obama picture……maybe not. But then again, I can honestly say it wouldn’t shock me if it happened either.
October 29th, 2009 | 10:45 am | #84
I’ve said it before; I’ll say it again. If there were such a thing as Catholic suicide bombers, we wouldn’t have to put up with this stuff. Not that I’m suggesting anything…
October 29th, 2009 | 10:47 am | #85
CD- you are correct. I quit watching television , and films, because of the useless vulgarity. I don’t want to see a man urinating on the screen, or any where else for that matter.
October 29th, 2009 | 1:21 pm | #86
If they were suicide bombers, they wouldn’t be Catholic.
October 29th, 2009 | 2:08 pm | #87
“If they were suicide bombers, they wouldn’t be Catholic.”
Boy, I’d like to hear your explanation of this. Would it include something about how a real Catholic wouldn’t commit a sin like that? What kind of sins does a Catholic get to commit before being declared non-Catholic?
In Mere Christianity, CS Lewis asks us to take people at their word. If someone says they are a Christian, then they are a Christian. I guess it’s up to you if you want to decide if they are the kind of Christian you want them to be or a “good enough” Christian. Same goes for Catholics, I suppose.
October 29th, 2009 | 3:21 pm | #88
[...] The Anchoress [...]
October 29th, 2009 | 3:51 pm | #89
Of all human frailties, ingratitude is the ugliest.
There is nothing funny about defacing an image of something Holy, and those who pretend to see humor in it are blind, deluded, lazy or lying.
Further, I see no merit in pretending to not take offense when good and Holy people are insulted.
Honorable people are bound to honor that which is honorable. We shame ourselves with this hideous and self-destructive entertainment.
If you find yourself instructed to step on a picture of the Virgin Mary, do you laugh and do it, or refuse, and bear the scorn and ridicule of your classmates? People have lost their lives for such simple acts. It was serious for Daniel Pearl, who professed his faith and heritage with four precious words: ‘I am a Jew’, and the world watched him lose his head for it. I defy those who laugh at this ‘entertainment’ to also laugh while watching his head getting sawed off. Go ahead, that’s what you’re doing; and if that thought makes you sick to your stomach then for a short moment you’ll understand how the rest of us already feel.
I see no humor here, only the sickness of aimless and mislead people. Our connection to G-d is the most serious element of human life, and those who ridicule such solemn dynamics embrace their own damnation.
Sincerely, Peter Warner.
October 29th, 2009 | 6:30 pm | #90
Jeanie: Yes, that’s exactly what I mean. I’m assuming that the suicide bomber is murdering in the name of the Roman Catholic Church, that he sees the act as theologically correct, in the way that Muslim suicide bombers say they do. If I’m wrong about Catholic theology, then forgive me, as I’m a Jew, but I would be surprised if it were.
October 29th, 2009 | 6:38 pm | #91
I’m not Catholic, but nonetheless an Anchoress fan. More on the libertarian side than anything else, but definitely a Christian.
After hearing the accolades for “Curb Your Enthusiasm, ” I put it in my Netflix queue. My spouse and I watched the first two episodes–please don’t tell me I should “give it a chance to develop”–and were repulsed. We decided that all of the mean-spirited episodes of “Seinfeld” that we didn’t like (e.g., “The Hamptons”) must have been attributable to his “humor.”
Won’t ever watch another episode of CYE. The “Christ Piss” episode sounds like the cheap, calculatingly offensive humor that was present in the two episodes that we were able to stomach.
I’m not offended because it’s provocative; I’m offended because it’s predictable and lame.
October 29th, 2009 | 10:09 pm | #92
Joe Y, thanks for the clarification. I think I see what you mean. But here’s a question for you. When Islamic suicide bombers commit their crimes in the name of Islam, do you still tie them to Islam even though other Muslims say they don’t represent true Islam? I’m tired…that question could be worded more gracefully but I’ll leave it like that.
If the guy is a Catholic, he’s a Catholic. Perhaps he doesn’t represent Catholic doctrine correctly, but he’s still a Catholic.
