HBO's hit series "Curb Your Enthusiasm" has pushed the comedic envelope for many years, but what happened in Sunday's episode was so disgraceful it's already received comment from the Catholic League's Bill Donohue.
The set-up is the show's star and producer Larry David is taking some medication that is making him urinate quite forcefully.
It's so powerful that while urinating in his assistant's bathroom, he accidentally splashed some of it on a picture of Jesus Christ hanging on a nearby wall.
This prompted the following response from Donohue (video embedded below the fold h/t Big Hollywood):
At one point in the show, David goes to the bathroom in a Catholic home and splatters urine on a picture of Jesus; he doesn't clean it off. Then a Catholic woman goes to the bathroom, sees the picture and concludes that Jesus is crying. She then summons her equally stupid mother and the two of them fall to their knees in prayer. When David and Jerry Seinfeld (playing himself) are asked if they ever experienced a miracle, David answers, "every erection is a miracle." That's what passes for creativity these days.
Was Larry David always this crude? Would he think it comedic if someone urinated on a picture of his mother? This might be fun to watch, but since HBO only likes to dump on Catholics (it was just a couple of weeks ago that Sarah Silverman insulted Catholics on "Real Time with Bill Maher"), and David is Jewish, we'll never know.
A Big Hollywood reader sent an e-mail message to the website asking an interesting question:
Of course, the hypocrisy is that Mr. David would never exhibit such gross contempt for any other religion, especially Islam. Can you imagine the s**t storm that would follow if David pissed on a painting of the prophet Muhammad? Of course, HBO, the complicit scum that they are, would not have allowed that to air.
No, likely not.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Despicable. Times need to
October 28, 2009 - 00:09 ET by bigtimerDespicable.
Times need to change...soon.
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
Hey, BT!
October 28, 2009 - 00:41 ET by TeamcheeserWhat? I thought times already changed right after the election! I mean, I was told to believe in it...
Times are changing for the Better
October 28, 2009 - 12:00 ET by TheDiplomatAfter centuries of mass murder, lies, slavery, war, etc. in the name of such a belief Americans and the world see Christianity for what it is. Larry is only exposing the fraud that the Christian-Right aka "bible thumpers" have been trying to push on this country.
Treaty of Tripoli Art. 11.
As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; ...
Treaty of Tripoli Art. 11
October 28, 2009 - 13:43 ET by nolotrippen"Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."
Context, TheDiplomat, context. The treaty remains an early act of cowardice (which we're still paying for) and hypocracy.
Tell me what you really think John Adams: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." What religion could he have meant? Mr. Adams back to you, "Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only law book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow man; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God, what a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be."
Adam's Scretary of War, Charles Carroll wrote,"Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure, which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments."
Before Adams, George Washington wrote, "It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible."
William Penn wrote, "Men must be governed by God or they will be ruled by tyrants." Which God, or is that like Adam's "religion"?
You can find out how the Christians and desits and yes, even the non-believers who created our founding documents actually felt if you wouldn't dwell on your Eureka moment of the inspid Treaty of Tripoli. Try this from Jefferson, "On every question of construction, let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
Perhaps you simply lack what Patrick Henry so possessed and hope to find it in the false promise of New Atheism (praise Dawkins, may peace be upon him), "Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
“It is almost impossible to distinguish a politician from a gangster.” (Will Durant, 1931)
You are incorrect sir.
October 28, 2009 - 15:04 ET by WarpTell me what you really think John Adams: "I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!" – he wrote this in a letter to Thomas Jefferson. He calls the cross an engine of grief – must have been a Christian! It doesn’t matter if what he thought of the potential for a country to be ruled by the bible or Christianity; he did not support it himself and would not have supported it – probably, and I’m guessing here; he was a bit more interested in actual freedom rather than living within the confines of a particular religious doctrine.
Charles Carrol: Roman Catholic, and signer of the Declaration of Independence. Notice how he signed it even though it did not support or specify any specific religion? He must have believed in some measure of religious freedom.
George Washington never wrote, "It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible." It is claimed that he delivered these words in his farewell address; “It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible. It is impossible to account for the creation of the universe, without the agency of a Supreme Being. It is impossible to govern the universe without the aid of a Supreme Being.” However, his actual farewell address is a matter of record and his actual words were; “In such a state of things it is in an especial manner our duty as a people, with devout reverence and affectionate gratitude, to acknowledge our many and great obligations to Almighty God and to implore Him to continue and confirm the blessings we experience.” – Yes, Washington believed in god – but not the Christian god. Sorry. Your quote is a fabrication – I know you didn’t fabricate it; you were inspired by someone else’s lies, and I suspect that makes you a good Christian.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/badquotes.htm
William Penn wrote, "Men must be governed by God or they will be ruled by tyrants." This does not establish William Penn as a Christian, he was a Quaker – and no, you don’t get to lump Quakers in with Christianity. Quakers are Christians as much as Muslims are Christians – they both recognize Christ as a prophet as well as various others, but he/they are not the central theme.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Penn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaker
Your Jefferson quote; “On every question of construction, let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed” though I cannot attribute it to Jefferson, seems rather Jeffersonian. It certainly doesn't make him a Christian.
On 10 August 1787, Jefferson wrote (in a letter to Peter Carr); "Question with boldness even the existence of a god."
25 June 1819, Jefferson wrote (in a letter to Ezra Stiles Ely); "You say you are a Calvinist. I am not. I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know."
I don’t consider the Treaty of Tripoli to be a “Eureka” moment, but a perfectly valid insight into the thoughts of the founders – or at least those who had input or involvement with that particular document. As you even quoted Jefferson as saying; “…instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." All actual evidence considered; the founders were probably deists and probably not Christians, but absolutely did not support defining the United States as a "Christian Nation".
Patrick Henry was apparently a Christian, that’s all fine and good; amongst his great achievements is that tried to get religion expressed in the Constitution and failed, he neither wrote nor supported any part of the Constitution which was eventually ratified, he even attempted to prevent the ratification of the Constitution and failed. If I lack what Patrick Henry possessed, does this mean you believe that I lack a one-sided religious fervor? I do; I believe that in order to be free, you must allow others to be free – Patrick Henry may not have believed that.
It is fun to listen to Dawkins sometimes, but he does not speak for me; you jump to conclusions when you assume that I am an atheist – I am not. I find atheists to be pompous and arrogant, and so convinced of their own opinions they are incapable of learning anything new – like Dawkins and apparently…you.
Warped -
October 28, 2009 - 15:28 ET by BO STINKS"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!" Sam Adams
You, sir are a Tool.
And you as well, my friend.
October 29, 2009 - 09:24 ET by WarpI have made no attempt to pervert the plain meaning of words; I have simply shown the words as they exist, and in some instances, included my own interpretations. The whole point to what I have written is in support of religious freedom, and that includes the freedoms of those who do not wish to be ruled or governed by a religious sect. If you do not agree, it can only be because you would like to have your ideas and beliefs forced on others, and that makes you a tool.
Warped? Yes, you most certainly are a sick TOOL. Perhaps
October 28, 2009 - 22:02 ET by pahuberlearning has somehow alluded you... pity.
BTW... Wikipedia as a source? OMG.
pahubered?
October 29, 2009 - 09:30 ET by WarpPerhaps I did not close my eyes when the learning was at hand.BTW...I provided a source which links numerous other sources for your convenience if you wished verification. If you do not wish verification, that is not my issue, or my failing.
Reading comprehension greatly lacking, Warped.
October 29, 2009 - 15:26 ET by BO STINKSYou are a Tool of a Tyrant (BHO). You spout the pop culture 'wisdom' and condescend to pretend you wish a conversation. It is unlikely that you wish any kind of debate in which you actually listen to the other person (look at your responses to someone who was kind enough to engage your silly positing in the above posts). You are a pseudo-intellectual who knows only what he has been told to believe by the pseudo-intelligentia of the socialist universities. When you have something fresh; something that you actually thought of all by your wee self, come back to the grown ups table.
"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!" Sam Adams
Hi BO STINKS...
October 30, 2009 - 14:32 ET by WarpHow am I a tool of BHO? I recognize BHO as a tyrant in the making, but then; I know what a tyrant is while you’re just repeating something you’ve heard somewhere. You’re special because you think you’re right, and you’re willing to use violence to prove it.
How is anything I’ve said even remotely a part of “Pop culture ‘wisdom’?” My words are in support of religious and individual freedom while “pop culture” these days seems to want to be controlled and taken care of.
I am not concerned about engaging you in a debate because as they say; it’s boring to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed man. I would stand to learn very little from you because I’ve already known everything you think you know now; I’ve been there, you’re a typical neo-conservative and you will be until you come to realize that in order to be free, you must be willing to allow others to be free.
I’ve posted many responses, are you referring to the guy…water-something?...who included known-fabricated quotations in his response? Was I just being a big-fat meanie by delivering actual, verifiable quotations of the same people? I thought only liberals invented quotes – but I guess the progressives and the neo-conservatives have a lot more in common than they think. Hey – do you support Obama’s plans for this country now that they have been shown to be nearly identical to George Bush’s? Probably not…you probably think there is a HUGE difference between them when really; Obama has just been doing a crummier job of hiding his socialist agenda.
I attended a socialist grammar school, followed by a socialist high-school, but I dropped out of socialist university prior to joining the Army. I haven’t yet met the pseudo-intelligencia, I guess my talking points must have gotten lost in the mail. I might suggest you were following your talking points; but no conspiracy leaders in their right mind would ever want to bring someone as completely blank as yourself into the fold. I know you’re just parroting whatever angry rant you recently heard that moved you, probably Mark Levin – hence your improper use of “Tyrant” and the fact that you don’t know how to spell intelligencia.
http://www.takimag.com/site/article/the_tyranny_of_mark_levins_liberty/
The writer of the article at the above link is far more conservative and pro-liberty than you or Mark Levin and you might learn something by reading what he had to say about the book I assume you really enjoyed.
Go now, educate yourself until you understand that you do NOT know best for everyone else, and come back once you have actually learned what freedom is. (Hint: Freedom does not mean that the guy who yells the loudest gets to make the rules)
Still nothing new from Warped...
October 31, 2009 - 10:16 ET by BO STINKSThought maybe you had learned something from the fine posters here at NB, but nope. BTW, you are probably the most boring troll we have ever had at NB. Don't think I'll be reading anymore of your diatribes anytime soon.
I hope he is impeached, soon.
Waste your Time
October 28, 2009 - 16:16 ET by TheDiplomatThere is nothing wrong in believing that there is a being or force greater than what we currently know. I am not arguing whether you should believe in God. What I am arguing is that Christianity is a tool used by people in power to control the fools. From the time it was created until this very day.
Damn I should have been a preacher! I could be as rich as Joel Osteen!
Diplomat
October 28, 2009 - 17:52 ET by Thinking.ManSeriously?
So you think Lord Obama is a christian and is using religion to control the country? Maybe Nancy P. is in on this?
I would ask you to backup your infantile reasoning, better yet just get back to your cave.
Stupid Troll
djm159
October 28, 2009 - 21:44 ET by djm159What Mr. David is exposing is his total lack of class and his inappropriate cries for attention. This is one sick narcisstic exhibitionist without limits. What Mr. David is exposing is his total lack of respect for anyone or anything.
Centuries of mass murder in the name of Christianity? You are obviously in the same boat with Mr. David. Now under the new messiah, B. Hussein Obama, Christian bashing is the norm not the exception, can mass murder be far behind. Certainly it followed with the last dictator to murder millions - Adolf Hitler - Mr. David must have missed that lesson in Hebrew school.
Yeah, Nice Try, Kid. Leave The Anti-Catholicism To Us Adults...
October 28, 2009 - 22:23 ET by The7SticksLook, you can say a lot of things based off of the reactions of thin-skinned morons like Jabba the Don-of-Puke and his Catholic League of Douchebags, but you are asking for it when you try to be a whinny liberal and generalize everything bad about Christianity as it's own fault. William Wilberforce, a British Christian, was the first major abolitionist against slavery.
America, whether you like it or not, WAS founded as a Christian nation; well, actually it's a little more complicated than that because it was made up of all kinds of Christians: Puritans, Pilgrims, Quakers, even Jewish people like Judah P. Benjamin. There were also some non-religious people, but it was largely outnumbered by Christians.
If you are going to bash Christianity, do so based off of a code of chivalry: You only attack those who attack you, and you do so because of what they say or do, not because of who they are; Never pick a fight: let the fight come to you; Never attack the recently deceased, be specific about which sect of Christianity you have a bone to pick with, try to be as benign as possible because it can get pretty ugly, and if you have to do some name-calling, you might want to be a little creative.
Silly liberals. You give professional anti-Catholics like us such a bad name. Now I'm not even sure we free-thinking anti-Catholics can even get ourselves disassociated with your Olberfuhers. Way to go, liberal douches.
No truer 248 words have ever been spoken!
October 28, 2009 - 22:40 ET by MightyMouth"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"
We Need to Let Al Qaeda Know That Hollywood is Attacking Them
October 28, 2009 - 12:29 ET by farstar99In fact, Hollywood, led by Larry David and The Diplomat, is the biggest threat to Islam in the world today.
Both of these anti-Muslim individuals need to be "converted" and "purified."
What in the hell is this
October 28, 2009 - 00:27 ET by CoolShadesWhat in the hell is this country turning into?
Atlas Shrugged.
October 28, 2009 - 00:42 ET by TeamcheeserAtlas Shrugged.
geotrekker
October 28, 2009 - 01:02 ET by geotrekkergeotrekker
Hilarious! Real cutting edge humor! You think next time the same situation will be depicted inside a Mosque with that imbicile urinating on a picture of Muhammad? Don't hold your breath. You know why? Larry David is a despicable coward.
A picture of Mohammed?
October 28, 2009 - 04:27 ET by CO2MakerIn a mosque?
Hmmmm. Maybe they're relaxing the rules a bit.
:-)
Yeah, He's Just Using It As An Example.
October 28, 2009 - 12:37 ET by farstar99But actually, there were a couple of very small sects that allowed that. They're no longer around because the mainstream Muslims killed them.
David pisses on Jesus, Donahue pisses on Jesus' good name
October 28, 2009 - 00:56 ET by 007memoDavid pisses on Jesus, Donahue pisses on Jesus' good name.
Both are despicable.
Donahue does not speak for Catholics, he is a CINO, Catholic In Name Only.
Right
October 28, 2009 - 01:23 ET by B-townGiantBecause you are SO knowledgeable about Catholics in general and Donahue in particular, right?
Exactly what (with sources, please) makes Donahue a "CINO?"
Donahue spews hate and vitriol, B-town
October 28, 2009 - 02:07 ET by 007memoDonahue spews hate and vitriol, B-town. His organization is self titled "Catholic" and is not endorsed in any way by the Catholic Church, thank God.
True,
October 28, 2009 - 16:16 ET by B-townGiantThe League is not officially a part of the Archdioces of New York. However:
So, no, it is not an official part of the Church. But then, it can't possibly be. That would jeopardize the Church's tax exempt status.
Even an idiot troll would know that. Guess you don't even rise to the level of "idiot." Obviously, you do not know the first thing about being Catholic. And if you claim to be a Catholic, then you are surely a CINO ChrEaster, and your parents did a lousy job of teaching you what it means to be Catholic.
Judges?
Bluster all you like-the Church does not endorse Catholic League
October 28, 2009 - 18:02 ET by 007memoBluster all you like, B-town,the Church does not endorse the Catholic League.
And they rent office space on the same floor of a building occupied by the Arch Diocese of NY.
The fact that a priest or even some bishops endorse the Catholic League means squat.
And your logic that the Church can't endorse because of tax status, somehow equates to evidence that the Church would endorse them otherwise, is pure asinine.
And the fact that "The League also boasts a Board of Advisors, consisting of prominent lay Catholics like L. Brent Bozell III, Linda Chavez, Dinesh D'Souza, Alan Keyes, Mary Ann Glendon, a group of mostly far right wing Republicans, further diminishes the chance that the League would ever be endorsed by the Catholic Church.
Finally, you accuse me of not being a good Catholic because I disagree with your perverted views of Catholicism? LOL!!! Such hatred and vitriol coming from you and Bill Donahue - neither of you speak for Catholics.
Judge ye not, B-town, lest ye be judged.
I won't be judging you, 007
October 28, 2009 - 20:28 ET by B-townGiantA much higher power will be. And you will answer to Him for your actions. I suspect it will be quite warm in your afterlife, to coin a phrase.
And if you bothered to read my post (sorry...what was I thinking) you would see that I clearly stated the League occupies the same floor of the office building the Archdiocese has offices AND the Archdiocese gave up part of the Archbishop's office suite so as to allow the League to expand (the same Archbishop that has spoken to the League's annual convention, mind you).
Hmmmmm. OK, so I will concede the Church has not formally issued an encyclical saying it supports the League.
Now, will you man up and admit the Church, by its actions, is providing at the very least moral support to the League? Or are you too much of a pantie-waist wuss of a liberal, small "c" catholic to admit you have been beaten?
Side note:
On Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 8:45 am ET, Catholic League President Bill Donohue will appear on Fox News Channel’s “Fox and Friends.”
He will discuss the recent attack on Jesus on HBO's "Curb Your Enthusiasm."
007, you can sit in the dark in your panties and throw Cheerios at the screen.
I concede the Church is not supporting Catholic League, b-town
October 29, 2009 - 23:14 ET by 007memoI concede the Church is not supporting the Catholic League, b-town.
A handful of Catholics out of what, a billion Catholics maybe, endorse them. Individuals in the church are permitted to do as they please without speaking for a billion of their brethren. Get real, b-town.
I judge you and Donahue to be full of hate and vitriol, b-town
October 29, 2009 - 23:40 ET by 007memoI judge you and Donahue to be full of hate and vitriol, b-town.
You ignorantly claim "I won't be judging you, 007"" and then go on to judge me in the next breath. LOL!
Here are examples of your non-judgemental statements:
"But if I'm right in what Christ has designed for us to live as Catholics, when we die you are screwed... your troll mind...Or are you too much of a pantie-waist wuss of a liberal, small "c" catholic... And if you claim to be a Catholic, then you are surely a CINO ChrEaster, and your parents did a lousy job of teaching you what it means to be Catholic."
Such hatred and vitriol coming from you and Bill Donahue. That's not very Catholic of you, B-town.
Judge ye not, B-town, lest ye be judged.
memo
October 30, 2009 - 00:16 ET by RESTLESS 1From what I've read here, you are both acting very catholic.
"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest
How do I react to this one, restless?
October 30, 2009 - 01:01 ET by 007memoHow do I react to this one, restless?
"From what I've read here, you are both acting very catholic."
Just how do Catholics act? Do you have a prejudice against Catholics, restless?
Have at it, restless. I am quite interested in your perspective and will not attack you (um, as long as your not too offensive imho, I guess).
You see, 007...
October 28, 2009 - 21:07 ET by B-townGiant...it is really quite simple. I will explain. And use small words so as not to tax your troll mind.
If you are right in your version of what it means to be a Catholic, when we die, we will just be dust anyway. So it doesn't really matter.
But if I'm right in what Christ has designed for us to live as Catholics, when we die you are screwed.
either way...I WIN!
Good Point!
October 28, 2009 - 21:13 ET by MightyMouthI think his mind will explode trying to comprehend that!
"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"
Anyone who disagrees with B-town will go straight to hell
October 30, 2009 - 00:41 ET by 007memoAnyone who disagrees with B-town will go straight to hell.
"But if I'm right in what Christ has designed for us to live as Catholics, when we die you are screwed."
At least in your judgement, b-town.
Most comical is that you spew so much hate, and yet believe your actually a good Catholic. No LOL's for you, just a sad sigh.
Watch your language troll.
October 28, 2009 - 01:57 ET by JWFThis website is viewable by all ages.
He, He, He, this site posts video of David pissing on Jesus, JWF
October 28, 2009 - 02:13 ET by 007memoHe, He, He, this site posts video of David pissing on Jesus, JWF, and you self-righteously tell me to watch my language. LOL!!!
How many times must I take you to the woodshed, JWF?
You're obsessed, JWF!!! I'm going to have you banned... er, censored! LOL!
007memo/williams411 the 3 bang troll.
October 28, 2009 - 02:23 ET by JWFNotice the 3 exclamation points & the LOL use.
when I have newsbusters and their always hilarious articles about who "real americans" are...LOL!!!...
LOL!!! Please, spare me the
Geraldo is a liberal? really? LOL!!!
I Win!!!
It's the williams411 troll.
The williams411 had a problem with language also.
October 28, 2009 - 02:25 ET by JWFI won't repeat those posts here.
Hey memo!
October 28, 2009 - 21:10 ET by MightyMouthYou were the first one to type "pissing" on this thread! You guys are a colossally ignorant bunch of moonbats... you and your friends.
"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"
You call teamcheeser "a colossally ignorant...moonbat" Mighty?
October 29, 2009 - 23:49 ET by 007memoLike my "friend" teamcheeser, you call the "colossally ignorant...moonbat" who said, "What would the outcry be if someone had p!ssed on a picture of Obama?"
What a pig
October 28, 2009 - 00:58 ET by caiobabeI'm pretty sure Our Lord will let David know where his Soul stands...the day he dies.
Yes sir, that's the spirit
October 28, 2009 - 01:03 ET by winston smithYes sir, that's the spirit Larry, pee on Jesus. David is an outspoken Democrat Party and Obama devotee. I guess he's just doing his part as a faithful Obama supporter to help "change the tone" coming out of politics and set an example of how those progressive Democrats are "uniters not dividers" And this will just do wonders for HBO. I'm sure right now the cable subscriber lines are jammed with people who just can't wait to receive HBO programming after seeing or hearing about a grown man desecrating a picture of Chirst on a comedy show. Do you think he is man enough to apologize? Do you think he possesses the basic intelligence to know that what he did was abhorrently wrong?
MSNBC - The Place For Lunatics
I wonder...
October 28, 2009 - 01:12 ET by TeamcheeserWhat wuld the outcry be if someone had p!ssed on a picture of Obama?
Here is a snip from the orginal script they could not use.
October 28, 2009 - 04:22 ET by DragonsbreathAt one point in the show, David goes to the bathroom in a MSNBC home
and splatters urine on a picture of Obama; he doesn't clean it off.
Then a Acorn worker goes to the bathroom, sees the picture and
concludes that Obama is crying. She then summons her equally stupid mother and the two of them fall to their knees in prayer.
"1/20/2013 The end of a Error"
Wonder no more
October 28, 2009 - 05:51 ET by matthewdeanWell, TC, actually---
Did'nt hear much of anything.
MD
"I may not agree with what your bumper sticker says, but I will defend to the death your right to stick it." (Unknown)
Comedy
October 28, 2009 - 01:20 ET by KC MulvilleSure, I'll be glad to offer everything I hold sacred to be fodder so that some self-adoring jackass can make a lot of money. And I shouldn't criticize them because they're trying to ... make ... me ... laugh? (Hint: it didn't make me laugh. That wasn't because I have no sense of humor. The joke sucked. Instead, it offended. It wasn't funny.)
Or maybe, they're trying to make other people laugh. You know, the kind of people who laugh at pissing on what other people hold sacred. It's really important to me that those people get a good laugh.
Idiots. They display a complete lack of respect, character, and integrity, and they call it comedy. As if that was funny.
Forgiven
October 28, 2009 - 01:54 ET by ShanghaiRayI can't speak for Jesus but I'm sure he would/will forgive them. However, I WON'T!!
I can't profess to be a righteous or religious man, and God only knows that I am a sinner...however, I am not a hypocrite and I can't tolerate anyone who is. Why on earth is Christianity being attacked from all corners of the world? Muslims claims to be downtrodden and persecuted but in reality Christianity is treated way worse than any other religion. I guess it's because Christians don't bomb and cut people's heads off......
Anyway, so is the world in which we all live. Sucks...sucks big time.
"Race doesn't matter..liberals are only one color - YELLOW"
You are so right!
October 28, 2009 - 04:38 ET by ohiochiliI used to snicker at Pat Robertson when he talked about persecution of Christians years ago. I was a liberal then, or thought I was. I still look at most tv preachers out of the corner of my eye, but I am not including most Christians I come in contact with the media mega preachers. In any event, I am a self-proclaimed heathen because I am an unbeliever. I have seen the goodness and kind works of Christians of many denominations that aren't splashed across the media. I observe many Christians doing their level best to live what they believe each and every day. I also see this kind of crap leveled at Christians almost daily whether it be broadcast or among co-workers. This is not humor. This is pandering. What happened to respect and tolerance? The left spouts political correctness, but they laugh at hideous attempts at 'humor' like this? I am going to quote Ann Landers here...'Time wounds all heels and you'll get yours, buster!'
WJWD,In Central Maine An Ember
October 28, 2009 - 05:58 ET by Nortoglows. There is a church with people living in it. This is what how Christians should be caring for their brothers. The pastor does not think of himself as a hero, but he sure stands out in a crowd.
trinityevangelicalfree.com
Really Clever - - - And Brave
October 28, 2009 - 02:06 ET by DoktorFrankenI wonder if he'd be as brave, comedic-wise, in doing it on a Koran or a picture of Mohammad?
JMHO, you understand.
If Saul Alinsky owned a news channel it would be MSNBC. ---- Me
Doktor - precisely what I was thinking when I read this.
October 28, 2009 - 15:43 ET by BO STINKSThe cowards. They insult the faith that will not cut off their heads or bomb their facilities (perhaps the mooslims will get fed up with Hollyweird's immmorality and start bombing?)
There stands Larry - desecrating the pic. of Jesus the Christ while an army of heathens stand behind him; their pitchforks and torches at the ready. Mentally ill, degenerate 'people' serving the father of lies.
"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!" Sam Adams
It was Foretold
October 28, 2009 - 02:59 ET by wolfemanic"Look at what they do to the tree of life when its fresh and green,
think of what they will do when its old, gray and brittle." ~ Jesus Christ
Don't find the humor in
October 28, 2009 - 03:11 ET by Andrew H.Don't find the humor in this--in fact, I never thought he was funny at all or even close to interesting.
Just don't see it. Nope. Nothing.
Liberalism is a convenient lie.
Yep Doc..You got that right....
October 28, 2009 - 03:22 ET by Army BratOne may urinate on a picture of Jesus and call it entertainment, place an ancient Crucifix in a jar of piss and call it art.
How many die? How many riots does it spawn? Zero. That is because Christianity is a true religion of peace while islam only pretends to be one, and very poorly at that.
It takes no guts, no testicular fortitude to attack the Christian. One might however end up with ones head in ones hands for insulting islam.
Come on Larry, be a true pioneer...insult islam in the same fashion. You won't because you're a coward and a bully. You won't take on a "religion" whose "over zealous" members might cut your empty head off.
And there are, despite what you may be told by muslims, depictions of mohammed, (Piss Be Upon Him) in islam. For some reason, despite the prohibition of such, they are overlooked and allowed. That was the main excuse for killing over the cartoons. Selective outrage?
islam is a lie and Truth is killing it.
THE KORAN, NOW IN TWO-PLY!
October 28, 2009 - 05:07 ET by George S PattonTHE KORAN, NOW IN TWO-PLY! It's about time some of these morons were worked over with a alunimum ball bat.
I pray
October 28, 2009 - 05:47 ET by MOONSTRUCKthat the second wave of sleeping giants are awakened.
Fellow Christians, it is time to stand up!
Enough is enough.
Holeinthehull Well said
October 28, 2009 - 07:51 ET by holeinthehullHoleinthehull
Well said
Yes, well said.
October 28, 2009 - 08:10 ET by Red JeepIt is always Christianity getting trashed. It is always Christian symbols that some people are so offended by. A manger in the town square is just terrible to many. I guess it is because as Army Brat writes, “…Christianity is a true religion of peace while islam only pretends to be one…”
One never sees Christians moving to a foreign country with a primary religion different from Christianity and demand concessions of that country’s religion regarding religious symbols and holy day celebrations. It is always the Christians that are the problem.
More truth about the barbarity of Islam is needed in this country.
Always Christianity getting trashed?
October 28, 2009 - 08:34 ET by WarpYou know why we don't bother making fun of Islam in the picture-shows? Because a portion of the Muslims will start bombing and killing people and it ceases to be funny really fast. It's not because the media has any more respect for Islam or Muslims than any other religion; I figure the media are just simple cowards, going after the easy chuckle.
On the whole, I don't expect there to be a disproportionately high percentage of potentially violent Muslims compared to potentially violent Christians – but we have already learned that enough Muslims can be inspired to violence when they are teased that teasing them is a dangerous prospect. Are you possibly of the mindset that Christians should become as thin-skinned and easily inspired to violence as the followers of Islam?
I’m in my 30’s, and I can remember a time when it was common to hear about the conflicts between the Catholics and Protestants; they had been killing each other ruthlessly for centuries, and though it has calmed down for the past decade or so, that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen or that there was any elevated reasoning behind it.
I have an important question for you Red Jeep, you said; “One never sees Christians moving to a foreign country with a primary religion different from Christianity and demand concessions of that country’s religion regarding religious symbols and holy day celebrations.” – If Christianity did not originate in the United States of America, then the Christians did move to a foreign country with a primary religion different from Christianity and demand concessions – they’re doing it right now.
No one expects the Spanish Inquisition (one never sees it either).
Seriously, do people still
October 28, 2009 - 06:23 ET by ThisnThatSeriously, do people still watch HBO? And pay for it to boot? What a looney way to spend your money.
__________
"mmm, mmm, mm. Barrack-Hussain-Øbama↓." - The liberals coolaid drinking song
Is this what they've sunk to? And people pay money for it?
October 28, 2009 - 06:33 ET by JohnMcGrewI haven't watched HBO in over 20 years (I recall they primarily used to show near first-run movies) and am not the least bit familiar with the show "Curb your enthusiasm".
But what I am told, is that this is supposed to be cutting edge, first rate comedy that people are willing to pay money for as opposed to the free content available on the broadcast networks.
And this is what people are getting for their money: Crude and offensive bathroom humor?
Sorry people. The joke isn't on Jesus, or Catholics. They've endured worse. It's on the brainless zombies that HBO and the pay-TV business have fooled into parting with money to pay for tasteless nonsense like this.
Here's what I think about HBO ...
October 28, 2009 - 06:38 ET by Crash... if a tree falls on a bear crapping in the woods, does anyone hear it? Obviously the bear didn't.
It would have been funnier if he urinated on Bill Donahue. Larry David should try squirting on a picture of the pedophile Mohamed. That's right the left are cowards and won't allow PICTURES of the pedophile Mohamed.
Just hate for Catholics
October 28, 2009 - 06:47 ET by Blogger Guy00001Nothing that happens in the movies or on TV is accidental. It's all carefully conceived, planned and scripted. This was a deliberate action for the express purpose of mocking Jesus and Christians.
I don't have HBO and never will.
This is why I say
October 28, 2009 - 06:52 ET by ChupacabraEvery single person out there who continues to give their money to HBO or Starz is financing this despicable behavior. HBO doesn't care if you're outraged. They don't care if you recognize the hypocricy in the fact that they would never allow that same skit to be carried out with a picture of Muhammed. They don't care if the Catholic Church lodges complaints. The one and only thing they do care about is if no one is paying to watch their ignorant channel. So talk with your dollars, people. Cancel HBO and Starz.
I agree. We dropped HBO
October 28, 2009 - 07:44 ET by celatorI agree. We dropped HBO 20 years ago. Trash.
No citizen's right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, or property is safe as long as Obama is President of the United States.
We did too
October 28, 2009 - 09:45 ET by doug1950Around 81 or 82 we decided after only a year or so of having it, that HBO was nothing but trash and dropped them from our service and frankly have not missed it one bit. It is simply amazing how much work you can get done if you are not sitting in front of the idiot box wasting time watching garbage that passes for entertainment. Likewise, we have only been to two movies at a walk in theater in the past 20 or so years for the same reasons. I refuse to finance Hollywood's agenda and make movie personalities rich (notice I did not say Stars).
Sorry but I think it is
October 28, 2009 - 07:10 ET by troglodytSorry but I think it is funny.
And for the reaction of that Big Hollywood reader: Show me a muslim who has a picture of Mohammed hanging above the toilet. Even show me a muslim who has a picture of Mohammed hanging somewhere in his house.
I don't know about any Muslims
October 28, 2009 - 14:56 ET by FranksamI do know that a friend of mine has a picture of Osama (not the President, of course, but the other one) posted on the inside of his toilet lid. I've tried to be careful, but I'm old enough to have some control problems.
And the winner is...
October 28, 2009 - 07:22 ET by Red JeepWhich is worse or more hateful? 1. Larry David urinating on a picture of Jesus that is supposed to be comedy? 2. Left wing radio person Mike Malloy saying that VP Dick Cheney eats Muslim and Jewish babies to maintain his healthy glow? 3. Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) for calling an adviser to the Fed Chairman, a K Street whore? Or 4. Anything Glenn Beck says?
Ding, ding, ding. Time is up. The answer, of course, is #4, Glenn Beck! Ex-Fox News contributor Jane Hall summed it up well saying Beck "…should be called out as somebody whose language is way over the top and scary."
Red Jeep, they become odder
October 28, 2009 - 07:38 ET by celatorRed Jeep, they become odder and more peculiar every day, don't they? You just have sit back and wonder what in the blue blazes is wrong with these people.
Everything people respect, love, support and honor is garbage to them. All that is vile, obnoxious and anti-freedom is worshiped by them.
No citizen's right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, or property is safe as long as Obama is President of the United States.
Sad and lonely people
October 28, 2009 - 07:48 ET by holeinthehullHoleinthehull
Setting up that scene with a picture of Christ in a toilet is one thing (disrespectful and disgusting), insinuating the splashing of urine on the picture is another (just in case you didn't get the offence of the picture in the toilet) which just shows this country that so called comedy writers at HBO (Hateful, Bigoted and Offensive) have nothing left in their comedic imagination to write about other than offending Christians as a joke to be laughed about and taunting the general public.
Larry David and his ilk are a pathetic bunch. I can see them now working the only idea they could come up with, a "show" around one infantile, childish sophomoric, scene (urinating on a religious picture).
Lives that have no real meaning in this world other than to throw bombs at people and institutions must be a sad and lonely existence.
"Setting up that scene with
October 28, 2009 - 07:56 ET by troglodyt"Setting up that scene with a picture of Christ in a toilet is one thing (disrespectful and disgusting)"
That is what makes it funny. Use a fairly common thing in a fairly common household and put it in a very uncommon place. Then take the worst case scenario which can happen. That is an often used concept in comedy.
How about this scenario
October 28, 2009 - 09:13 ET by holeinthehullHoleinthehull
A picture of Obama hanging on a wall in a toilet and Larry David's character splashing urine on Obama's picture(which I would still find that in poor taste regardless of me being a conservative) and in another scene some dolt sneezes phlegm all over the picture) Would that upset the Liberals and cause them to have seizures.
My point is TV in general is truly a desolate wasteland of writers with a over worked and over used bag of punchlines . I always read the comics first hoping to laugh the first thing in the morning. I am always on the lookout for a laugh or a great joke, but I can assure you that I am not looking to the TV for a laugh. Some one sent me the YouTube video of SNL making fun of Joe Wilson and I thought that it was absolutely hilarious. The SNL takeoff of Obama admitting he has not accomplished "nothing"during his first 9 months. Both of these scenes in my humble opinion were hilarious regardless if they are true or not.
Holeinthehull.com
Comedy theory
October 28, 2009 - 09:39 ET by KC MulvilleBut it isn't funny. That's the most important "concept" in comedy.
At best, you can argue that it's funny when some believers called something a miracle when it was really an explainable accident. But it's only funny if it happens in real life. This was a fictional creation. He's mocking people for being stupid, but he created the stupidity of the situation in the first place. He staged it. He invented a fictional situation, and then mocked others for behaving stupidly, even though he staged the stupidity himself.
Who exactly are you talking
October 28, 2009 - 09:51 ET by troglodytWho exactly are you talking about, when speaking of "He"? The shows character or the writer of the show?
The writer
October 28, 2009 - 17:56 ET by KC MulvilleCharacters are fictitious ... they really can't stage anything ... being non-existent, you see ...
It does happen in real life.
October 28, 2009 - 09:55 ET by WarpLarry only created THIS instance. If he'd made fun of the loon that found jesus on toast, you'd be saying it ISN'T funny BECAUSE it happened in real life.
You'd be surprised at what I'd be saying ...
October 28, 2009 - 18:04 ET by KC MulvilleI see. Because I found this "comedy concept" offensive, I must be a raging hypocrite, right?
Back up.
Christians...
October 28, 2009 - 08:01 ET by WarpNowhere is it written that you have any right to not be offended. Look at how many of the commenter’s seem to think this should inspire a call to action – what action would you like to see? I seem to remember hearing that Christians credit the Jews with the persecution and killing of Jesus – maybe I am mistaken, but…don’t you also celebrate that persecution and killing? I saw small parts of that Passion of the Christ movie – it sure looks like you’re celebrating something a whole lot worse than splattering a wee-wee on a picture of someone. As for the over-the-top representation of the Catholics going nuts with happiness when they interpret the pee-pee as a Miracle; such things happen frequently enough that I’ve seen them a few times in my life, and it’s always funny (jesus on toast, jesus in photos of a fire, jesus in photos of…).
If you people have so little faith that your belief system is thrown into a tizzy by the jokes of a below-average comedian on a low-rated cable pay-channel; you might as well admit that you don’t believe any of those fairytales right now – isn’t Jesus supposed to give you people peace rather than something to fight about?
While I agree we do not
October 28, 2009 - 08:37 ET by misterbee241While I agree we do not have a right NOT to be offended, I'd just like some fair play. Let David whizz on a picture of Muhammad. But he wont because Christians are fair game and Hollywood liberals are cowards first and foremost. I dont care what David and his ilk do. He'll have to answer for it to someone higher than I am. See my post on judgement.
"I dont need to read a newspaper to know the world's been shaved by a drunken barber."
Walter Brennan, The Colonel, Meet John Doe, 1941
Just my opinions...
October 28, 2009 - 09:25 ET by WarpI’d like to see a cartoon which depicts a pig (Muslims think pigs are dirty) dressed like Uncle Sam (an American, capitalist pig) skull-f*cking Mohammed in one ear and out the other. I don't support violence or the suggestion of it, but I really don't care if someone feels offended for any reason, ever.
I’m not sure your post on Judgment would mean anything to me – there is probably no god and I am fine with that. There will be no ultimate judgment for anyone, and any insistence that a day of judgment by someone “higher than I am” shows only two things; 1) you regard yourself as being “high” to some degree – isn’t that pride? 2) You relish the idea of violence (you call it judgment) perpetrated on those who do not share your ideas - wrath?
Let’s not pretend to be of any high-ideals, the “my imaginary friend could beat up your imaginary friend” argument is getting pretty worn.
That is not about fair
October 28, 2009 - 09:33 ET by troglodytThis is not about fair play. If you produce a TV show in America, your main audience are americans who, whether or not religious themselves, are familiar with christian symbols, teachings and faith. There isn't a common familiarity with islam and its teachings. So using islamic connotations and hints wouldn't be understood by the majority of the audience. I can imagine some writers backing off from such topics considering the reactions of muslims in the past, but I don't see that as the main reason.
Actually, David will feel free to whizz on Jesus because...
October 28, 2009 - 09:47 ET by JohnMcGrew...he knows that Christians do not put on bomb-belts and seek out brainless Hollywood scriptwriters and producers.
He knows better than to try this is Muhammad. It's not because he doesn't think it would be funny. It's because he's a coward.
Let's all have a good laugh
October 28, 2009 - 09:54 ET by Tom Paine"If you people have so little faith that your belief system is thrown into a tizzy by the jokes of a below-average comedian on a low-rated cable pay-channel; you might as well admit that you don’t believe any of those fairytales right now – isn’t Jesus supposed to give you people peace rather than something to fight about?"
You have a good point here. Now, substitute the name "Mohamed" for "Jesus" and ask the same question of Muslims. If Christians are expected to tolerate this kind of "Comedy", then the volume should be turned to the same level for followers of other faiths. Oh, I forgot. Muslims rioted and burned down a town because a magazine published a cartoon of Mohamed. What message are we receiving from the "religion of peace". It sounds like "if you accuse us of being intolerant we will respond with an act of intolerance."
Then start...
October 28, 2009 - 10:03 ET by Warpburning down villages every time someone makes fun of a Christian. Bring the grand inquision back. Use the violence supposedly so abhorrent to you to force people to "respect" you and to do as you say so that you can continue to ridicule and denigrate all those who don’t subscribe to your brand of “faith” – if you really had faith, you wouldn’t need to fight back, because you would know that you were right and you would feel only pity and love for those who hadn’t yet learned the truth. Instead, you’re responding with anger because you don’t really have any faith.
You describe the Muslim
October 28, 2009 - 10:18 ET by Tom PaineYou describe the Muslim reaction perfectly. You should be telling this to them instead of Christians. Christians may complain with words, but we don't riot and kill people as a reaction and our reward is more ridicule. If you won't say it about a Muslim you shouldn't say it about a Christian.
Christians don't riot and kill...lately...
October 28, 2009 - 10:41 ET by WarpBut make no mistake, Christians have done more than their fair share of killing.
I don't imagine that most Muslims even want to be Muslim - in many parts of the world, they would be killed for turning away from Islam for any reason. I'd bet most of them are just going along to get along; but that doesn't negate the violence perpetrated in the name of Islam. Muslims are weak-minded, weak-willed followers of a rediculous fairy-tale, and though I may have respect for an individual; I have no respect for the religion in general because it is completely worthless and contributes absolutely nothing to society. Do not rejoice too quickly; I feel the same about Christianity.
"As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."
- Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli.
Signed 04 November, 1796 by George Washington.
I have no respect for the
October 28, 2009 - 11:30 ET by Dan The Man 2I have no respect for the religion in general because it is completely worthless and contributes absolutely nothing to society.
Then you have no perspective on what has been contributed. You need to read up on the contributions from Christians to our society.
You mean, like....
October 28, 2009 - 12:22 ET by Warpthe Dark Ages?
"The Question" & other very imaginative techniques for torture?
The flying buttress? - well, there's one, but I highly doubt it wouldn't have been otherwise developed.
Christianity and other religions attempt to take credit for concepts which existed prior to Christianity and will continue to exist after Christianity is long gone - it's called false pride and I believe it violates at least one of your rules.
Christians
October 28, 2009 - 14:36 ET by jacktheripperdidn't bring on the "Dark Ages" you dope...climate change did
http://www.scienceda...
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can
bribe the people with their own money." – Alexis de Tocqueville
I don't mean to bruise your ego, but...
October 28, 2009 - 12:41 ET by Karma...what led you to believe that anyone would "rejoice" in your thoughts?
"We are holding our own."
-Ernest Michael McSorley
Warp, 8 years later
October 28, 2009 - 13:08 ET by upcountrywaterThomas jefferson barbary coast pirates
This is the first time in history that the United States flag was raised in victory on foreign soil.
A great read: "What's So Great About Christanity"
"The atheists have a point: there are not two truths or multiple
truths; there is one truth" (p. xiv). According to him, the atheists
have had it too easy; their arguments have gone unanswered. Now he will
take up the task of answering them, covering the relation of
Christianity to such topics as Western civilization, science,
philosophy, and morality, and exposing throughout the errors of atheism.
Heres one...
In a stunning confirmation of the book of Genesis, modern scientists
have discovered that the universe was created in a primordial explosion
of energy and light. Not only did the universe have a beginning in space and time, but the origin of the universe was also a beginning for
space and time. Space and time did not exist prior to the universe. If
you accept that everything that has a beginning has a cause, then the
material universe had a nonmaterial or spiritual cause. This spiritual
cause brought the universe into existence using none of the laws of
physics. The creation of the universe was, in the quite literal meaning
of the term, a miracle. Its creator is known to be a spiritual, eternal
being of creativity and power beyond all conceivable limits. Mind, not
matter, came at the beginning. With the help of science and logic, all
this can be rationally demonstrated (p. 116).
if you really had faith,
October 28, 2009 - 10:36 ET by Dan The Man 2if you really had faith, you wouldn’t need to fight back
Apparently your faith says we dont need to fight for what we believe in and you are perfectly willing to be slaughtered? Where do you get the notion we should not fight for the truth? One of the problems is that many do not fight the lies "I can see Russia from my house" and the lies if repeated often enough be come facts. The Rush "factual" quotes for instance are lies that have beome "facts".
Ask yourself...
October 28, 2009 - 12:33 ET by WarpWhat is it you're "fighting" ... and try to be specific.You say we should fight "for the truth?" - who decides what constitutes "truth?" - what do you do about other people, who believe other things are the "truth?"
I am perfectly aware that the MSM makes up quotes and polls and otherwise fabricates all kinds of information because they feel the end justifies the means. How is that any different from the religious insisting that their imaginary friend represents the "truth?"
You have no need to fight for your imagination - no one can ever take it from you; I could understand fighting for freedom, but I do not support the initiation of force without provocation.
Here's help in your fight for truth, dan the man.
October 28, 2009 - 19:34 ET by 007memoHere's help in your fight for truth, dan the man.
What Palin actually said as proof of her bonafides as a foreign policy expert was this: "They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." Close enough for hand grenades and horseshoes to: "I can see Russia from my house".
And the idiots readily believed Limbaugh's false quotes because of a history of racist remarks in his resume - no excuse for that, but the fact remains that Limbaugh is a race-baiting racist.
→ No he's not
October 28, 2009 - 19:37 ET by Cool ArrowPlease tell me you understand.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Warp
October 28, 2009 - 10:42 ET by ahusserChristian barbarities are mostly in the past. Moslem barbarities continue. It is ironic though that a 1000 years ago the most enlightened and tolerant religion was Islam (aside from the conversions by the sword 400 hundred years earlier). The inquisition was a terrible thing and so was the persecution of catholics and others in England beginning with Henry VIII and continuing into the 20th century. All that aside I am a non-believer and don't understand sectarian violence by any side but I would never mock or profane anyone's religion by word or deed. The humor in this skit as explained would be even offensive to me, a non-believer. The humor isn't there so it must be a political statement. Nothing is done for no reason. The point was to offend, push the envelope, see what they could get away with with an obvious bias.
"Somehow, I told you so, just doesn't quite say it." Will Smith in 'I, Robot.'
a few things...
October 28, 2009 - 12:45 ET by WarpLabeling barbarities as Christian and Moslem is primarily for the sake of convenience, people are panicky, stupid animals and we like to fight with each other for any excuse we can come up with, and we'll label the actions of others in whatever way we find easiest or most beneficial to compartmentalize them.
If you are really a non-believer; you do not find the skit offensive. I think Larry David is a moron and I do not find his brand of humor particularly impressive. Even if he were cracking jokes at the expense of white, 33-year old males with porn-star moustaches, I wouldn’t care as long as he is not preaching the initiation of force against others.
"If you are really "
October 28, 2009 - 14:42 ET by jacktheripper"If you are really a non-believer; you do not find the skit offensive."
have you no decency,shame , RESPECT? shall LD come over to your house and piss on Grandma's picture?
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can
bribe the people with their own money." – Alexis de Tocqueville
LD didn't piss on a picture of anyone's relative.
October 29, 2009 - 09:04 ET by WarpHe splattered toilet water on a picture of a fictional character – not even a historically accurate picture if we were to assume the person really existed (his hair would have been short and his skin; very brown). If LD’s skit included him splattering toilet water on a picture of my Grandmother followed by two true-believers kneeling before it; both she and I would have found it absolutely hilarious. You take yourself and the things you want everyone to think you believe far too seriously – you’re as godless as the rest of us, but you seem to think you’re really good at faking it.
LD didn't piss on a picture of anyone's relative.
October 29, 2009 - 09:05 ET by WarpHe splattered toilet water on a picture of a fictional character – not even a historically accurate picture if we were to assume the person really existed (his hair would have been short and his skin; very brown). If LD’s skit included him splattering toilet water on a picture of my Grandmother followed by two true-believers kneeling before it; both she and I would have found it absolutely hilarious. You take yourself and the things you want everyone to think you believe far too seriously – you’re as godless as the rest of us, but you seem to think you’re really good at faking it.
Ok Warp
October 28, 2009 - 22:14 ET by ahusserI will amend it to barbarities done in the name of religion. But some did the barbarities out of their closely held beliefs. We now do barbarities in the name of political ideologies, religion not as much. That being said I am not a squeamish person and know that human nature is what it is both good and bad sometimes to extremes. I feel very lucky to live in this country in this era and be spared the fear that many must feel in not so enlightened countries where what you believe can cost you and your loved ones your lives. Also I would be offended even as a non-believer because the joke no matter what the reason was in poor taste and, given the generally accepted mores, offensive and the author of said joke should know that it would offend from the git go. Knowing that then offensiveness was the point.
"Somehow, I told you so, just doesn't quite say it." Will Smith in 'I, Robot.'
I interpreted LD's skit as...
October 29, 2009 - 08:58 ET by Warpkind of an expression of the common Jewish guilt about the crucifixion of jesus. Beyond all of this silly bickering, the purpose of any art form is to evoke an emotional response – I’m now feeling like this skit was probably one of LD’s most successful and one for which he will be remembered. I don’t recall the same outrage when Mel Brooks made fun of Christianity – are you Christians getting more sensitive as time goes on? Cripes people, get over it – you and your little religion are just not that important….and LD didn’t piss on a picture of mohammed because the Jews didn’t crucify that particular prophet…did they?
~Do you think Jesus was a prophet?
October 29, 2009 - 09:19 ET by choselife3xIn order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
I don't think its an attack on Christianity
October 28, 2009 - 08:16 ET by nwahsI think its a joke about the mass hysteria that is common around Christian imagery. When I was kid, some woman claimed to have seen Jesus in a stop sign. By the end of the week, there was 2000 people gathering around the stop sign and placing flowers at its base. Of course news cameras were all over, and it was quite the spectacle.Imagine hundreds of people kneeling in front of a stop sign and various types of trances. The stop sign actually spoke to a few ( or so they said).
A priest had to remove the stop sign as its worshipers were becoming a traffic hazard. I'm sure most here have a similar story, whether or not its a stop sign, a tree, a piece of toast - whatever.
I think the joke is about that hysteria - not Christianity.
Misguided Reasoning
October 28, 2009 - 09:27 ET by BrutariusNWAHS, if the joke were really meant to be around the hysteria of people seeing religious images in toast or stop signs, then why didn't Mr. Creativity figure out a less offensive (and less sophomoric) method of getting "tears" onto the picture of Jesus? He could just as easily have had some water splash from a bathroom sink onto the portrait.
No, this is an intentional slap in the face of Christians -- even those who don't necessarily agree with the notion of images of Christ.
So your reasoning
October 28, 2009 - 09:56 ET by nwahsSo your reasoning is that Larry David is anti-Christian?
Remember the Seinfeld episode where Jerry was caught making out in the Schindler's List movie? Think he's a holocaust denier as well?
Its fine you don't like the joke, but its quite a stretch to believe its anti-Christian sentiment. I don't believe that for a second. I think its anti-Christian hysteria. We had a statue of Jesus that used to cry until the Church fixed air conditioning ductwork. People in my church still swear fixing it made Jesus happy so he quit crying.
You think splashing water is more funny the David's faux pas, but I disagree. David's faux pas made it less likely he'd explain it - it made it more of an awkward situation.
The real outrage is the distorted nature of the title on this blog. More bait and switch from Newsbusters.
Seriously?
October 28, 2009 - 08:16 ET by Red Devil DawgPeople are so easily offended by nothing. I watched the episode and thought it was hilarious. I took the whole pissing on the Jesus picture this way...he wasn't degrading Jesus, he was making fun of the fruitcakes who say they have a burn mark on a grilled cheese sandwich that looks like Jesus or a potato chip in the shape of Jesus. Is it wrong to make fun of these types of people? NO!
At the same time, I do agree with people who are saying that Larry David would never have pissed on a picture of Muhammed. It truly does piss me off that Christianity is ridiculed on many shows but Islam is off limits. It is a ridiculous double standard.
Liberals are such a class act.
October 28, 2009 - 08:34 ET by misterbee2411st Corinthians 5:12, 13:
12 For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? 13 But those who are outside God judges. Therefore “put away from yourselves the evil person.”[a]
"I dont need to read a newspaper to know the world's been shaved by a drunken barber."
Walter Brennan, The Colonel, Meet John Doe, 1941
cancel
October 28, 2009 - 09:40 ET by charlietexasno wonder they wanted to cancel this show.......hes just not funny any more.....fool
david
October 28, 2009 - 09:43 ET by charlietexaswe signed up for HBO earlier because of the hype of the Seinfeld gang coming on the show. After that "bomb" we considered cancelling, but left it on because Jerry and the gang were supposed to be on later shows. Now we see this. We cancelled HBO for good.
But not islam!
October 28, 2009 - 09:56 ET by slickwillie2001In our PC-America, not only can't you insult islam, you can't tell the truth about it:
Father of 9/11 Victim Fights to Have 'Murdered by muslim Terrorists' Inscribed on Son's Memorial: http://www.foxnews.com
Don't be surprised by this...
October 28, 2009 - 10:12 ET by stage9...it's only the beginning. Again...if God is dead (to a society) something/someone will have to take His place (as arbitor of moral absolutes)...either an autocratic dictator or a perverse impetus.
Jesus warned these days would come. None of this surprises the Christian who knows his Bible:
Romans 1:28-32 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
Sound familiar?
If the moral condition of America collapses, everything else collapses with it.
"If God is dead, somebody is going to have to take his place. It will
be megalomania or erotomania, the drive for power or the drive for
pleasure, the clenched fist or the phallus, Hitler or Hugh Hefner."
— Malcolm Muggeridge
A couple of things. First
October 28, 2009 - 10:12 ET by Dan The Man 2A couple of things. First its is just a picture and not in a house of worship, and it was "supposedly" accidental. Second God said we should not make graven images of Him and we should not worship idols. This to me means we should not worry about images but the real deal God/Jesus/Holy Spirit. The splashing was to set up the worshiping of a picture of Jesus and this si clearly a "graven image" or idol condition in the worship of God.
This of course is from my Southern Baptist perspective and other offshoots think differently. But, its HBO and there are people writing, producing and acting in taht show that have no reverence for God so why should we care. We should ask those "Christians" around us why they continue to subject themselves with such pap.
We should guard the gates of our lives against such; the eye gate, ear gate and mouth gate. When we successfully guard against these attacks then we can be more effective for Christ. So perhaps Donahue should be asking his "flocks" why they are watching this crap or admonish them against it.
In essence I guess the guarding and propping up of Christianity is what conservatives should do. We should guard and prop up our own.
...so symbolically urinating on an image
October 28, 2009 - 10:16 ET by stage9...of Jesus Christ (regardless of whether it's what He truly looked like or not, or whether it can be considered a graven image or not) is Ok, so long as it's not in church? Just trying to clarify...
"If God is dead, somebody is going to have to take his place. It will
be megalomania or erotomania, the drive for power or the drive for
pleasure, the clenched fist or the phallus, Hitler or Hugh Hefner."
— Malcolm Muggeridge
ROFLMAO The question is
October 28, 2009 - 10:58 ET by Dan The Man 2ROFLMAO
The question is why are you watching such trash anyways, how does it glorify God. Does the premise in teh show glorify Him? Does it matter whether some persons idea of what God looked like on a mass produced picture has any bearing when an accidental spray of urine gets on it; no and it matters not where it is. God is not a picture.
The part that concerns me is what the mother and such did; they worshipped a picture (hence graven image/idol) rather than understand that the image and supposed "miracles" are inconsequential.
Furthermore, it is interesting what one of the characters said "every errection is a miracle" and pretty much hit it on the head. Basically he was saying that miracles happen continously right in front of us and we dont notice them because we are too wrapped up in the world around us and not focused on the other worldly concerns God told us to be concerned with.
Though I disagreed with another post of yours...
October 28, 2009 - 12:49 ET by WarpThis one seems to be rather insightful.
Notice anyone, Dan the Man finds fault with Catholic religion?
October 30, 2009 - 00:16 ET by 007memoROFLMAO, notice anyone, Dan the Man finds fault with the Catholic religion?
I wonder if the Catholics here recognize the less than subtle critique of their religion: "The part that concerns me is what the mother and such did; they worshipped a picture (hence graven image/idol)."
We could have a holy war that starts right here on this page!
It wouldn't be the first one
October 30, 2009 - 00:20 ET by RESTLESS 1And it probably won't be the last.
"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest
.007 memo, if you do some research, you will find that
October 30, 2009 - 00:47 ET by upcountrywaterChristanity is a RELATIONSHIP, a one on one with the ALLMIGHTY, Not a semimighty but the Allmighty.
Religion is a set of rules and usually has stuff that must be bowed down to.
Crosses and pictures don't do it for me,they are just things and stuff.
As a Christian the only thing that bugs me is the distruction of the Bible.
I guess that is some thing I do not need to worry about
. A fun big fact is that there are 6 Billion bibles.....
The Bible Society of the United Kingdom calculates that the number of
Bibles printed between 1816 and 1975 was 2,458,000,000. By 1992 the
estimated number rose to nearly six billion. Furthermore, worldwide
sales of the Bible number more than a staggering 100 million each year,
far outpacing any other book in history. Without a doubt, the Bible is
the best selling book of all time.
Two thumbs off...
oh wait that's the god Our troops keep you safe from.
get a passport, travel outside the land of FREEDOM.
State controlled health care ! music video.
Bible versus religion, upcountry?
October 30, 2009 - 01:42 ET by 007memoBible versus religion, upcountry?
"As a Christian the only thing that bugs me is the distruction of the Bible." Who's destructing the Bible? You point out the widely known fact that it's the greatest selling book in history, so what's the worry?
"Religion is a set of rules and usually has stuff that must be bowed down to." And the Bible doesn't? And aren't quite a few of those rules set out in the Bible contradicted within that same Bible?
I'm not looking for an argument, just a simple clarification.
And please explain this incongruous comment: "Two thumbs off... oh wait that's the god Our troops keep you safe from." And who is this "Our" of whence you speak? And this part: "that's the god", are you saying we're in a Holy War, upcountry?
Makes you wonder....?
October 28, 2009 - 10:16 ET by Patriot IIIf he uriniated on a copy of the quoran, wonder what the outcry would be from the muslims, socialists and liberal morons? I wouldn't want to be in this guys shoes in the next life!!!
socialists and liberal
October 28, 2009 - 13:10 ET by Another Dead Kennedysocialists and liberal morons
Isn't that redundant?
xoxo - Ted
this show jumped the shark
October 28, 2009 - 10:17 ET by seaniepthis show jumped the shark for me a while ago, I thought the early on one about baptism was pretty funny, but its fairly predictable now
sets up something really silly and then runs with it to absurdity
I hate the New York Times more than it hates the US Military
In 1978 before a very learned audience in Harvard Square...
October 28, 2009 - 10:57 ET by stage9at Harvard University...a very strange looking man made what was viewed by many as a very strange speech. Winner of the “Nobel Prize for Literature,” the exiled Russian author Alexander Solzhenitsyn received a thunderous standing ovation as he had just received the "Honorary Doctor of Letters" from Harvard University.
[During his speech] he asked whether we present America as a model to the world, especially to his own ex-land of Russia?
“No,” he said, “we cannot because America is in a state of exhaustion and sickness, and it does not look very attractive.” He went on to say, “After all of the decades of violence, suffering and oppression, [in Russia] the human spirit longs for something higher and purer than America has to offer.”
He went on to describe America’s materialism, her mass living habits, her revolting invasion of privacy by TV stupor and intolerable music.
He then said, “No weapons can help America until we overcome the loss of will power. And how did America become so sick? How did America decline from her triumphal march to her present sickness?” Then speaking as one of us he went on to explain:
“WE HAVE LOOSED OURSELVES FROM THE MORAL HERITAGE OF CHRISTIAN CENTURIES. WE ONCE BEGAN WITH THE IDEA THAT INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS WERE GRANTED BECAUSE MAN IS GOD’S CREATURE AND GOD GAVE THEM TO MAN CONDITIONALLY ON THE BASIS OF CHRISTIAN RESPONSIBILITY.”
He then went on to say:
“WE HAVE TURNED OUR BACKS ON THE CHRISTIAN SPIRIT, AND EMBRACED ALL THAT IS MATERIAL WITH EXCESSIVE ZEAL. WE MAY BE SPARED WAR BUT WE FACE AN EVEN WORSE CALAMITY – A DESPIRITUALIZED AND MATERIALIZED HUMANISTIC CONSCIOUSNESS.”
How this modern day prophet’s critics bristled in that audience! But be assured that the loosing of America from the moral heritage and spirit of Christian centuries will be complete when the Cross of Christ is taken down and away from America’s already despiritualized consciousness. Truly then her spiritual and moral illness will quickly become terminal, and her sure demise will be just a matter of time.
("Is America Sick Unto Death?" - Bob Klingenberg)
"If God is dead, somebody is going to have to take his place. It will
be megalomania or erotomania, the drive for power or the drive for
pleasure, the clenched fist or the phallus, Hitler or Hugh Hefner."
— Malcolm Muggeridge
Disgusting...
October 28, 2009 - 11:14 ET by WarpYou've merely chosen a celestial dictator over an earthly one - you are not free spiritually or mentally and you have no more understanding of morality than those you claim are destroying this country. Christianity and all other religions will fade as religions inevitably do, replaced with more recently imagined tales designed to coerce and control the weak-minded populous. The words of your “modern day prophet” mean nothing as they represent only the opinions and dreams born of an acute delusion. What is this “moral heritage” of which you speak? Does it include stoning children to death in public, chopping off the hands of women who offend you or, how about condemning to death anyone who dreams or prophesizes anything that is against God, or anyone who tries to turn you from God? I think that last one comes from Deuteronomy 13:5. Do you support violence, coercion, oppression and suppression when it is yielded on your behalf because it is moral or because it feels good to strike down those who offend thee.
Warp, The Darwinists, thought that way too, 100 years ago.
October 28, 2009 - 13:38 ET by upcountrywaterGee Christanity is the Largest faith on the Earth, about 3 Billion souls.
Deut: 13:5 Is a specific place in time for a certain individual.
moslem, kill all infidels, for all time...
See the difference ?
State controlled health care is Tort Reform. Update! music video.
I see...
October 28, 2009 - 13:53 ET by WarpYou find some violence inspiring and other violence is wrong. People like you, who rationalize your way through the subjugation and coercion you both willingly accept and dole out day-to-day, without ever taking responsibility for your own actions are exactly what’s wrong with every organized religion. You’ve always got an excuse, don’t you?
Warp, It happened once way back 3,000 YEARS AGO
October 28, 2009 - 14:32 ET by upcountrywatermoslems want to slice off your head TODAY.
You, and People like you really don't get it.
There is EVIL in this world, what YOU going to do about it, HIDE, well pal you can't hide forever!
Christianity teaches that while reason can point to the existence of
this higher domain, this is where reason stops: it cannot on its own
investigate or comprehend that domain. But one day, it is promised,
when our earthly journey is over, we will know the higher realm and see
things as they really are
Why
Christianity explains the universe, and
our origins, better than atheism does
Why
Christianity and science are not
irreconcilable, but science and atheism
might be
Why
the alleged sins of Christianity—the
Crusades, the Inquisition, the Galileo
affair—are vastly overblown
Why
atheism is a demonstrably dangerous
creed—and a cowardly one
Why
evolution does not threaten Christian
belief
Why
atheists fear the Big Bang theory
Why
Christianity is the ultimate defense of
man’s free will
Why
ultimately you can’t have Western
civilization—and all we value from
it—without the Christianity that gave it
birth
Once, 3,000 years ago?
October 28, 2009 - 15:19 ET by WarpMight want to fact-check that tid-bit.
yea warpster, Every single thing is recorded.
October 30, 2009 - 00:14 ET by upcountrywaterA precise time and place, thousands of years ago.
Not some kill ya, for fun, for all time, and forever.
What! you have problems with waterboarding.
However No problems with Nick Berg.
typical..
State controlled health care! music video.
You didn't get a longer reply from me...
October 30, 2009 - 13:51 ET by Warpbecause you didn't deserve one.
Your why...why...why rambling showed you to be an uneducated, hateful zealot and nothing more.
What happened 3,000 years ago that you think is so important?
Is Nick Berg the only one whose name you remember? Are you one of those jerk-offs that think that just because you remember someone's name you have somehow shared in their pain?
You are preaching exactly the same type of extremist garbage that is preached to the muslim zealots just before they strap a bomb to their chest, and just like the cowardly muslim religious leaders who watch their creations blow themselves up from a safe distance, you screech your hatred from relative safety because your beliefs don’t require you to give up your own life.
Christianity explains nothing about the universe, nor does atheism. You’ve made a false argument.
Christianity only listens to what science discovers AFTER a lengthy attempt to discredit it with moronic arguments.
“The alleged sins of Christianity—the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Galileo affair—are vastly overblown” – tell that to the victims.
“atheism is a demonstrably dangerous creed—and a cowardly one” – then demonstrate it you coward!
“evolution does not threaten Christian belief” – if you were a Christian, you would know that nothing could; but you’re just a scared, panicky coward hiding behind something someone told you that you don’t even understand.
“atheists fear the Big Bang theory” – Are you sure? Generally; Christians seem to get all bent out of shape when it’s mentioned. Was this the event of 3,000 years ago you keep mentioning?
Christianity is the ultimate example of man’s ability to control other men through ridiculous stories.
"ultimately you can’t have Western civilization—and all we value from it—without the Christianity that gave it birth” – Amazingly stupid comment.
It is people like you that make the liberals think that all conservatives are racist morons. I pity your stupidity and honestly hope you are capable of pulling your head out of your ass at some point in the future. Next time you create a post; have a point to make.
goodupcountrywate is
October 28, 2009 - 13:56 ET by nolotrippengoodupcountrywate is correct.
When you read the Bible (or anything else, frankly), you have to know the context (historical, cultural, etc.) as well as the person being addressed, and you must read what is before and after the text. Obviously, this wouldn't apply to something that stands on its own, (e.g., "Jesus wept") but your quote means nothing without context.
This is why Deuteronomy 13:5 is not taken out of context by Christians. Interestingly, it is taken out of context by Muslims, because they claim the Bible is God's word corrupted and that Muhammad's cribbing of Bible text with his own imagination (psychotic, satanic dreams, to put it bluntly) is the real deal.
Deuteronomy 13:5 (New International Version) That prophet or dreamer must be put to death, because he preached
rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and
redeemed you from the land of slavery; he has tried to turn you from
the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the
evil from among you.
“It is almost impossible to distinguish a politician from a gangster.” (Will Durant, 1931)
Context?
October 28, 2009 - 15:18 ET by WarpContext for the "inspired word of god?" Are you telling me that you know what god meant better than those he was directly inspiring?
The bible was written by, potentially hundreds of men over the course of hundreds of years. It is not inspired by anything more than a quest for power and control. It is not a good story, and the current bible isn't even an honest representation of what these so-called religious leaders actually wrote. Some of the stories in the bible were written back when it was socially acceptable for a two men to "know" each other. The full gospel of Mark even tells of Jesus having sex with a man whom he had recently resurrected - the only reference to this man with which Jesus had sex in the current version is the naked man who follows Jesus after he is arrested, even after the apostles have fled.
I really don't care what context you find for your words of hatred, subjugation and division - Christians and Muslims have more in common than either would like to admit. They both want to believe they don’t simply rot after death and are willing to cause a whole lot of rotting to prove it.
BS
October 28, 2009 - 15:40 ET by contrarySome of the stories in the bible were written back when it was socially acceptable for a two men to "know" each other. The full gospel of Mark even tells of Jesus having sex with a man whom he had recently resurrected - the only reference to this man with which Jesus had sex in the current version is the naked man who follows Jesus after he is arrested, even after the apostles have fled.
And your source???????
You make me weep with utter disbelief at the lack of spirit and faith men have.
"No I have the facts"
--The resident Joe Friday
Secret Mark
October 29, 2009 - 08:47 ET by Warphttp://www.earlychristianwritings.com/secretmark.html
Some insist it was faked, some insist alternate interpretations and some insist the church is working hard to discredit it.
History has shown us that it was common at one point in time for men to have sex with other men for pleasure and with women for procreation. It likely had something to do with the prevalence of infection which was not readily treatable at the time. The bible’s jesus would have lived at this time and the stories written about him at the time would have included social norms of the day which were understandably removed later on, but it changes nothing. Either the authors were lying sometimes or they were not – who are you to decide which words came from god and which words did not – were the editors of the bible also divinely inspired? Ridiculous.
Boo hoo!
October 28, 2009 - 11:22 ET by someloudthunderDon't care. It was hilarious. Unless you are actually Christian and go to Church, stop complaining about it.
Typical Larry
October 28, 2009 - 11:25 ET by StarAZTo me the problem was this wasn't funny--and was just some macho mess like Larry always sets up, when he is SO not manly--trying to control his parts like a runaway fire hose...he wishes.
A friend of mine
October 28, 2009 - 11:36 ET by nwahsA friend of mine ( much my senior) had his prostate removed and had a similar out of toilet experience. Said he didn't have such a "surge" since he was 12. I'm guessing the pills Larry was taking was for the prostate. Of course its exaggerated, but I think the point was surprise more than machismo :) Kind of like expecting a babbling brook and getting the Mississippi River!
Putting the offensive part
October 28, 2009 - 11:55 ET by Another Dead KennedyPutting the offensive part of the episode aside, when Larry fell off the building at the end and had to grab on to the, er, muffin top to keep himself from falling to the ground...pure genius.
If the thing with jesus is,
October 28, 2009 - 13:13 ET by troglodytIf the thing with jesus is, why is that joke not offensive?
That's because we're all
October 28, 2009 - 13:38 ET by Another Dead KennedyThat's because we're all healthy, fit people here who don't sympathize with "fat" jokes.
xoxo - Ted
Not everything is funny to
October 28, 2009 - 12:25 ET by balboaNot everything is funny to everyone.
Larry also makes fun of Judaism, for the record.
Larry Quixote tilts at harmless windmills
October 28, 2009 - 14:11 ET by Jack BauerThis would never happen because Larry David knows he would have seriously deranged Muslims who would plot to KILL him. FOREVER.
As opposed to those ultra violent Christians and their deadly word bombs.
I'm sure he actually knows Salman Rushdie.
He still has armed guards, and is very careful over his security. 25 YEARS after that senile old murderer Khomenni issued a "fatwah." which called for his death.
David (who I actually admire as a comedy writer) is a liberal coward tilting at easy windmills instead of real villains.
As opposed to those ultra
October 28, 2009 - 14:16 ET by Another Dead KennedyAs opposed to those ultra violent Christians and their deadly word bombs.
Like the word bombs that killed George Tiller? Religious extremists are the problem, not the religions.
xoxo - Ted
Garbage. You compare one
October 28, 2009 - 14:31 ET by Jack BauerGarbage. You compare one lone nut with a history of mental problems, to organized oppression and terrorism from Islam.
Says all we need to know about you. Liberalism is a mental disease. You have the symptoms.
And by the way. Isn't it time liberals moved beyond Ted Kennedy. The guy's dead and buried.
Jack, you've been around
October 28, 2009 - 14:44 ET by Another Dead KennedyJack, you've been around here a long time. Please tell me you don't really believe my screen name in any way reflects my feelings about Ted Kennedy. I swear, some of you knuckleheads force me to explain this at least once every week.
As far as your ignorance of the Muslim religion, so be it. I don't know one single Muslim who conforms with your view of their religion, which to me is just as offensive as Christians may feel about the Larry David scene in discussion.
xoxo - Ted
I disagree with this entire post
October 28, 2009 - 15:20 ET by red eye repubWas Larry David being offensive? Well of course! That's his whole character. Offending people and then watching the ensuing chaos that results from it.
If you watch Curb Your Enthusiasm, you would remember a great episode that revolved around Larry match-making a devout Muslim women who wore a burka with a blind man.
His wife Cheryl even gets egged because she wears the burka as a Halloween outfit.
So yes, Larry David is willing to offend all people.
Get over it.
For the record I disagree
October 28, 2009 - 15:33 ET by Another Dead KennedyFor the record I disagree with the entire post as well. And if you want some truly offensive humor, give It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia a try.
xoxo - Ted
Yup. Larry David's whole
October 28, 2009 - 16:19 ET by balboaYup. Larry David's whole show is about offending people because he's got odd social skills. Is he ACTUALLY making a decision in this episode to urinate on Jesus? No. Is he, as the show's creator, choosing to put his character in a situation where he accidentally gets urine on a painting of Jesus? Yes. Choose to be outraged if you want.
Yea thats about it
October 28, 2009 - 18:22 ET by nwahsAnd that's where the author of the blog performs his bait and switch. The title indicates the character urinates on the picture, not accidentally splashes it. The title is as much of a lie as the title indicating Montel Williams encouraged Bachmann to kill herself, when if fact he was making fun of her holy covenant speech. Its as much a lie as the author of a blog indicating that Fox News reporter Cameron was fooled by a hoaxer, when the author of the blog was the only one fooled by a hoaxer.
If you friggin' genius's are so right...
October 28, 2009 - 19:48 ET by MightyMouthWhat about Jack Bauers assertion of the Muhammad switch and the resulting s**tstorm? Really, you liberals are sickening in your "anything anti-Christian goes" bit...
"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"
"You Liberals..."
October 29, 2009 - 16:08 ET by red eye repubMan....you're worse than someone on Huffington Post.
See my screen name? It says 'red eye repub'
That means that i vote Republican, and my eyes are Red. Red from all the weed i smoke. And yes, it is possible to be a stoner and a Republican.
So get off your high horse like you speak for anyone with Conservative values.
As far as your ignorance of
October 28, 2009 - 15:38 ET by Dan The Man 2As far as your ignorance of the Muslim religion, so be it. I don't know one single Muslim who conforms with your view of their religion
I dont know one single Muslim either I know hundreds taht are like that. Heck Iran and Pakistand and parts of Afghanistan has most likely thousands. And the people in power are some of those. That statement is typical pap spouted by funcional brain dead or as Archie used to say meatheads.
I posit you are the one ignorant of how Islam works and what it says. If Islam was kind and benevolent then we wouldnt have the problems we have now. The people in those countries harbor these terrorists and willingly in great numbers. And guess what they are Islamic.
Do you have any proof to
October 28, 2009 - 15:46 ET by Another Dead KennedyDo you have any proof to back up these statements? This kind of ignorance is completely dumbfounding to me, albeit not unexpected. No, you are in fact wrong that this is what the Muslim religion teaches. Are you the guy who spies on his Muslim neighbors, always suspecting them of secretly assembling car bombs in their garage? Have you ever met a Muslim? What did he or she do to make you believe they wanted you dead?
xoxo - Ted
Keep up with the body count, Kennedy.
October 28, 2009 - 15:56 ET by SickofLibsKeep up with the body count, Kennedy.
Well look at that. A right
October 28, 2009 - 16:04 ET by Another Dead KennedyWell look at that. A right wing website based on the horrors of Islamic extremists. Gee, you mean to say that extremists are the problem? Thanks for making my argument.
xoxo - Ted
A "right wing website", Kenne-dhimmi?
October 28, 2009 - 16:22 ET by SickofLibsClick ANY news article there and guess what, you go to external new sources, a majority of them in muslim countries.
Lemme guess, you're also a big CAIR supporter, too?
Did I deny any of the
October 28, 2009 - 16:32 ET by Another Dead KennedyDid I deny any of the material on that website? It's a site created to do one thing: instill fear in those who are looking for an excuse to hate Muslims. Do you really think all Muslims are evil? Terrorists? Do you think they're looking for a war? If their religion is as you believe, why do you suppose the 1.8 billion of them haven't waged war on Christianity? With 1.8 billion people who are looking to martyr themselves, surely one of them is organizing the war to end all civilization.
xoxo - Ted
Ted
October 28, 2009 - 16:45 ET by MrShy"A right wing website based on the horrors of Islamic extremists."
You know, Ted, after we all have to cut through your cute, thick layer of sarcasm, you know what we have? Yeah, you got it, we have a lot of horrors around the world of Islamic extremism.
Almost. Every. Day.*
Correction: it seems EVERY DAY, if not several horrors a day.
Just today, in Pakistan, over a 100 killed by bombs. You got it.... Islamic extremists.
Wake up.
Wow, Shy. It's almost like
October 28, 2009 - 16:46 ET by Another Dead KennedyWow, Shy. It's almost like you're going out of your way to make my argument that Islamic extremists are the problem, not the religion itself.
xoxo - Ted
Ted
October 28, 2009 - 16:58 ET by MrShyWhat I'm saying, TED, is that there are countless horrors -- from suicide bombs to planted bombs all over the Middle East, Africa, etc., to killings of daughters (in OUR country) to raging (yeah, REAL raging, not "town hall raging") Islamists protesting in Western countries like the UK and in Europe to almost every Westerner/non-muslim *scared sh--less* (like, oh say, comedies like this one) of poking fun at Islam to Danish cartoonists being murdered to visibly NO GROUP of Muslims ANYWHERE that are forming to really DENOUNCE extremism to polls that have been done that even show that a majority of NORMAL Muslims have sympathy for what EXTREMISTS do....... must I go on?
Yeah, guess what? I'll say it here... there might really be a problem with the religion itself.
Call me crazy.
But really, sarcasm aside, if you want to keep whistling along and painting the whole problem with grey colors, good luck with that.
Shy, do you honestly believe
October 28, 2009 - 16:58 ET by Another Dead KennedyShy, do you honestly believe that the primary teachings of Islam are truly evil, and that in any way that the violence from extremists is based on the root of the religion? What are the beliefs of your Muslim friends?
xoxo - Ted
~Teddy
October 28, 2009 - 17:10 ET by choselife3xWhat are the primary teachings of Islam?
From my extensive
October 28, 2009 - 17:16 ET by Another Dead KennedyFrom my extensive research:
Islam is a religion of peace and well-being
God condemns mischief
Islam defends tolerance and freedom of speech
God has made the killing of innocent people unlawful
God commands believers to be compassionate and merciful
God has commanded tolerance and forgiveness
Like I said, from my research.
xoxo - Ted
Actions speak louder than
October 28, 2009 - 17:23 ET by MrShyActions speak louder than words. And louder than Ted's research.
A heck of a lot louder, in this case.
Shy, there are roughly 1.8
October 28, 2009 - 17:29 ET by Another Dead KennedyShy, there are roughly 1.8 billion Muslim believers on this earth. Exactly what percentage of them are terrorists? What is the number of terrorist acts per capita? You're using the acts of a very small percentage of extremists to define a religion.
xoxo - Ted
Ted
October 28, 2009 - 17:35 ET by MrShySorry, my question first:
Exactly how many individual Muslims -- or Muslim groups -- have organized/mobilized and risen up to DENOUNCE the very real and widespread terrorist and violent aspect of their cherished religion?
With the crisis it's been in, they SHOULD mobilize and get serious. How many have so far? After decades of global bloodshed almost daily?
So you choose to ignore my
October 28, 2009 - 17:44 ET by Another Dead KennedySo you choose to ignore my questions, and now demand that I respond to yours? There are a number of groups out there who stand against the acts of terrorism and extremism. Just to name a few, the Free Muslims Coalition, Islam for Today, Muslims Against Terrorism. Surely you have some kind of proof to back your claim that the teachings of Islam are inherently evil.
xoxo - Ted
Ted
October 28, 2009 - 17:50 ET by MrShyContinue on apologizing and being the wiser one around here. It floats your boat.
Surely you have some kind of proof to back your claim that the teachings of Islam are not inherently evil. When you've seriously read the entire Koran and lived with authentic Muslims for some time, I guess come back to me. No, I don't expect (or "demand") that you do. Life is too short.
But carry on rushing to their defense -- and why you and so many do is absolutely beyond me. Are our collective doubts and concerns about the core of Islam a threat to the religion? Or to you? No, of course not.
ted
October 29, 2009 - 01:14 ET by upcountrywaterhere ya go, read the whole thing, then come back
~*grin*
October 28, 2009 - 17:27 ET by choselife3xIslam is a religion of peace and well-being
Rape victim gets 200 lashes
Islam defends tolerance and freedom of speech
In Saudi Arabia freedom of religious expression is barred for all faiths apart from Islam. Public acts such as holding a Bible, wearing a
cross, carrying a rosary or praying are outlawed.
The rest of your post can only be applied to the God of Christianity, who bears no resemblance to the being known as Allah.
