Spherical Time
Reality has a well known Liberal bias.
- Apr 20, 2005
- 2,375
- 227
- 43
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- UK-Liberal-Democrats
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
No better or worse than Christians, I've found.Top rated by whom? Hollywood? Well, there's a bunch of great moral experts! /sarcasm
Rachel
South Park has moments of genius. There is absolute no doubt about that and anyone who claims otherwise has either never seen it or just likes to make noise.
You don't have to like something for it to be good. But if you try to say it's bad just because you don't approve you only make yourself look foolish.
Some of you guys are going to laugh at this one.....I heard something yesterday that puzzled me.
For the last couple years my parents have been taking my 15 year old brother to a very conservative baptist church to receive brainwashing. When he got home from church the one week, he was telling me that they told him that watching the show South Park was evil, and also that his favorite band Slipknot was evil as well (I'm guessing because of the profanity). When they tell him these things, I make sure to balance him out with some common sense, and he's a pretty smart kid and can already start seeing through some of their lies.....Plus, he loves watching South Park with me.
Why do fundamentalists think that "bad" words can be harmful to listen to? They're just sounds like any other word. It just seems kind of silly to me.
Top rated by whom? Hollywood? Well, there's a bunch of great moral experts! /sarcasm
Rachel
miniverchivi said:You have to keep in mind that not everyone is a Christian, nor do they have to be. Trey Parker and Matt Stone are an Atheist and a former Jew....so why would they make their late-night show appeal to Christian beliefs?? They've also depicted Jesus to be a cool guy, with a good sense of humor, who everyone in town truly likes. The fact that they acknowledge that he existed (regular man, son of god, or otherwise) is doing what most atheists wouldn't do. It's not like Christianity is the only belief system they've had some fun with. They've dedicated entire episodes to poking fun at scientology and mormons. They've even done a show where the major figureheads of every religion are actually friends with each other and in a team of heros called the "Super Best Friends".
You wanted me to comment on this part of your post.You have to keep in mind that not everyone is a Christian, nor do they have to be. Trey Parker and Matt Stone are an Atheist and a former Jew....so why would they make their late-night show appeal to Christian beliefs?? They've also depicted Jesus to be a cool guy, with a good sense of humor, who everyone in town truly likes. The fact that they acknowledge that he existed (regular man, son of god, or otherwise) is doing what most atheists wouldn't do. It's not like Christianity is the only belief system they've had some fun with. They've dedicated entire episodes to poking fun at scientology and mormons. They've even done a show where the major figureheads of every religion are actually friends with each other and in a team of heros called the "Super Best Friends".
Consumers let producers know what they want by purchasing or not purchasing their product. Producers only care about public opinion insofar as it affects their bottom line.Point 1: There's no reason why nonChristians should try to appeal to Christian beliefs unless they want Christians to watch it. (I believe that consumers have the right to let producers and advertisers know what they do/don't like.)
You wanted me to comment on this part of your post.
Point 1: There's no reason why nonChristians should try to appeal to Christian beliefs unless they want Christians to watch it. (I believe that consumers have the right to let producers and advertisers know what they do/don't like.)
I'd think they'd also listen to the advertisers, who may (and have) listen to consumers' complaints.Seeing how most of the threatened boycotts come from Christian activist groups that aren't a part of the show's market base anyway, the producers don't have much cause for concern.
Actually, the only thing I may have ever protested about SP is one of the more offensive things about Jesus portrayed.I don't understand some people's preoccupation with having programs taken off the air simply because they disagree with them. Nobody is forcing these individuals- or their children- to watch South Park. There are numerous ways that one could effectively prevent South Park from being viewed in his or her own home, if they so choose. Taking that into consideration.. why the need to have them removed from the air altogether?
We all have different standards. The behavior exemplified on most reality TV shows makes me sick. Pat Robertson offends my every sensibility, and I don't personally feel that he has any positive contribution to make to viewing audiences. You couldn't pay me enough to get me to watch the insipid tripe that passes for 'entertainment' on MTV these days. (Where's the 'M'?) And don't even get me started on Bill O' Reilly.. or FauxNews in general.
However, just because I think a program or performer is, in my opinion, without merit doesn't mean I feel I have the right to bar others from watching such programming if they so desire. Such censorship sets a very dangerous precedent.
Maybe I misread him, but it sounded to me like he was referring to quatona's examples of pet names like "bear," "honeybee," and "mousetail." I could be wrong, though. Perhaps KCDAD could clarify?
Actually, the only thing I may have ever protested about SP is one of the more offensive things about Jesus portrayed.
The main things that concern me are those aired during prime time (which excludes SP, unless I'm very much mistaken). Those that are on during times when children are likely to be up and watching tv need to be of a certain calibre (or at least discretion). If somebody wants to air horrible programming after 10pm (while I don't like it) I'm much less likely to protest than if it were at, say, 7pm or 8pm.
Rachel
Which is why I've only ever said something to anyone (producers, channels, advertisers) maybe once. If it's made available mainly when only adults are up, it's just not worth a whole lot of energy, to me.Actually South Park is aired at 10:00pm, unless it's a re-run...the re-runs are aired all throughout the evening, but the one's before 10 are more highly censored (more bleeps and blurs).
What is a pet name? What does a pet name do to one's perception of the person? Your girlfriend is sweetie pie, your daughter is sweetie pie, your niece, the neighbor's girl, someone's kitten... the words become meaningless... they are more about the person using the petname then they are ever about the target .
Is there something inheritantly bad in them? I guess it depends if you believe bad or evil equates to selfishness or self centeredness... in which case they would be inheritantly evil.
Fine. Pretend you are different from everyone in the history of mankind. Or pretend there might be someone out there that can call a human being by some animal name and NOT begin to think of them in non-human (or impersonal) terms. If it makes you happy... I say go for it.I would say that depends largely on the person using the pet name. Sometimes they are terms of endearment, nothing more. Other times, they serve to objectify the addressee. I would dispute any assertion that the latter case is universally true. It may be your experience with endearments, but it is not always the case.
Fine. Pretend you are different from everyone in the history of mankind. Or pretend there might be someone out there that can call a human being by some animal name and NOT begin to think of them in non-human (or impersonal) terms. If it makes you happy... I say go for it.
The main things that concern me are those aired during prime time (which excludes SP, unless I'm very much mistaken). Those that are on during times when children are likely to be up and watching tv need to be of a certain calibre (or at least discretion). If somebody wants to air horrible programming after 10pm (while I don't like it) I'm much less likely to protest than if it were at, say, 7pm or 8pm.
Fine. Pretend you are different from everyone in the history of mankind. Or pretend there might be someone out there that can call a human being by some animal name and NOT begin to think of them in non-human (or impersonal) terms. If it makes you happy... I say go for it.
KCDAD said:What is a pet name? What does a pet name do to one's perception of the person?
Your girlfriend is sweetie pie, your daughter is sweetie pie, your niece, the neighbor's girl, someone's kitten...
the words become meaningless...
they are more about the person using the petname then they are ever about the target .
Is there something inheritantly bad in them? I guess it depends if you believe bad or evil equates to selfishness or self centeredness... in which case they would be inheritantly evil.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?