You are looking at posts that were written on December 7th, 2007.
Posted on December 7th, 2007 by Mark.
Categories: Editorials, Just Dumb, Movies, News.
The Catholic League has once again come out and demanded the boycott of a film. This time it’s “The Golden Compass” that they are targeting. Why? Well, it seems that this movie has the power to suck the “faith” right out of an unwitting child’s mind. Yes, you read right. This movie, part of the “His Dark Materials” trilogy by Philip Pullman, is so anti-church that it will turn your hapless child against God!  How? Isn’t it OBVIOUS? The movie will cause your child to want to read these books and their (your children’s) very reading of the words contained therein will overturn your years of well cultivated indoctrination into the faith. Imagine that, your child unwittingly forced into believing something! Why, it’s an outrage!
The funny part is that I can see where the church might have some cause for concern. I mean, Philip Pullman is an unrepentant (pun intended) atheist that has as much as said that he hopes his books turn children against organized religion. It’s just a shame that the Catholic League chooses to deal with the matter in such a hysterical manner.  What they’ve ended up doing is making ”The Golden Compass” a news story. It’s great fun to watch idiots debate nonsense while fantastically enticing clips from the movie are played in the background. Hell, it’s even piqued my interest!
What is all of this fruitless angst? Why not simply say to your flock, “This film contains some subject matter that we find to be contrary to the teachings/philosophies of the church and if you go to see this movie, you should be prepared.” Why set off a media firestorm? Faith is attacked every day. Faith where religion is concerned is belief in the absence of definitive proof. Your children (assuming they have a brain) at some point will question the existence of God and the works of the church whether this movie was viewed or not. Should they abandon the church out of hand because a few priests are convicted of molestation? Should they abandon the church because it squirrels away priests it suspects of being molesters? Does the church not fear that its very behavior has alienated followers from the faith? I’m Catholic by birth but a Christian by choice and I do not fear those that challenge my beliefs. When they ask, “Why do you believe?” the answer is simple, “Because I choose to believe.” I owe them no explanation beyond that. Am I the most pious of fellows? Perhaps not, but like my faith it’s frankly nobody’s business but my own.
Considering what went on in Sudan with throngs of Muslims calling for a teacher’s death because she allowed her class to name a bear Muhammad, we should all just be glad that Pullman did not name one of the bears in this film Jesus. Where does the knee jerk reaction stop and the critical thought begin? The Catholic League has bought “The Golden Compass” publicity that it could never have afforded itself, and a curious public will go to see this film just to find out what all of the fuss is about. Mark my words; this movie will be a hit.
If you place religion and common sense on a scale you must be very careful, for too much of one, means not enough of the other! Â
Posted on December 7th, 2007 by Mark.
Categories: News, Politics.
Is it any surprise that Rudy Giuliani was using the perks of his position? Should we be shocked that he and his buddy Bernie Kerik lied about when it was that his mistress started getting police protection? These people are entitled and you better just get used to it. Does it take more than a glance to see that Judith Nathan is a shrew that likely expects such treatment? Does it take much more than a look to see that Rudy Giuliani for all of his superhero bluster is just a wuss of a man, beholden to this bug-eyed creature? Answering her calls during speeches as if to humanize their sickeningly saccharin marriage is clear evidence to support such assumptions.Â
Judith Nathan got taxpayer-funded chauffeur services from the NYPD earlier than previously disclosed - even before her affair with then-Mayor Rudy Giuliani was revealed, witnesses and sources tell the Daily News.
“It went on for months before the affair was public,” said Lee Degenstein, 52, a retired Smith Barney vice president who formerly lived at 200 E. 94th St., Nathan’s old building.
“It was going on longer than anybody thought,” added Degenstein, who, along with others in the neighborhood, said they often saw Nathan hopping into unmarked NYPD cars in early 2000, before the affair was revealed that May.
Whoops.
Then-Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik said in January 2001 the NYPD assigned Nathan round-the-clock protection the month before because of an unspecified threat against her on a streetcorner near her home. He insisted at a news conference she had no guards until then.
Thursday, Giuliani aides changed their story. They said Nathan had received previously undisclosed “threats” earlier in 2000, and that protection was provided at those times.
Unspecified threats? That sounds like a bunch of garbage to my untrained ear. The taxpayers fronted the bill, they’re entitled to know “specifically”, why this woman needed the services of the NYPD.
This is just more of the same with Giuliani. The guy can’t be straight-up about anything these days. Why all of the lying and covering up if this was something that was justified? Why not just come clean at the time? I have lost all respect for Rudy Giuliani. He’s a caricature. A guy with a Napoleon complex and a hero complex… talk about a troublesome combination! Judith, don’t go buying any china just yet, I think Rudy’s boat is sinking fast.