B. C. Sunday strip, 7/4: Hart again lambastes the politically correct

[dougie_monty]

Here’s the direct link to the Skelton article on the Snopes website:
http://www.snopes.com/glurge/skelton.htm

[Sternvogel]

@stolichnaya

What does this mean?

“Let he who is without conscience/ Cast the first asterisk” is a play on the Biblical quote “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” (John 8:7), uttered by Jesus upon seeing a mob about to pelt an accused adultress. Johnny Hart is saying that anyone who would add an asterisk (i.e. remove “under God” from the text) to the Pledge of Allegiance must lack a conscience. The cartoonist was perhaps recalling the legendary asterisk affixed to Roger Maris’s 61-homer season of 1961.

[dougie_monty]

@Sternvogel

“Let he who is without conscience/ Cast the first asterisk” is a play on the Biblical quote “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” (John 8:7), uttered by Jesus upon seeing a mob about to pelt an accused adultress. Johnny Hart is saying that anyone who would add an asterisk (i.e. remove “under God” from the text) to the Pledge of Allegiance must lack a conscience. The cartoonist was perhaps recalling the legendary asterisk affixed to Roger Maris’s 61-homer season of 1961.

I read about that controversy, Sternvogel; I understand that Ford Frick, commissioner at the time Maris was closing in on Ruth’s record, had been a close friend of Ruth during his (Frick’s) newspaperman days: the implication is that Frick didn’t want anyone to break his friend’s record. (And Rogers Hornsby said, “It would be a pity if Ruth’s record were bested by a .270 hitter.” (Ruth batted .356 in his record year; Maris .269.)

[lawoot]

It always amazes me how a group that claims that our society has been going downhill due to the lack of religion in the secular side, gets freaked out over the removal of “under God” - ignoring the fact that our society ‘started’ going downhill AFTER the words were ADDED to the pledge. Hmmm… maybe God doesn’t want the words there, eh?

[Baldwin]

Will you please do me a favor and tell that to our Supreme Court?

Well, the Supreme Court found a technical reason to send the case back down, but I imagine they haven’t seen the last of it.

What I’ve always heard is that in 1954 the addition of “under God” passed Congress as a way to symbolize the difference between our way of life and that of evil, Communist, Soviet Russia. I guess the idea was that the U.S. has a predominantly Christian population whilst the USSR was officially atheistic. Great. Didn’t they really get it backwards? If they had rejected the idea of adding those words to the Pledge, they could have shown the real difference – that the U.S. recognized freedom of belief, rather than imposing a state doctrine like the USSR.

[xvxdarkknightxvx]

@blowero

Yeah - Johnny Hart is a douchebag.

I have opinions. This makes me a douchebag.

[blowero]

@xvxdarkknightxvx

I have opinions. This makes me a douchebag.

Only if they’re douchebag opinions, and you can’t keep them out of your cartoons.

[Winston_Bongo]

@xvxdarkknightxvx

I have opinions. This makes me a douchebag.

No, no, no . . . see, you’re only a douchebag if you have conservative Christian opinions (i.e. “crapola”), or if you believe anything that contradicts liberal, secularist thought. That’s why our oh-so-tolerant, open-minded, live-and-let-live liberals here have dubbed Hart a “douchebag,” a “weirdo,” a “nutjob,” and a “pathetic, freedom-hatin’, religion-crazed hate-monger” simply for expressing his opinions in a silly, innocuous newspaper strip.

Yep, for a bunch of tolerant people, some of you sure are brimming over with venom. I’d especially like to see some evidence that Hart is “freedom-hatin’” and a “hate-monger.” Cite, please? Or are we just supposed to take your word for it because you’re a good little liberal?

And hey blowero, here’s a news flash for you! He doesn’t have to keep his “douchebag opinions” out of his strip. See, that’s part of the whole 1st Amendment thing you lefties claim to be so fond of.

Geez, the hypocrisy here is astounding sometimes. I don’t even like BC, but some of you folks need to get a grip.

[dougie_monty]

Touché, Winston. It’s good to know someone agrees with me in this regard.
I like to think that there are approachers to religious topics other than H. L. Mencken’s and Elmer Gantry’s…

[Eve]

@Winston Bongo

I’d especially like to see some evidence that Hart is “freedom-hatin’” and a “hate-monger.” Cite, please?

You got it, buck-o, just read this interview.

He says:

Jews and Muslims who don’t accept Jesus will burn in Hell.

Homosexuality is the handiwork of Satan.

America was founded as a Christian nation, and should remain one. The country’s moral decline began the day that prayer in the public schools was outlawed.

[Trunk]

@dougie_monty

I read about that controversy, Sternvogel; I understand that Ford Frick, commissioner at the time Maris was closing in on Ruth’s record, had been a close friend of Ruth during his (Frick’s) newspaperman days: the implication is that Frick didn’t want anyone to break his friend’s record. (And Rogers Hornsby said, “It would be a pity if Ruth’s record were bested by a .270 hitter.” (Ruth batted .356 in his record year; Maris .269.)

Are you saying the asterisk is there because Maris hit .269 while Ruth hit .356?

The asterisk is there because Maris hit 61 homers in a season with 162 games. Ruth hit 60 homers in a season with 154 games. And, Maris only had 58 homers at the 154 game mark.

FWIW, I think Maris’ achievement derserves an asterisk.

[alison_ashley]

Originally Posted By Winston Bongo
No, no, no . . . see, you’re only a douchebag if you have conservative Christian opinions (i.e. “crapola”), or if you believe anything that contradicts liberal, secularist thought. That’s why our oh-so-tolerant, open-minded, live-and-let-live liberals here have dubbed Hart a “douchebag,” a “weirdo,” a “nutjob,” and a “pathetic, freedom-hatin’, religion-crazed hate-monger” simply for expressing his opinions in a silly, innocuous newspaper strip.

One can be “tolerant”, “open-minded” and exhibit a “live-and-let-live” attitude while still criticizing others. Hart has chosen to be a douchebag. No-one in this thread is denying his right to make all the moronic comic strips he wants to. However, to criticize Hart’s speech is perfectly reasonable, and it is perfectly reasonable to criticize Hart for his opinions.

That is why I say, with full tolerance for Hart’s religion, with an open mind regarding Hart’s opinions, and seeking no prohibition of his opinions, that Hart is a douchebag. Understand?

[Live_Better_Electrically]

Wow, I’m not a regular B.C. reader, but I saw this strip on Sunday and completely misinterpreted it. I thought Hart was saying that “under God” should be left out and that it would be unconscionable to qualify any of the remaining statements. I hadn’t noticed the tattered flag. I wonder if he would be pleased to know that some readers were getting the opposite of his intended message?

[Winston_Bongo]

@Eve

You got it, buck-o, just read this interview.

Thanks for the cite, Eve. That’s a pretty good article; it provides both sides of the story and sums up the controversy very well. My only problem is that the comments you cite from Hart are not actually quoted in the article. Did he really say those things straight out, or was that the interpretation of the interviewer? And if he did say something like them, what was the context? Perhaps he does believe Christianity is the only way to Heaven. Millions of Christians believe this, but that does not automatically make them “hate-mongers,” because Christ taught his listeners to “love thy neighbor” no matter who they are. Suspecting that someone may be going to hell is no excuse for hatred – such a reaction would not be consistent with Christ’s teachings. So I think you are assuming hate where you have no real evidence of such. Now, that infamous “God hates fags” guy, for example – that guy is a true hate-monger. But Johnny Hart? Artist of lame cartoon strips? I don’t think so.

Interestingly, the article also quotes several quite liberal folks who have a less-hypocritical attitude about B.C. than some have expressed here.

Daniel Polsby is a law professor at Northwestern University. He teaches the First Amendment. He is Jewish. He doesn’t believe in the divinity of Jesus. But he thinks Hart is a hero for free speech.
Unsolicited, Polsby wrote a letter to Hart’s syndicate in 1997, complimenting the cartoonist’s religious strips for their defiance of commercial pressure. Polsby thinks the issue is about a fundamental hypocrisy as old as faith, as noxious as the Inquisition. It is, he said, about the intolerance of one religion for another. And the tyranny of the liberal intellectual elite. He mentions the strip “Doonesbury.”
“A lot of people who love it when Garry Trudeau does it with his religion, which happens to be the secular religion of politics, can’t stand it when Johnny Hart does it with his religion.”

Trudeau almost never speaks for the record. But he said he would be willing to look at some of Hart’s religious cartoons.

He read them. Laughed.

“Please tell me this is not controversial,” he said.

“What’s the problem – that, God forbid, Johnny Hart still believes in God? These are good,” Trudeau said. “What’s important is that he still honors his first professional obligation, which is to entertain. If he wants to stimulate people into thinking about the nature of faith, more power to him. I don’t disagree with the law professor. [Hart] is writing about his values as much as I am writing about mine.”

To me, that reaction seems a lot more rational than getting one’s underpants in a bunch and calling Hart a douchebag. Which brings me to . . .

@alison ashley

One can be “tolerant”, “open-minded” and exhibit a “live-and-let-live” attitude while still criticizing others. Hart has chosen to be a douchebag. No-one in this thread is denying his right to make all the moronic comic strips he wants to. However, to criticize Hart’s speech is perfectly reasonable, and it is perfectly reasonable to criticize Hart for his opinions.

That is why I say, with full tolerance for Hart’s religion, with an open mind regarding Hart’s opinions, and seeking no prohibition of his opinions, that Hart is a douchebag. Understand?

I’m glad you at least acknowledge his right to express himself, but you still sound contradictory. The act of calling someone a douchebag based on his opinions is itself indicative that you do not, in fact, have an open mind about those opinions. Which, by the way, is fine with me – I don’t have an open mind toward the opinions of those I regard as “douchebags” either. But let’s not try to have it both ways, claiming open-mindedness while also engaging in name-calling.

[Eve]

I’d like to know hat would happen if Mary Worth, say, advised her neighbor to “give up the priesthood, dear—religion is just fairy tales for the weak-minded.”

The poor old broad would be given the bum’s ruish before her ink was dry.

[blowero]

@Winston Bongo

And hey blowero, here’s a news flash for you! He doesn’t have to keep his “douchebag opinions” out of his strip. See, that’s part of the whole 1st Amendment thing you lefties claim to be so fond of.

Um, did I say he had to keep his opinions out of his strip? He can put all the opinions in he likes, and I can call him a douchebag if I like, just as many conservatives like to call Gary Trudeau names. Or does that 1st Amendment thing not apply to me?

Geez, the hypocrisy here is astounding sometimes. I don’t even like BC, but some of you folks need to get a grip.

You’re the one who’s losing his grip. :rolleyes:

[blowero]

@Winston Bongo

Which, by the way, is fine with me – I don’t have an open mind toward the opinions of those I regard as “douchebags” either. But let’s not try to have it both ways, claiming open-mindedness while also engaging in name-calling.

I called him a douchebag. ONE sentence: “Johnny Hart is a douchebag.” That’s it - one sentence. What other claims are you imagining that I made? You need to calm down.

[Loach]

Wow the tolerance for other views is under whelming around here lately. If I said Gary Trudeau is a doucebag I’m sure no one would jump on me. The hate the left feels for anyone they perceive is on the right is downright scary any more. This is why I like to stay here in CS and out of GD. No room for any other thoughts or ideas and um well someone forbid that you actually believe in God. Go ahead a push a secular agenda but don’t dare to suggest that its good to have religion in your everyday life. I don’t even believe that but I see nothing wrong with anything I have seen in BC (other than it used to be a lot funnier). I don’t agree with everything in it but I have seen nothing to come close to what is in Doonesbury on a day to day basis when it comes to purposefull controversy. The only difference is you agree with one and not the other. For the record I am a very lapsed Catholic who goes to church for funerals and weddings only.

Actually reading that cite closely Gary Trudeau says it perfectly.

[Gamaliel]

@Winston Bongo

I’m glad you at least acknowledge his right to express himself, but you still sound contradictory. The act of calling someone a douchebag based on his opinions is itself indicative that you do not, in fact, have an open mind about those opinions. Which, by the way, is fine with me – I don’t have an open mind toward the opinions of those I regard as “douchebags” either. But let’s not try to have it both ways, claiming open-mindedness while also engaging in name-calling.

This may be the silliest argument I’ve seen in a while, which is of course why I feel compelled to participate in it…

Really, now, how many Jesus strips does he have to read before he’s allowed to make up his mind? Having an opinion does not equal “close-minded”, and even if his mind is now closed to Hart’s missives, what new revolutionary message about Jesus is there in strip 174 as opposed to 173?

@Johnny Hart

Damn, there’s Satan again.

[blowero]

@Loach

Wow the tolerance for other views is under whelming around here lately. If I said Gary Trudeau is a doucebag I’m sure no one would jump on me.

People would disagree with you, but they probably wouldn’t suggest you don’t have a right to express an opinion.

The hate the left feels for anyone they perceive is on the right is downright scary any more.

I don’t hate Johnny Hart; I just think he’s a douchebag.

This is why I like to stay here in CS and out of GD. No room for any other thoughts or ideas

Hmmm…aren’t you the one who’s suggesting that we’re not allowed to express our opinions?

and um well someone forbid that you actually believe in God.

You’re WAY off. Hart didn’t just say “I believe in God”, he said “If school children aren’t forced to pledge allegiance to God, then the country will fall apart.” Ergo, he is a douchebag.