Religious censorship?

[Achilles]

Griffin Attacked for Award Show Remarks

 

Comedienne Kathy Griffin has come under fire from a former TV costar for joking about Jesus at the Creative Emmy Awards on Saturday night. The funnywoman, who claimed the Outstanding Reality Programm prize for her show Kathy Griffin: My Life On The D-List, upset Christians by poking fun at her peers who thanked Christ for their good fortune. In her acceptance speech, Griffin quipped, "A lot of people come up here and thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus... This award is my God now."

 

Griffin's comments have upset her former Suddenly Susan co-star Sherri Shepherd, who is also a stand-up comic. On TV show The View on Tuesday morning, Shepherd raged, "I love Kathy but I was trying to text her, 'Girl, you know you ain't supposed to be saying no mess like that.' There's just a line that you shouldn't cross, there's a reverence for God that we should have." Griffin's taped acceptance speech will be heavily censored when it airs at the official Emmy Awards on Sunday. Officials at the Catholic League, a U.S. anti-defamation group, called on Emmy bosses to "denounce Griffin's obscene and blasphemous comment" at Sunday's ceremony.

Here's the link, however I'm not sure how long it will be available.

 

So here's my question: It's okay to reference jesus in award acceptance speeches and any effort to repress such speech would correctly be labeled as religious censorship, however if someone opts to point out that his or her award has nothing to do with jesus, then the catholic league springs into action and the speech itself will be censored by broadcasters. How is this not a double-standard?

[ET Warrior]

I think this is obscene. If they are censoring Griffin's "Jesus didn't win me this award" then they damn well ought to be censoring everyones "Thanks Jesus!" as well.

[mimartin]

I have no problem with people thanking Jesus, God, their parents, or anyone else that they believe helped them attain some type of achievement. At the same time I have no problem with what Kathy Griffin said. I don’t like the idea that someone would make fun of another person’s belief system, but she is a comedian and I’m sure it was all done in fun.

 

The fact that network has decided to “heavily censor” Kathy Griffin’s acceptance speech isn’t a problem to me either. If a government agency was telling them to do it, then I would have a serious problem with it. If the network is doing it on their own because they do not want to be associated with such remarks or because they just don’t want to deal with the unjustified outrage of some of their viewer this self censorship is not a problem to me. It is their network and their responsibility is to their stockholders and not the viewers.

 

Even so I believe the Catholic League call for Emmy bosses to “denounce Griffin’s obscene and blasphemous comment” during the ceremony, after they already said they would “heavily censor” her speech to be outrageous and even counterproductive to their cause. Just proves the old adage “give them an inch and they’ll take a mile.”

 

How is this not a double-standard?

I don’t believe there is any way around it; it is a double-standard. It isn’t right, but it is rightly the networks decision.

[Jae Onasi]

This article makes it sound like it was censored because of references to God. However, if you look at the text of the speech, the censorship is for using a couple expletives (including the s-word, which you can't use on TV) and for saying Jesus should commit a certain sexual act, said act also not allowed on TV. Those comments would have been censored whether she applied them to Jesus, Satan, her pet dog, or her next-door neighbor.

[Achilles]

Good info to have, Jae. Do you have a link to a transcript or a clip? Also, any source that shows specifically what they intend to censor?

 

If what you say is true, the part of the mystery is solved, however if her religious speech is censored, then that's another matter.

[Jae Onasi]

Good info to have, Jae. Do you have a link to a transcript or a clip? Also, any source that shows specifically what they intend to censor?

 

If what you say is true, the part of the mystery is solved, however if her religious speech is censored, then that's another matter.

 

I'll PM you the link/content I found, since I can't post it here.

 

I don't know what they're going to censor, but I can give an educated guess on the content. I don't think religious speech should be censored, either, unless it's obscene/vulgar.

[Darth InSidious]

Well, it's good to know that TV comedians/comediennes are still as awful as always. If she thinks that kind of thing is funny she needs to stop picking her scripts from what the cool kids at the créche are saying.

 

As for the censorship, if Jae is correct, it's for breaking the Rules of TV, which are written on stone tablets 30 feet high and were brought down from Borough Hill by the Prophet John Reith...but I digress.

 

As for acceptance speeches, whether they thank God or not, they're self-congratulatory twaddle to a weeping Z-list actress. The whole TV Awards thing is a sham.

[Achilles]

More info from the catholic league site:

 

On September 8, at the 59th Annual Creative Arts Emmy Awards, comedian Kathy Griffin won Outstanding Reality Program for her Bravo show, “My Life on the D-List.” In her acceptance speech, Griffin said, “Suck it, Jesus, this award is my God now.” Fox will televise the Primetime Emmy Awards on Sunday, September 16 from the Shrine Auditorium in Los Angeles.

 

Catholic League president Bill Donohue responded as follows:

 

“Mel Gibson. Michael Richards. Isaiah Washington. Imus. