Archbishop calls on RTÉ to remove 'blasphemous' clip

MrMusician18

Choochtown wrote: »

That's an interesting point. I see RTE playing the Angelus (a Catholic tradition) every evening but you see one group being "constantly picked on"

Can you give some examples of Christians being "constantly picked on" please?

Well I don't keep a ledger, but off the top of my head we have this one, and that time RTE investigates decided to destroy a Catholic priest.

Can't recall anything similar from RTE for other faith groups and faith leaders tbh.

Zaph

Acosta wrote: »

Fair enough if catholics are pissed off about it. They should write in. But all I can see on other social media is the youth defence/national party crowd up in arms about it. They spend most of their time whinging about RTE but continue to watch it for some reason.

Well if you don't watch it you can't be offended by it, and where would that lot be if they didn't have something to be offended about?

Personally I think the only offence committed was to call it comedy, it was like a poorly done drama student review sketch. If you're going to piss a load of people off in the name of comedy, which they undoubtedly knew it would, the first rule should be to at least make it funny.

growleaves

Zaph wrote: »

Well if you don't watch it you can't be offended by it, and where would that lot be if they didn't have something to be offended about?

Personally I think the only offence committed was to call it comedy, it was like a poorly done drama student review sketch. If you're going to piss a load of people off in the name of comedy, which they undoubtedly knew it would, the first rule should be to at least make it funny.

Yeah well literally all I watch on RTE is GAA matches and the NYE annual show. I'll know in future to stick to the BBC on NYE.

breezy1985

GarIT wrote: »

So we're any official building, school, hospital in Ireland, will we pull them all down?

The fact that the church has its hand in all those things in Ireland is exactly why it is constantly satirized on RTE and not the hindus or muslims and I'm pretty sure all the suddenly outraged on here see that too.

By the way the whole statue thing was to point out the absurdity of the church in this country crying about being picked on and downtrodden and how using offence as a tool could backfire. I don't actually expect any grottos to be pulled down

breezy1985

growleaves wrote: »

Yeah well literally all I watch on RTE is GAA matches and the NYE annual show. I'll know in future to stick to the BBC on NYE.

Ya stick to BBC they would never have a bad word to say about Irish catholics over in the UK

jmayo

Choochtown wrote: »

Looks like most of the people complaining here would be happy if there were a few oul Muslim jokes to even things up!

And why not.
Why is it ok to have a pop at some groups and not others.

I am a lapsed catholic so couldn't care if you slag the shyte out of catholic church, but I also hate the fact that slagging the absolute living shyte out of what I consider a much worse religion nowadays is somehow not ok.

And I aint talking about scientology which is another pile of dogsh**e.

magicbastarder wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEYNGWAGrrY

unless RTE has a hidden pool of muslim or jewish comedians, i cannot see anyone being interested in writing jokes about religions they don't know anything about.

Actually AFAIK in an interview he admitted in a jokey way he didn't include stuff about muslims on his routine because he didn't want it to be his last tour.

breezy1985

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Well I don't keep a ledger, but off the top of my head we have this one, and that time RTE investigates decided to destroy a Catholic priest.

Can't recall anything similar from RTE for other faith groups and faith leaders tbh.

Please tell me cause the number of times this idiotic argument is popping up now is getting boring.

How many religions have been heavily embedded in the politics of the Irish state throughout it's history?

breezy1985

jmayo wrote: »

And why not.
Why is it ok to have a pop at some groups and not others.

I am a lapsed catholic so couldn't care if you slag the shyte out of catholic church, but I also hate the fact that slagging the absolute living shyte out of what I consider a much worse religion nowadays is somehow not ok.

And I aint talking about scientology which is another pile of dogsh**e.



Actually AFAIK in an interview he admitted in a jokey way he didn't include stuff about muslims on his routine because he didn't want it to be his last tour.

Any link to that interview?

tjhook

Glad to see RTE have learned from experience that they have to be careful which groups they insult. They've moved onto easier/more acceptable targets, even though disability, religion and membership of the traveler community are all "protected grounds". Somebody is bound to complain, and I'll be interested to see how equally the rules are applied.

I've no problem with an archbishop being outraged about it. Or with RTE telling him where to go.

For me the fault lies in the creative process that must have gone something like "Let's do something edgy. But not so edgy that it insults any of our sacred cows. What other group can be insulted without consequence?". I also think the timing (New Years Night celebrations) was dimwitted. But I suppose cowardly and dimwitted is all we can expect from RTE.

The upcoming "hate speech" laws will have exemptions for artistic/comedic speech, so they wouldn't have any effect on something like this. But if an ordinary person is going to joke like Tommy Tiernan about sex with travelers, the force of the state could be applied.

MrMusician18

breezy1985 wrote: »

Please tell me cause the number of times this idiotic argument is popping up now is getting boring.

How many religions have been heavily embedded in the politics of the Irish state throughout it's history?

Does that matter? Does that give RTE the right to be gratuitously offensive to that group and that group alone during a light entertainment show?

This wasn't an edgy satire show. It was meant to be music and entertainment for everyone to ring in the new year.

jmreire

riffmongous wrote: »

Well Mary was probably around 12-14 years old

In biblical times, people did not have as long a lifespan, and married earlier. Even up to more recent times, in Gretna Green in Scotland, couples could get married once they were 16 year old, and without their parents consent, which was not allowed elsewhere in the UK where you had to be 21.
Aisha was 6 years of age when Mohammad married her, 9 years old when he consumated the marriage. So Mary being as young 12 or 14 may be true. But there was a difference between the two marriages. At that age, 9 years old is still to young.

magicbastarder

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Does that matter? Does that give RTE the right to be gratuitously offensive to that group and that group alone during a light entertainment show?

interesting use of the word gratuitous.
it's a core belief of the catholic faith that god selected a teenage girl and decided to impregnate her without her consent. in any context, that's eye popping, and i struggle to understand how it could be defended. it's ripe for the satire shown to it.

Donald Trump

Zaph wrote: »

Well if you don't watch it you can't be offended by it, and where would that lot be if they didn't have something to be offended about?

To continue on my question earlier to another poster, would you say the same if I went and made some unfunny "joke" or quip about a random person because of their socioeconomic background or friends or ethnicity or other stereotypes?


More specifically, if I went on to the thread about the man who was recently shot and made some derogatory remark towards the deceased based on any of the above, thinly veiled as "satire", would you support my right to make it there? Even if I was adamant that it was funny or "dark humour" but others thought it was horrendously offensive to either the deceased or his community? Would you simply say that people don't need to read the post if they don't find it funny? That "where would that lot be if they didn't have something to be offended about"?


I think that I would be banned and quite rightly too if I said something that would cause so much offense.



The point here is that people claim they want "freedom" etc. That nothing is taboo and no topic is sacred. When in fact what they mean is "well I'm happy for those other to be offended so I'll pretend that I believe that anything should go". But nobody really wants a free for all for all and everything. They just want to draw their own personal line in a different place that suits them.

breezy1985

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Does that matter? Does that give RTE the right to be gratuitously offensive to that group and that group alone during a light entertainment show?

This wasn't an edgy satire show. It was meant to be music and entertainment for everyone to ring in the new year.

Yes it matters. The context of the joke matters and satire of the church in Ireland is about way more that a religion it is about or culture and politics and therefore the rules are different to any other religion in Ireland

magicbastarder

Donald Trump wrote: »

I think that I would be banned and quite rightly too if I said something that would cause so much offense.

the crucial difference is this joke was not about catholics, it was about catholicism.
and it's not a subtle difference, it's quite glaring. your comparison does not fit the context.

suicide_circus

The joke didnt work but i'll be damned if i have any time for a bishop to talk to any broadcaster about blasphemy. The fact remains however that rte would never in a million years make any kind of joke about islam or any other religion because they are cowards.

emo72

What idiot in rte thought that would be funny. I'm not in the least offended by it. But still think the older people in ireland that find solace in their religion, well, they don't need ****e like that after the year they had.

There's a time and a place for humor that pushes boundaries. This wasn't it.

GarIT

magicbastarder wrote: »

interesting use of the word gratuitous.
it's a core belief of the catholic faith that god selected a teenage girl and decided to impregnate her without her consent. in any context, that's eye popping, and i struggle to understand how it could be defended. it's ripe for the satire shown to it.

Was that not a normal age at the time?

growleaves

magicbastarder wrote: »

the crucial difference is this joke was not about catholics, it was about catholicism.
and it's not a subtle difference, it's quite glaring. your comparison does not fit the context.

No it was not about Catholicism - it was a joke about God/Christian beliefs.

MenloPete

magicbastarder wrote: »

it's a core belief of the catholic faith that god selected a teenage girl and decided to impregnate her without her consent.

I think you've forgotten a line from your prayers: "Be it done unto me according to thy word" :rolleyes:

Donald Trump

magicbastarder wrote: »

the crucial difference is this joke was not about catholics, it was about catholicism.
and it's not a subtle difference, it's quite glaring. your comparison does not fit the context.

Nope.


One could easily make a quip that was - on the face of it - general to something else. For example a genre of music.


How about making a quip about the stereotypes of people who are from that area of Dublin?


The man was described as a thug in the initial reports. That was highly offensive to certain people. Most Irish people don't realise that that is because that is kind of a "protected" word now in the US. You can't really use it in reference to a person who is black there. To Irish people it does not have those connotations.



You can twist it however you want to justify where you want to draw your own line. The point is that you do have a line. To pretend that there should be no line while having your own is not honest.

magicbastarder

suicide_circus wrote: »

The joke didnt work but i'll be damned if i have any time for a bishop to talk to any broadcaster about blasphemy. The fact remains however that rte would never in a million years make any kind of joke about islam or any other religion because they are cowards.

ah, it was funny in a way i'd have found funny as a teenager.

i find all this 'RTE are willing to attack catholics but not muslims' talk interesting given that RTE pause on both the main radio (twice) and TV channel (once) every day for a catholic prayer 'time out'. catholicism has a special place in our national broadcaster's airwaves, so i find this talk that they hate catholics a rather difficult square to circle.

Smee_Again

GarIT wrote: »

Was that not a normal age at the time?

The age didn’t change for the priests down through the centuries though.

magicbastarder

Donald Trump wrote: »

How about making a quip about the stereotypes of people who are from that area of Dublin?

they weren't stereotyping catholics. they were referring to a core belief of catholics, the place of which in the canon which is not in question. stereotyping is something else entirely.

MenloPete

conorhal wrote: »

...some of the most hilariously thin skinned cretans on the internet that spend all day trying to ban stuff.

That's very unfair to all those people from Crete :P

MrMusician18

magicbastarder wrote: »

interesting use of the word gratuitous.
it's a core belief of the catholic faith that god selected a teenage girl and decided to impregnate her without her consent. in any context, that's eye popping, and i struggle to understand how it could be defended. it's ripe for the satire shown to it.

It may well be ripe for satire, but there's a time and a place. An inclusive light entertainment show is not it.

A key component of entertainment is knowing your audience. This was a failure.

Smee_Again

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It may well be ripe for satire, but there's a time and a place. An inclusive light entertainment show is not it.

A key component of entertainment is knowing your audience. This was a failure.

That’s a different argument than calling for it to be removed now.

riffmongous

jmreire wrote: »

In biblical times, people did not have as long a lifespan, and married earlier. Even up to more recent times, in Gretna Green in Scotland, couples could get married once they were 16 year old, and without their parents consent, which was not allowed elsewhere in the UK where you had to be 21.
Aisha was 6 years of age when Mohammad married her, 9 years old when he consumated the marriage. So Mary being as young 12 or 14 may be true. But there was a difference between the two marriages. At that age, 9 years old is still to young.

According to stories written at least 100 years after they were alive

magicbastarder

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It may well be ripe for satire, but there's a time and a place. An inclusive light entertainment show is not it.

no argument there.

joeysoap

ElJeffe wrote: »

I don't think that actual clip is funny but I do believe in the right of comedians to rip the piss out of all sky fairies. Problem is they usually sidestep Islam and concentrate on Christianity

They like to live afterwards