Archbishop calls on RTÉ to remove 'blasphemous' clip

Carfacemandog

quintana76 wrote: »

Except Islam of course.

Plenty of good humour out there about Islam, Four Lions being one of my favourites.

The problem with sketches like the one in the OP and some similar ones aimed at other religions is that they're just not funny and seem to only be coming from a hateful place (and not funny hateful like a Bill burr type; just hateful).

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

newmember? wrote: »

All the comedy "experts" on this thread. :rolleyes:

Well, yeah, everyone IS a comedy expert really. Pretty much everyone will have an opinion on a piece of comedy that is presented to them and it’s not something you can tell somebody they’re wrong about. How they take it is how they take it. They laugh or they don’t. It’s involuntary. And if they don’t laugh, they can explain why they didn’t laugh. If they want to.

DeanAustin

newmember? wrote: »

All the comedy "experts" on this thread. :rolleyes:

I'm far from an expert. I just have an opinion on it. I didn't find it funny and saw nothing clever about it. It wasn't ironic, it wasn't cleverly poking fun at religion or the church. I just found it cheap and gratuitous. And that, in my opinion, makes it offensive. And, to be clear, I've no religious belief.

If other people have a different opinion, that's grand.

newmember?

newmember? wrote: »

All the comedy "experts" on this thread. :rolleyes:

You might compile list of acceptable comedy?

Zebra3

Zebra3 wrote: »

https://www.catholic.com/qa/how-important-is-the-old-testament-for-catholics


That's how important the genocidal God is to Catholics.

On here getting offended about a joke, but no issues to them worshipping a deity that's into slavery, incest and rape amongst other things.

Amazing that they get all uppidity about a joke, as I don't recall them getting upset about all the child abuse that was covered up and demanding that the RC church open up its' files and sack all those involved.

Youre selectively extracting a pick and mix theology of actions and beliefs to justify your position, that Christians venerate a god who levels cities and wipes out children, incest etc. They don't.

In Christian theology there are several covenants ,
Noahite, Abrahamic, Mosaic and Davidic and new (Jesus). Ratzinger/Pope Benedict in Verbum Domini regarded these covenants as an evolution of a relationship between man and god, of man's resistance etc.

The Christian god is very complicated, but its theologically inaccurate to accuse Christians of worshiping a murderous god. ("He" was/is, but that aspect is not what Christians hold as central- very simply, its more about Jesus and his version of god, rather than the god of Levi and Moses.

And that's wbataboutery at the end. Yea, some Christians have done very unChristian actions. But that is like arguing Isis represent Islam.

(Jesus H Christ, I can't believe I'm defending the Christian god here....)

newmember2

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Well, yeah, everyone IS a comedy expert really. Pretty much everyone will have an opinion on a piece of comedy that is presented to them and it’s not something you can tell somebody they’re wrong about. How they take it is how they take it. They laugh or they don’t. It’s involuntary. And if they don’t laugh, they can explain why they didn’t laugh. If they want to.

Indeed, I agree.

newmember2

DeanAustin wrote: »

I'm far from an expert. I just have an opinion on it. I didn't find it funny and saw nothing clever about it. It wasn't ironic, it wasn't cleverly poking fun at religion or the church. I just found it cheap and gratuitous. And that, in my opinion, makes it offensive. And, to be clear, I've no religious belief.

If other people have a different opinion, that's grand.

Surely it was referring to historic sex allegations which would be pretty much a current topic, no?

DeanAustin

newmember? wrote: »

Surely it was referring to historic sex allegations which would be pretty much a current topic, no?

Maybe but if it was it was a poor effort. The church are linked with child abuse so it’s not really poking fun at that (which would be a very risky topic to try and make funny).

Personally, if it was taking a pop at anything, I thought it was the metoo movement. Like, here’s a woman impregnated by a man in a much more powerful position. I think other comedians have covered that whole subject in a much funnier way.

One eyed Jack

newmember? wrote: »

Surely it was referring to historic sex allegations which would be pretty much a current topic, no?

It wasn’t referring to historic sex allegations, it was basically trying to take the piss out of the Nativity story by placing it in a modern context. Waterford Whispers used to be funny, but in recent years it’s stories have a more ‘woke’ bent to them, they’re tedious essentially. They probably got the idea to put a spin on the Nativity story from Atheist Ireland’s effort I think it was last year or the year before. I can’t find the article now, and the input of Angus McGrianna was likely because of his infamy for bloopers which went viral -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AcV43LfPF0

Basically it was RTÉ again attempting to appear “with it” to the Internet generation, and failing miserably. The Archbishop going off on one made it all the more Father Ted-like, which RTÉ were likely not just expecting, but hoping for.

newmember2

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It wasn’t referring to historic sex allegations...

it wasn't?..and you can hear God trying to defend himself saying "it was 2000 years ago!"?? Of course it was, it was bringing the nativity story into the current context of historical sex allegations and as mentioned the metoo movement. It wasn't a pop at the religion at all imho although I can see how devout Catholics would be offended by it.

Hotblack Desiato

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

That'd be the Jews, and their OT "genocidal maniac", that "quality" of "God" isn't really celebrated post new covenant. I suspect if you read the bible yourself, you might know that, ratger than profess some knowledge of it, to fire cheap shots.

The christians say the good bits of the old testament are still 100% fully relevant today, and downplay the bad bits. E.g. teach kids the story of Noah, but don't dwell on the innocent men women and children drowned in their multitudes, or mention that he slept with his two daughters. Then attack modern society because of its lack of supposed "absolute morality" when they lack it themselves. It's utter hypocrisy.

Consumption of "offensive" material for entertainment purposes should be a choice, not rammed down ones throat by your taxes' funded state broadcaster when you're confined to your home on the instructions of the state.

Are you living in "1984" where the TV can't be turned off?

Also, other channels are available. RTE alone provide two entertainment channels and a news channel.

Hotblack Desiato

jmayo wrote: »

Yes the church did with the help of authorities and ordinary citizens

...who had been told from the cradle if they defied the church they'd burn in hell.

Funny how it is ok to intimate all catholics, or at least all catholic priests, did something bad

Thousands and thousands of priests - who all went to the same handful of seminaries and knew each other - and not one whistleblower. Odd, isn't it?

joseywhales wrote: »

Edit: not the news but the new years countdown show. Still the same requirement for inclusivity

Inclusivity, on a broadcaster which pauses twice a day for an explicitly Catholic call to prayer?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

That’s it. If you’re going for a provocative target, you really have to absolutely nail it.

Life of Brian nailed it :pac:

One eyed Jack

newmember? wrote: »

it wasn't?..and you can hear God trying to defend himself saying "it was 2000 years ago!"?? Of course it was, it was bringing the nativity story into the current context of historical sex allegations and as mentioned the metoo movement. It wasn't a pop at the religion at all imho although I can see how devout Catholics would be offended by it.

You know that’s part of the joke, right? God was never actually accused of rape. It was a poor attempt to take a pop at religion, because most people weren’t going to get the reference as they don’t associate Jesus’ conception with rape. Not even the “Christmas is over lads, Joseph confessed”, associates the story of the nativity with rape. There’s no reason devout Catholics would find it any more or less offensive than anyone else for any particular reason. They may well be of the same opinion as myself that it was just shìte, and the Archbishop is a fool to be looking for offence where it’s perfectly clear that while offence was intended, not too many people actually gave a shìt.

joseywhales

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Inclusivity, on a broadcaster which pauses twice a day for an explicitly Catholic call to prayer?

Yes because the angelus is exclusive, the bells and the natural scenes are offensive to non Catholics and it is broadcast as part of a new years broadcast.(sarcasm)

I suppose if the angelus was a satirical sketch of buddha raping Ganesh then I would agree that they are on a par.

AngryHippie

biko wrote: »

It's kinda funny I think.
Although Mary wasn't a migrant. She simply travelled with her husband from Nazareth to Bethlehem for a census. They then returned home again.

So she travelled from Galilee to Judea ?
But She (or Joseph) were born in Behtlehem (Judea) and had moved to live in Nazareth (Galilee).....Ticks the Migrant box.....

I agree it is funny.

People getting upset over this is like people getting upset over Mickey Mouse imo.
(although there is substantial photographic evidence to suggest that Mickey Mouse exists)

AngryHippie

joseywhales wrote: »

I suppose if the angelus was a satirical sketch of buddha raping Ganesh then I would agree that they are on a par.

did we watch the same clip ?

Nobody got raped in the clip.

It didn't even identify whose God it was.

Could have been any God that happened to immaculately conceive a child with a migrant and then get bailed up on charges.

The clip I watched had a bearded man in a robe getting carted off by the guards.

An Garda Siochana werent even created until 1923 (AD) which was nearly two millenia after the alleged offence and well outside the statute of limitations for a prosecution or any hope of DNA substantion.

I know everyone has the right to take offense, but I personally ran out of offense with all the offense that people were taking, then I had to substitute fcuks, now I'm out of those too. And your not getting my figs. Need them for the fig roll reverse engineering experiment. I'm really close to gettin them in there.

Then everyone can have a fig roll and lighten up.

Its what Jesus would have wanted.

joseywhales

AngryHippie wrote: »

did we watch the same clip ?

Nobody got raped in the clip.

It didn't even identify whose God it was.

Could have been any God that happened to immaculately conceive a child with a migrant and then get bailed up on charges.

The clip I watched had a bearded man in a robe getting carted off by the guards.

An Garda Siochana werent even created until 1923 (AD) which was nearly two millenia after the alleged offence and well outside the statute of limitations for a prosecution or any hope of DNA substantion.

I know everyone has the right to take offense, but I personally ran out of offense with all the offense that people were taking, then I had to substitute fcuks, now I'm out of those too. And your not getting my figs. Need them for the fig roll reverse engineering experiment. I'm really close to gettin them in there.

Then everyone can have a fig roll and lighten up.

Its what Jesus would have wanted.

Ah yeah your right sure its only a bit of rape, if you can't laugh at that what can you laugh at?

frag420

AngryHippie wrote: »

And your not getting my figs. Need them for the fig roll reverse engineering experiment. I'm really close to getting them in there.

Then everyone can have a fig roll and lighten up.

Its what Jesus would have wanted.

Wait, where did you get your figs as i don’t want no bible figs that have been covering bible bollox!

one world order

frag420 wrote: »

Wait, where did you get your figs as i don’t want no bible figs that have been covering bible bollox!

Man has a sinful heart which is why we try to deny God. Some choose to accept and surrender to God thereby have their spirit renewed, living in peace and happiness with God. Others seek to reject God and follow Satan, the ruler of this world. They hate the bible, hate what is good and seek out bad over good.

ohnonotgmail

one world order wrote: »

Man has a sinful heart which is why we try to deny God. Some choose to accept and surrender to God thereby have their spirit renewed, living in peace and happiness with God. Others seek to reject God and follow Satan, the ruler of this world. They hate the bible, hate what is good and seek out bad over good.

do you post anything other than proselytising? isn't there a christianity forum for that?

Ash.J.Williams

i'm anti censorship anti religion but strangely happy that the Catholics have found their balls at last

Hotblack Desiato

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Are you living in "1984" where the TV can't be turned off?

Also, other channels are available. RTE alone provide two entertainment channels and a news channel.

This was the flagship NYE programme.
Many predominantly Catholic people's celebration, confined to their homes. There was no need for it. It wasn't funny, satirical, it wasn't the time nor the place.
Theres a thing called appropriateness.
One shouldn't have to "turn over".

If RTE had shown a religious documentary on N2, that the whole lot is nonsense, I wouldn't give one. I'm all for ripping the piss out of religions- but all of them, at an appropriate time.

ohnonotgmail

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

This was the flagship NYE programme.
Many predominantly Catholic people's celebration, confined to their homes. There was no need for it. It wasn't funny, satirical, it wasn't the time nor the place.
Theres a thing called appropriateness.
One shouldn't have to "turn over".

If RTE had shown a religious documentary on N2, that the whole lot is nonsense, I wouldn't give one. I'm all for ripping the piss out of religions- but all of them, at an appropriate time.

it was definitely satirical. it just wasn't satirising what you thought it was satirising. I'll give you the not funny though because it was really wasn't well done.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

it was definitely satirical. it just wasn't satirising what you thought it was satirising. I'll give you the not funny though because it was really wasn't well done.

satirizing who/what?

ohnonotgmail

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

satirizing who/what?

#MeToo

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

#MeToo

Thats what I thought
But I was worried I might have missed the "joke" or target.

So a state funded television event for people confined to their homes on state instructions, is reduced to satirising rape and sexual assault albeit of an imaginary person, whom a significant proportion of the audience, having had their taxes pay for the material, hold very dear.

Jasis. If that's what passes for satire now...

lawred2

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

As I said on another thread

RTÉ always take the easy lazy and cowardly option (cheap shots on Christianity)

If RTÉ want to go down the route of religious humour let them take the p1ss and have a good go off

Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, traditional african religions

etc etc along with the easy and cowardly option of Christianity.

I'd have to disagree - for such satire to land - it has to land on a large audience and be somewhat self deprecating

I don't see how a joke aimed at a minority group would fall into that category.. Certainly wouldn't be "brave" as you seem to be framing it.

as it goes - thought that that sketch was unfunny crap

lawred2

lawred2 wrote: »

I'd have to disagree - for such satire to land - it has to land on a large audience and be somewhat self deprecating

I don't see how a joke aimed at a minority group would fall into that category.. Certainly wouldn't be "brave" as you seem to be framing it.

as it goes - thought that that sketch was unfunny crap

In theory, yes.
Fr. Ted, Life of Brian were satirical of aspects of the Church and Christianity. But were spot on.

But using the OED definition of satire:

I. A literary composition, and related senses.

a. A poem or (in later use) a novel, film, or other work of art which uses humour, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize prevailing immorality or foolishness, esp. as a form of social or political commentary. Frequently with on, of, against...
... a thing or circumstance which exposes the faults or absurdities of something or someone; a mockery. Chiefly with on, of. Also occasionally as a mass noun

This was not satire. Not even close.
If #metoo the target, even less so, unless RTE is moving to discredit #metoo and would have sexual assault allegations ridiculed or satrised, or is using #metoo as a vehicle to satirise god? Either way it failed.

jmayo

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

This was the flagship NYE programme.
Many predominantly Catholic people's celebration, confined to their homes. There was no need for it. It wasn't funny, satirical, it wasn't the time nor the place.
Theres a thing called appropriateness.
One shouldn't have to "turn over".

If RTE had shown a religious documentary on N2, that the whole lot is nonsense, I wouldn't give one. I'm all for ripping the piss out of religions- but all of them, at an appropriate time.

Some are excusing this as satire on #metoo movement, but WTF were they doing satirising anything on a NYE show ?

NYE shows are meant to be light entertainment not trying to be smart ar**es taking on targets.

And as for this shyte about switching over, there are still people in this country operating off a few chanels, not on satellite feeds with hundreds of channels.
So some people are stuck with watching RTE for NYE, most especially with lockdown restrictions.

But of course a lot of the more cosmopolitans amongst us look down on those people as being backward and probably call them something like boggers. :rolleyes:

Also what really annoys me is the complete double standards.
Of course the excuse being used here is that christians, and most especially catholics, are fair game since they are in the majority.

A lot of people hate the catholic church, I get that.
I haven't fancied their bullc*** since I was in primary school, but I also know there is a time and a place to pull the pee out of catholics.
This most certainly wasn't it and to make it worse this wasn't even remotely funny.

But then again what do you expect from the comedy free zone that is RTE.

statesaver

Was it supposed to be funny ?