February 09, 2006
But that was last year...
Just, you know, for your info...The New York Press, the paper that refused to offend religious sensibilities by publishing the Danish cartoons, and had their editors resign? Well, Amy Welborn has not forgotten another, um, religiously themed piece they did...
Title: THE 52 FUNNIEST THINGS ABOUT THE UPCOMING DEATH OF THE POPE.
Posted by John Weidner at February 9, 2006 06:56 PMMight I note that the management was inconsistent in this case - but that the employees who walked were entirely consistent?
Posted by: Kathy K at February 9, 2006 07:16 PMFor your convenience, I’ve assembled the funny ones in one place:
32.Priest who administers last rites to Pope excitedly calls mother afterward to tell her how well it went.
26.Pope recovers and survives until 2009; New York Press columnist Matt Taibbi beheaded by passing garbage truck, March 2, 2005.
23.Doctors examining the body discover that the Pope was not only a woman, but also Hitler. (this one is just too absurd not to be funny. You may have other opinions)
19.To the end, the Pope could only think of the poor and the downtrodden. (not funny; probably true)
Oh, those are hilarious. I'm rolling on the floor laughing my ass off.
Not.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at February 10, 2006 04:29 AMAnd: I imagine this paper would never have printed "The 52 Funniest Things About the Death of Mohammed." Number One: "He passed away surrounded by his four wives, aged 9, 6, 4 and a half, and 3 months."
Posted by: Andrea Harris at February 10, 2006 04:31 AMAndrew,
As you noted, one man's meat is another man's poison.
Those "jokes" aren't funny. They're merely statements made in VERY poor taste.
I'm with Andrea on this one: you can bet your bottom dollar that the newspaper would NEVER publish something similar about the prophet Mohammed.
Tell me again how the mainstream media is unbiased, devoted to telling us, the great unwashed masses, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Posted by: Hale Adams at February 10, 2006 09:58 AMOh Hale, you are so square. Don't you know that Christianity is essentially absurd, and merely mentioning it in an arch way is to have said something witty, which will have Bleu State sophisticates rolling in the floor with laughter?
And the Pope of course is ludicrous by an extra Order of Magnitude. There's no need to actually be clever or funny, just say, "The Pope," (or "Reagan," or "Bush") anf giggle, and you qualify as a wit.
At least around here you do...
Posted by: John Weidner at February 10, 2006 10:30 AMWait, are you guys really telling me that number 26 is not funny? I mean, seriously?
Also 19 isn’t funny, wasn’t meant to be funny, and is a rather poignant statement of the Pope’s faith and legacy. Perhaps you want to minimize that; I won’t...
But come on! Are you guys feeling so victimized that my agreeing with you on 95% of the statements simply isn’t good enough? It’s either 100% or I can go to hell?
#26 is moderately funny.
#19: "To the end, the Pope could only think of the poor and the downtrodden." So Andrew, are you really saying that this was intended to be poignant? When it's on a list of funny's, and placed adjacent to #18? You are being absurd.
But I'm NOT (repeat NOT. n.o.t.) saying that it's wrong to make jokes about the Pope. The Pope probably laughs at Pope jokes.
But my original point was that you should not then turn around and claim to not want to "offend religious sensibilities."
And my point in the comments is that these are not in fact, funny. Some of them are hardly jokes at all. And I am personally familiar with the sort of lefty non-wit that says, "Ronald Reagan," and then everybody rolls on the floor.
Actually, this one is fairly funny: #9. Bush on the tragic event: "Our thoughts and prayers go out to this great man and all of his many children."
I think a general rule should be that it is wrong to mock anyone's religion, ethnicity, personal deformities or mental problems...UNLESS YOU ARE DEVASTATINGLY WITTY AND CLEVER. Then, go for it. But moderately funny = bad taste.
Posted by: John Weidner at February 10, 2006 11:20 AMJohn, you're creating disagreement where there isn't much.
Stop that.
51 of them were tasteless. Most of them were focused on the writer’s own fear of mortality. We agree.
2 were moderately funny
1 was a side-splitting send up of every anti-catholic paranoid fantasy ever
1 was a poignant reminder of the man’s work.
As for me, I don’t want to mock religious sensibilities. Hell’s fire! I talk to the JW when they come to the door. But the one’s I found funny simply weren’t mocking of religion...
er, not 51, rather 48 of them were tasteless...
Posted by: Andrew Cory at February 10, 2006 11:42 AMAndrew,
Hey, you agree with us 95% of the time? I guess we're making progress with you. A little more progress, and we can admit you to the RJ Collective. [cue sinister music] :)
Seriously, SOME of the statements could be considered funny, IF the context was not one of issuance by an entity known to be hostile to Christianity. Even #19 ("To the end, the Pope could only think of the poor and the downtrodden") is hostile rather than funny, because its literal truth is, in the eyes of the paper, a lie.
Why am I cheesed off? Not because the Pope is the object of this so-called humor. Hell, strictly speaking, I'm not even Christian, let alone Catholic. It's because I'm being lectured to by children masquerading as adults working at a newspaper, while the rest of us are adults trying to make the world a better place.
Grrrr.
That doesn't mean the paper can't print such things. But they print such things, and then complain when we tell them of our unhappiness? Grow a spine, dudes. Better yet, grow a brain.
Yeah, I'm cranky these days.
And welcome back to the comment threads, Andrew. I wondered where you got to.
Posted by: Hale Adams at February 10, 2006 04:58 PMThanks for assembling the "good" ones, Andrew. I started reading the list and decided it was puerile and unfunny and I'm glad somebody decided to slog through the tedium and uncover the... not gemstones... rhinestones? Paste gems?
Posted by: B. Durbin at February 10, 2006 06:30 PMDried, only faintly oderous turds as opposed to fresh, smelly ones?
Posted by: Andrea Harris at February 10, 2006 10:08 PM