Interesting questions.
October 29th, 2009 | 10:22 pm | #93
Hi, Jeanie: To take your 2nd comment first, I would qualify my statement to say that he’s a Catholic that has sinned grievously, and although he may think he’s acting in the name of the Catholic Church, he’s not, and citing the relevant scripture to point that out.
The problem with Muslims is that far too few of them do that, and a significant amount feel that suicide bombing is justified, and, most to the point, can cite the relvant scripture in the Koran. The combination of the significant numbers of belivers in suicide bombing combined with their ability to find scriptural support, does demonstrate that Islam is not the same as the other religions at this point. One or the other, scriptural or popular support, is not sufficient. Popular support by itself is heresy, while scripural support alone, without the concommitant activity is essentially irrelevant.
It doesn’t mean that suicide bombing is Islamic, but until there is widespread wholehearted condmenation, Islam has a major problem, and I don’t mean just here on earth. Quite the contrary.
Finally, your last point, that a Catholic is still a Catholic even if he’s a Catholic suicide bomber, resonates with particular bitterness with me as a Jew. All kinds of nominally Jewish rotten people get a great deal of mileage out of claiming to be Jewish because of their ancestry. In this situation their religious identity is a matter for the Almighty, just as it is for the Catholic suicide bomber murdering in the name of Catholicism.
The Almighty has set a certain criteria for Catholicism in this world, and the bomber has not met it, and the next world is not our business.
I’m sure there are errors here, and forgive the spelling (I’m pretty wiped myself) but I hope I have communicated somewhat successfully.
October 29th, 2009 | 10:24 pm | #94
Just to amplify one thing: It is not the sin of suicide bombing that denies the bomber’s Catholicism, it’s the not believing it to be a sin.
October 29th, 2009 | 10:27 pm | #95
[I merely wonder what the reaction would be if David played the same scene with an Obama picture in an Obama-loving household. I somehow doubt that would be shrugged off. admin]
That’s because at the end of the day, your faith is stronger than theirs.
October 29th, 2009 | 10:40 pm | #96
Jack:
“Many Jews in Hollywood are obsessed with Jesus in a twisted way. I think deep down they know that he is their Lord, but are unwilling to accept it for behavior-related reasons.”
Not really. Us Jews know no such thing. That’s not a combatative statement, just a factual one. We know very well who our lord is, as well as you know who yours is. I hope that satisfies your speculations on the subject in a satisfactory manner. If you subscribe to the “all roads to god are the same” theory, we could be talking about the same lord – but it’s all in how you get there in that case.
As for what Hollywood Jews are obsessed with….that’s a bit of an unfair comment simply because Hollywood is a planet all unto itself and every inhabitant, regardless of religion is clinically insane
October 30th, 2009 | 12:25 am | #97
The long-time fans of Curb who have written here have forgotten (I think – I may have skimmed too quickly) the many, many jokes – some of them bordering on very bad taste – Larry David has made about Jews and Judaism. The character of Larry David basically has no use for religion – he doesn’t hate it, he just sees it as a waste of time. There have been countless storylines revolving around Larry David showing absolutely no respect for Jewish tradition (the episode where he’s pretending to be Orthodox..why? I can’t remember..something about a car) or Jewish sacral history – including the Holocaust. Did anyone see the episode dealing with dueling definitions of “survivor?” Oh, my….
October 30th, 2009 | 9:43 am | #98
The Anchoress seems to be hung up on some hypothetical “How would this play if Larry pissed on a picture of Obama?” situation. I’m sure Larry David could pull off all kinds of humor at the expense of Obama personality cultists (not the same thing, mind you, as people who support him for more worthwhile reasons).
But, as with the Jesus thing, it would only be funny if it was, you know, DONE WELL. If a gag is sloppy or badly written or cliched, it’s not going to work. Sorry to be so simple-minded in this, but a comedic scene is funny only if it’s well-crafted. Skillful craftsmanship has nothing to do with political or theological sympathies.
