Author: Bryant

It’s still my opinion that The Passion of the Christ is going to bring the fanatics out of the woodwork. It looks as though it may also enable David Neiwert’s transmission process. Over on Ain’t It Cool News, Harry printed a defense of The Passion by Rabbi Daniel Lapin, who he describes as “a well known zealot type is known to do some pretty wild right wing things that I completely do not approve of.”

Well, yeah. Rabbi Lapin is of the camp that believes there’s a civil war in this country that may need to be settled by force:

“First of all, [there’s] the matter of the little battle that must be fought, just as it was in the 19th century.” There were, and are, “two incompatible moral visions for this country. We had to settle it then. We’re going to have to settle it now. I hope not with blood, not with guns, but we’re going to have to settle it nonetheless. The good news is that I think our side is finally ready to settle it. Roll up its sleeves, take off its jacket, and get a little bloody. Spill a little blood. We’ll settle it. And we’ll win. And then there’s no holding us back.”

OK, so what? Does this mean his opinions on the movie aren’t worth printing?

Not in and of itself, but Rabbi Lapin’s argument is that Jewish leaders have only hurt themselves by protesting the movie, and that they were motivated by hatred for Christianity. The sum total of his commentary about the movie itself is two paragraphs in which he claims that “The movie will one day be seen as a harbinger of America’s third great religious reawakening.”

It’s not a piece about the movie. He’s simply using the movie as an excuse to write about his perceptions of the Jewish establishment.

Harry Knowles is providing a platform for a right-wing fanatic who encourages — if necessary — spilling blood in order to advance the cause of a theocratic America. Said fanatic is using that platform to advance his cause, with only a half-nod to the putative topic of movies. He writes about the controversy surrounding The Passion, not the movie itself.

Harry let him in because Harry loved the movie — unsurprisingly, since it’s a brilliant piece of filmmaking — and he wants to give others a chance to defend it. And that’s exactly how Neiwert’s transmissions work. The fanatics find common ground and use it as a springboard.

Most amusing quote so far in the Massachusetts legislature gay marriage debate:

”God destroyed a whole city over this issue. We’re trying to save our city, our state. They see the gays and lesbians out here voicing their opinions and they know it’s wrong and we want them to know that we stood up for what’s right.”

Beware, Boston! What happened to Sodom and Gomorrah could happen to you!

You know, things aren’t going that poorly. I was listening to Dennis and Callahan on WEEI this morning on my way into work; unsurprisingly, they did an hour or so on the gay marriage issues. Dennis was sympathetic, by which I mean he told Callahan that he was a closed-minded idiot for yelling at pro-gay marriage callers, and by which I mean that he said he thought the term “marriage” was important and would strengthen gay couples.

That’s not why I felt all uplifted, though. What I liked was hearing the middle-class Boston accent working class guys call in and say “Yeah, you know, it’s no skin off my back. Let ‘em be married if they wanna.” I liked the guy who called in and said “Look, I was raised by two guys who didn’t happen to be gay, and I came out just fine. What’s wrong with having two father figures in the house?” I liked the guy who called in and said “I’m a conservative Republican, but my son came out to me a couple of years ago and I think he’s right; he should be able to marry another guy if he wants to.”

Go ahead, Finneran. Get a constitutional amendment out in front of people. I don’t think they’ll ratify it.