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
How many American Muslims
October 28, 2009 - 17:30 ET by Another Dead KennedyHow many American Muslims are accountable for acts of terrorism in the past 30 years?
xoxo - Ted
~I wondered what that loud thumping sound was
October 28, 2009 - 17:37 ET by choselife3xFor goodness sake, Teddy. If you're going to move the goalposts, do it quietly! I've got a sleeping baby here.
TEHRAN, Iran -- Iran's supreme leader said Wednesday that questioning
the results of Iran's June presidential election is a crime, his
strongest warning yet to opposition leaders who continue to insist the
vote was rigged.
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
I was just simply pointing
October 28, 2009 - 17:51 ET by Another Dead KennedyI was just simply pointing out that a huge faction of Muslims - those living in the US - are not in fact terrorists or supporters of terrorism. The US was an easy argument. But seriously, everyone knows the psychopaths governing Iran fall into the realm of evil we are discussing. And while there are certainly tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of very bad extremists out there, it's not what the religion is based on.
PS: Sorry to wake the baby!
xoxo - Ted
the liberal brain
October 28, 2009 - 18:00 ET by MrShy"And while there are certainly tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of very bad extremists out there, it's not what the religion is based on."
Right. Absolutely not. And we're ignorant fools to even entertain anything otherwise.
Well ILTK
October 28, 2009 - 18:08 ET by general companyHow about this, this, this, this, this , this, or this five minute of searching can answer your question
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
Ted
October 28, 2009 - 17:16 ET by MrShyDid you read my off-the-top-of-my-head list just now that covers more than just "extremist" Islamic problems in our world? A list which hardly scratches the surface?
I honestly have my doubts about Islam, SURE. After all you see around you, do you honestly have no doubts *whatsoever* about the "religion of peace" itself?
If you have no doubts when the dust has to keep settling day after day, than I'm certainly not the kook here.
You didn't answer my
October 28, 2009 - 17:25 ET by Another Dead KennedyYou didn't answer my questions, Shy.
xoxo - Ted
I'm concerned about the
October 28, 2009 - 17:31 ET by MrShyI'm concerned about the primary teachings of Islam, you bet.
I have one friend who's a sweet guy who's Muslim, and he's embarrassed by the extremist part. That means very little to me, other than, sure, not 100%, or even 90%, of Islam and Muslims represent something dark and evil. But there's enough for anyone with half a brain to really wonder what's going on with that teaching and the Koran.
Again, if you're so anxious to be a steadfast apologist for the religion "itself", that's your call.
What is apologist about
October 28, 2009 - 17:32 ET by Another Dead KennedyWhat is apologist about defending a religion from ignorance?
xoxo - Ted
Ted
October 28, 2009 - 17:44 ET by MrShyYou choose to "ignore" the daily bloodshed (daily, LITERALLY) around the world that all has one common denominator -- Islam -- and I'm the ignorant one.
But calling us ignorant feeds your need to feel superior and appear more compassionate and understanding.
Because a minority
October 28, 2009 - 17:55 ET by Another Dead KennedyBecause a minority percentage of followers do some heinous things, it does not define the religion. That's like saying that all musicians are lame because a few of them put their names on ladies panties to be sold on their websites.
You've ignored my questions, and now I'm going to do what several reputable Newsbuster members have suggested I do with you - IGNORE. Buh-bye.
xoxo - Ted
???
October 28, 2009 - 18:11 ET by MrShyReal mature Ted. I'm not going anywhere.
I have answered your questions, and you have suggested I'm ignorant. And I never make it personal, start whining, and take my ball and run off.
People's tolerance for Islam's very widespread proven-to-be-quite-intolerant aspects I take very seriously.
I won't answer your
October 28, 2009 - 17:56 ET by FranksamI won't answer your questions either, because they are stupid. I want Muslims to kill as many of each other as they can. Even the Greenies who want lower human population figures are on my side here. Muslims have contributed less to the good of mankind than any group.
Henry Kissinger said of the Iraq-Iran conflict that it was too bad that they's couldn't both lose. I agree with him on this issue.
Maybe one day we'll feel
October 28, 2009 - 17:07 ET by balboaMaybe one day we'll feel comfortable enough to have Larry David splash his pee on Mohammed. Then we'll all be happy.
~You first
October 28, 2009 - 17:17 ET by choselife3xIn order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
bal
October 28, 2009 - 17:18 ET by MrShyYou're not really getting it, but that's no shock.
→ Shy
October 28, 2009 - 19:40 ET by Cool ArrowHe gets it. It's the reply that's no shock.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
MrShy, so you don't want
October 28, 2009 - 19:58 ET by balboaMrShy, so you don't want anyone poking fun at religion or dealing with it in a controversial way?
bal
October 29, 2009 - 16:20 ET by MrShyNo, it's not necessary or productive to poke fun at religion, but then it IS comedy. And it's a free country, and a free world (or the predecessor to Duh One certainly did all he could to promote freedom everywhere.)
That being said, it would be nice to see maybe a 1-10 ratio of poking fun at a religion that needs to be poked -- Islam, to expose how crazy it is -- versus, oh, the 1-100,000 ratio we have now. And for comedy writers not to fear for their lives if they consider doing this.
Do you have any proof to
October 28, 2009 - 19:59 ET by Radical1979Do you have any proof to back up these statements?
There were the repeated bombing of the World Trade Center, 9/11, the attack on the USS Cole, and the attacks on our embassies in the 90's.
Im the guy who worked
October 28, 2009 - 21:02 ET by Dan The Man 2Im the guy who worked closely in the same office with one of those idiots who was involved in the Holy Land Foundation. Idiot.
Apparently you think the
October 28, 2009 - 18:19 ET by Jack BauerApparently you admit you don't know something, and you think that fact proves something in your favor.
You're even dumber than I suspected.
Do you think if a Muslim
October 28, 2009 - 19:56 ET by Radical1979Do you think if a Muslim believed in wiping out infidels he/she would tell you?
There is an upside to this episode
October 28, 2009 - 15:46 ET by CO2MakerApparently, pudgy midriffs are okay now. Except, I guess it's another way to make her look slovenly, you know, in appearance and in "inward intelligence," etc. yadda yadda.
CO2 I think her pudginess
October 28, 2009 - 19:49 ET by Radical1979CO2 I think her pudginess was another way to make her look stupid, the way she was so stupid to believe in God and therefore miracles.
Replace with Mohammand
October 28, 2009 - 15:46 ET by ddm... and the entire staff and actors would be dead by now.
Maybe the Muslims have it
October 28, 2009 - 15:53 ET by RR GOPMaybe the Muslims have it right with their prohibition of iconography.
Can't do this to the Prophet.
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 86% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.
Wow, this article has attracted every
October 28, 2009 - 16:16 ET by BO STINKSObama sycophant, deranged, psuedo-intellectual fascist to defend this trash. Truly amazing how the libs think it is okay to attack anyone who dares to disagree with BO's policies and yet defends this filth. Not surprising, though. Hypocrisy, thy name is Democrat(ick).
"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!" Sam Adams
The left loves this and
October 28, 2009 - 19:47 ET by Radical1979The left loves this and Roman Polanski. Surprised?
Oh wow..how *edgy*!
October 28, 2009 - 16:34 ET by UndercoverConservativecourse not edgy enough to dare try that on an image of Mohammed. Such courage these 'entertainers' exhibit: attacking and insulting the beliefs of those who they truly have little to fear...while hoping they can get one or two violent reactions to point the finger at Christianity and say "see, it's *them* what's violent!"....
cowards. these are the same folks who as kids, threw rocks at chained dogs in yards and poked sticks at animals in zoos. Probably enjoyed starting fights in school with all their friends around ready to lie and say "the other kid started it!" so the official on record punishments happened to their target.
Go ahead, "comedians". I dare ya. Be "edgy", take a real risk, and show us how funny it will be to desecrate symbols of Islam and then mock the people of Mohammed for reacting emotionally. Big laughs all around there I betcha, and since it's your "job" to "challenge" beliefs and cultural mores, you're doing society a huge favor, too..right?
WWW.GS2AC.COM. 2nd Amendment Grass Roots Action in the Bay Area, CA. We're not all "Breakfast Cereal" folks here! :)
Mein Kampf vs koran
October 28, 2009 - 17:32 ET by slickwillie2001Interesting study comparing Mein Kampf to the koran:
10.6% of koran devoted to Jew-hatred, Mein Kampf 'only' 6.8%: http://www.weaselzippers.net/blog
The perversion known as islam should not be labeled a religion.
Comedy is so much funnier
October 28, 2009 - 18:27 ET by Radical1979Comedy is so much funnier when things are implied and not crude (not that I'm endorsing the implication of urinating on any religion's symbols). That was one of the things that made the "Master of the Domain" episode of Seinfeld so funny.
By the way, am I alone in finding it gross now that movies and television feel the need to have scenes in the bathroom? Whenever I see the back of men at a urinal I'm grossed out and miss whatever point they're making.
Could be worse
October 28, 2009 - 19:35 ET by nwahsWhenever I see the back of men at a urinal I'm grossed out and miss whatever point they're making.
Could be worse...
I agree with television, but no so much the abundance of bathroom scenes as CSI type autopsies scenes. Nothing like sitting down with a plate of food and seeing them do the y cut on an upper torso. I flip the channel to the early news.You have to wonder how brain dead the writers are to have to show an autopsy to make a show interesting.
You're exactly right though, less is more as Hitchcock knew well.
I stopped watching CSI
October 28, 2009 - 19:46 ET by Radical1979I stopped watching CSI because I knew I'd be grossed out. I don't always know when those bathroom scenes are coming on other shows though...
I remember Steven King writing somewhere that he really wants to scare the reader, and if he can't scare the reader he goes for the gross out. Whenever a book/movie/ tv show goes for the gross out they've lost it as far as I''m concerned.
"When you defend mockery of
October 28, 2009 - 21:04 ET by 24enak"When you defend mockery of one religious figure as free speech and then roundly condemn mockery of another, that's not outrage, that's hypocritical bigotry." (http://mediamatters.org/blog/200910280024)
I laughed at the setup up to the joke and laughed some more on the punch line of the joke. It's not like he purposely urinated on the picture of Jesus, the fact there is outrage is only helping Larry David's goal, create buzz about his show. He will not lose any viewers because of this he will only gain viewers, because by now fans of the show are use to this kind of humor from his show.
How come he didn't have the balls
October 28, 2009 - 22:20 ET by MightyMouthTo put Mohammad up on the wall? Answer that one! Don't bother... Jesus Christ is an easy and safe target. In other words the dumbass you look up to is a pussy! Which pretty much makes you one!
"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"
Well since most Muslims
October 28, 2009 - 23:07 ET by 24enakWell since most Muslims think it is sacrilegious to display any image of the prophet Mohammad then a picture of the prophet Mohammad wouldn't be hanging on the wall. However Christians proudly display pictures of Jesus, thus a picture of Jesus hanging on the wall would be a common sight.
The joke was that this family had a picture of Jesus in their bathroom, and some urine splash on the picture to make it look like he was crying. Which some Christians believe to be a miracle, though it is often Mary who is crying.
I have never watched Curb Your Enthusiasm because I don't have HBO. However I do like Larry David from his work with Seinfeld which I have all the seasons on DVD.
And that changes my reply to you how?
October 28, 2009 - 23:11 ET by MightyMouth"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"
So what if he thought J.C.
October 29, 2009 - 12:11 ET by balboaSo what if he thought J.C. was an easier target? Big deal. There are no awards for bravery in comedy.
Why wasn't it Mohammed? Well, how many people have pictures of Mohammed on their walls? In their bathrooms?
And as a website reminded me earlier, CYE has poked fun at Muslims before, in an episode where Moon Unit Zappa was a Muslim.