Another thing. Why all the grumbling about an episode that you admittedly haven’t seen? The point of the joke wasn’t “Ha ha Larry pissed on Jesus.” It was, at first, the utter horror with which Larry reacted when he realized what he’d done (as some other commenters have pointed out, a running theme on “Curb” is Larry’s utter haplessness when it comes to religion, a running gag very much at HIS expense). THEN it was about the silly mother and daughter thinking it was some kind of miracle.
Pissing on a picture of Obama probably wouldn’t work because Obama supporters, no matter how in love with the guy they might be, as of yet don’t have a history of seeing kitschy Obama miracles everywhere. Catholics do. Hence the joke.
There are plenty of ways to make fun of Obama cultists though. It just has to be funny.
October 30th, 2009 | 11:07 am | #99
Joe,
“Just to amplify one thing: It is not the sin of suicide bombing that denies the bomber’s Catholicism, it’s the not believing it to be a sin.”
I would say that suicide bombing is a sin–and not believing it to be a sin is the sin of arrogance. Or perhaps the sin of despair, when someone gives up on God’s ability to deal with whatever problem the suicide bombing “solves”.
I agree that Islam has a problem. I don’t know the religion well enough to know if it is a problem of actual theology (suicide bombing really IS okay) or a problem of popular support for misunderstood theology. Another problem could be the lack of moral courage in standing up to the religion and saying, “No matter what the scriptures say, suicide bombing is wrong.”
When someone bombs an abortion clinic, Catholics all over stand up to say that while abortion is wrong, so is the bombing and that the bomber is a sinner. I’d like to see more, and more visible statements like that from Islam.
“All kinds of nominally Jewish rotten people get a great deal of mileage out of claiming to be Jewish because of their ancestry. ”
Yes, I have heard that complaint before. The difference might be that Jews are Jewish because they are born Jewish, and even secular Jews are still Jews. Catholics might be born into the Catholic church and baptized as babies, but Catholics can choose to stop being Catholic. An ex-Catholic says he used to be a Catholic. Is there such a thing as an ex-Jew? Perhaps a Jew who left the faith says he is a Jew who used to be religious but he still says he’s a Jew. Judaism is a nation as well as a religion. Not so with other faiths. (Ah, now you can explain how little I understand about Judaism. I can take it!
“The Almighty has set a certain criteria for Catholicism in this world, and the bomber has not met it, and the next world is not our business.”
I would say that the Almighty has set a certain criteria for people in this world and we try out best to discern the criteria and meet them.
I am enjoying this discussion though it’s hard to put together a coherent response in between doing things here at work.
October 30th, 2009 | 3:44 pm | #100
I appreciate this post. In reading other reactions on the net, I am struck by how people who are defending Larry David’s right to free speech are completely missing the point.
If I pissed on the Star of David on an HBO program, I would be instantly banned from further broadcasting. I would probably be hauled to jail for committing a “hate crime.” This is a fact. Jews insist on public respect for Judaism, and even the most innocuous reference to their religion or to Israel is deemed anti-semetic if it’s true but casts Jewish culture or tradition in a negative light.
You can bet that if anyone insulted Judaism on a public broadcast, the ADL, JDL, B’nai Brith, Hadasah, etc. would link together in full force to not only demand a public apology, pull the show from the air, but see what they could do legally to punish this case of “free speech.”
That Larry David has made fun of Jews and Judaism does not mean it’s acceptable for a gentile to do so in public. Everyone keeps saying, “Lighten up! He makes fun of everyone!” but only a powerful media Jew such as himself is allowed to make fun of Jews. And he would never, ever urinate on a Star of David or an Israeli flag.
Catholics are right to be outraged, and I ask all Christians who are offended by this, and who truly understand the double standard at play here, to cancel their HBO subscription.
October 30th, 2009 | 11:43 pm | #101
[...] Conservative reading: Ellen Karis, Big Hollywood: Larry David’s God-Given American Right to Be a Jerk The Anchoress: Would he piss on an image of Obama? [...]
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact