I mean, Jesus could drill her like a plumber’s snake and then afterwards, if she was a good and faithful…?
pinky fwip
Her hymen is back in place, every lil bit is miraculously all where it should be: all nice, tidy and snug in place. :eek: :o
Born again? Meh, its more like Sophomore-15 with a Varsity letter for Cross Country. (Its in that bible version where Jesus wears a wife-beater with jeans, has guns, drives a pick-up, and is White.)
"Friends, lets turn the hymnal to page 116… “What A Friend We Have in Jesus…”
I just did a Google search, because I’m sure that Sarah Silverman has made jokes about Muslims. Unfortunately, “Sarah Silverman Mohammed” just brings up endless links to right wing bloggers making exactly the comment you just made.
So, no points for originality, but good job staying on message.
Perhaps not Sarah Silverman, but some atheists have been known to chalk/draw Mohammed all over campuses. They were not struck by divine wrath, thus demonstrating that God is imaginary, or at least that the provisions forbidding Mohammed’s depiction are ludicrous.
Doesn’t the story of St. Boniface demonstrate something similar, vis-a-vis paganism? There is some irony here.
I could see some people being offended by the ending, but I’m gonna guess that’s not the part that bothers them.
In fact, other than that ending, I thought it was too tame for Silverman. And even the ending only works if you think about it in a dirty way. You need not do so.
I believe you missed the point if you think anonymous chalk drawings are analogous. I like Silverman, but I think it’s a fair point in general. Many comics like to be edgy, “in your face,” risk takers in terms of possibly offending others–right up to the point where they actually take a risk.
I don’t blame them. There’s a crazy faction of Muslims I wouldn’t fuck with either for the sake of a joke. But it does mean their (the gonzo comics, not the Muslims) “edgy cred” is at least a bit in question if the only people they poke with their crazy, crazy humor are those whose hostile reactions they actually enjoy.
Meh. It’s not about being risky. Comics who make fun of power structures are asking for a re-examination of social standards, social justice, the experiences of the disenfranchised. Comics who make fun of the powerless are just assholes.
The majority of the people in the Muslim world live pretty shitty lives. What’s the point in taking them down a notch? The majority of the people in the Muslim world are also not among the audience for American comedians.
Muslims in America pretty much have zero clout. They are themselves among the disenfranchised. They hold no power in our society.
Christians on the other hand hold great sway in American society and governance. The political power held by Christians in this country has very real effects on the everyday lives of non-Christians.
American comedians making fun of Christians are the Court Jester making fun of the King.
American comedians making fun of Muslims are the Court Jester making fun of the busboy.
The only thing worse than good arguments for the side you disagree with, is bad arguments for the side you take. Sperm is alive because it has a sense of smell? Really? I don’t have a sense of smell. Am I not alive? What does it even mean that sperm ‘has a sense of smell’ beyond ‘is able to detect certain chemicals’, which I don’t think is a very special thing among cells? And most ironically, of course sperm is alive, it’s a living cell, if not an autonomous life form. But its sense of smell just doesn’t enter into it.
Plus what makes this sort of thing funny is the limited level of offense it causes. Something so offensive as to actually be risky to the person saying it is really not all that funny. Comedy is about treading that line carefully.
Of course, the line is different for different types of comedians and in different audiences. But as Silverman’s ad clearly is going for a more general audience than, say, South Park. And then, even their use of Mohammed seemed less about humor and more about cultural criticism. How many people went “Mohammed is not allowed on TV. That’s hilarious!”
Aren’t the majority of Christians powerless, relatively speaking? What’s all that talk about the 99%? Lots of Christians in that tribe, isn’t there? And there are enormously powerful Muslims in the Muslim world, if you’re including the entire world in the equation.
I’m Catholic, and I don’t take much offense at such things. And I get the point that there are lots of Christians (just as there are lots of Muslims) in the world who believe their perspective is the only right one, a viewpoint that ought to be imposed on others even when what they restrict has no real impact on anyone other than the people they look to constrain. But there is a conspicuous absence of “poke the Muslim” humor compared to that directed at Christians. Again, I don’t blame them. I don’t lose sleep over it, but it is at least a bit of a pussy position, IMO. And also IMO, it’s disingenuous to pretend that the lack of such humor has nothing to do with the fact that making such jokes creates the real risk that some asshole will do you the favor of slitting your throat or cutting your head off for the effort. “I just don’t want to piss on the downtrodden, that’s why.” Yeah, right. Then consider the sensibilities of the poor Baptists in Mississippi who won’t find Silverman’s joke very funny either, if that’s the way you feel. Can’t have it both ways, ISTM.
Do the social standards of the Muslim world need re-examining?
I think Stratocaster has a point - it rings a little hollow to be all edgy and transgressive only when it is safe, or aimed only at politically correct targets.
For what it’s worth, I posted above while at work and not able to watch the video. I assumed it was a Sarah Silverman “I’m Fucking Your Jesus” comedy song or sketch. I was just making a general point about it being more relevant to take aim at the power structure rather than taking aim at a disenfranchised group (not, by the way, because of any concern for the sensibilities of the disenfranchised group but because there’s no point in “taking down” a group that has no power).
Now that I’ve actually watched the video, my above comments are actually more relevant.
It’s a freaking PSA meant to inform U.S. citizens of just how much the Christian power structure in the United States is legislating their religious beliefs and just how widespread the effects of these laws are in infringing upon the rights of U.S. citizens who happen to not hold the same religious views as those in power.
It’s a “If You Don’t Agree With These People You Have to Vote Because That’s How Democracy Works” message.
Now, who wants to explain to me the many ways Muslims are attempting to codify their religious beliefs into U.S. law?
Anti-abortion, “pro”-life legislation in the U.S. has been enacted by Christian lawmakers, not Muslim. The whole movement is driven by Christian fundies. How did Muslims even get into the discussion?
It’s wishful thinking by the Fundy-tards; they see someone making fun of their holy book, and wish they, or one who is in authority, could put a fatwa on her.
The Onion poked a little fun at this discrepancy in how religions react to offensive jokes (spoilered because it is designed to be as offensive as possible) :
Dude, you left out the word “poor” in my post. The dirt-poor, disenfranchised, to make it clearer–those Mississippians. Silverman is offending those po’, po’ bastards.
The one that leaps to mind is killing people who hold differing political viewpoints. You know, by flying airplanes into buildings and blowing up bombs at marathons, that kind of thing. And the threat thereof. They seek at least to influence U.S. policy.
But really, your point is not so much weak, as it has nothing to do with the original point being made, IMO. Whatever Silverman’s viewpoint is, in the aggregate the conspicuous lack of humor ridiculing Muslim extremism (as opposed to Christian extremism) is extremely telling. Again, I don’t blame the comedians. Those Muslim fanatics don’t call their Congressman, they cut your head off. So, however righteous you think Silverman’s point is, the point remains that comedians on the whole leave Muslims alone for reasons obvious to those who aren’t tortuously seeking alternate explanations. If Silverman has other thoughts, if she’s a one-off exception, I have no way of knowing. But I don’t believe that en masse (at least as far as I can see) there’s an alternate explanation.
If your explanation re: Silverman’s bit is supposed to be broader, an explanation for the wider absence of similar Muslim-targeted humor, it’s a fail. If you’re just explaining your read of Silverman’s bit, by itself–okay, whatever. Maybe you’re right. Maybe she’s saving some brilliant bit skewering Mohammed, just waiting for the moment when those U.S. Muslims gain enough political clout and get pushy. But I doubt it.
:eek: :o