I happen to be a full supporter of Israel. Only in Weirland would I find so much in common with Pat Buchanan!. Sometimes I think I've passed through a wormhole and come out somewhere so strange that its only proper name is Weirdland. Posted by Emma 4:37 PM Monday, February 23, 2004 I wonder how many of them will weasel out of applying their own dictum to Mel. During the Dixie Chicks brouhaha, one of the arguments on the right was that with free speech come consequences: if you speak your mind, you must be prepared to pay the price.
#Late night thoughts movie
Mel has the right to make his movie and people have a right to see it. My opinion? As all four of you know, I'm a First Amendment absolutist. I didn't remember any conservative theologians standing up for artistic expression during the showings of The Last Temptation of Christ. Interestingly, the "pro" theologian started defending those "additions" as forms of artistic expression. Specifically, he discussed three: Christ being thrown off a bridge by a Jewish mob a raven pecking out the eyes of one of the thieves crucified with Jesus (right after Jesus says "forgive them Father for they know not what they do"!) and the presence of devils and demons in the crowd. The "con" professor pointed out several places in the movie where Mel departed rather strongly from any and all Gospels and into the fevered imagination of the not-so-sainted Emmerich. Now, in several discussions I've read lately, one of the "pro" arguments made most often can best be described as "it happened deal with it." Or to paraphrase Mel, this is the story as written in the Gospels. Two theology professors gave their impression of the movie. Tonight there was a discussion in The Newshour about the movie. But I have really been interested in people's reactions, pro and con. I must be the only person in the world who could care less about Mel's latest bio.er.movie.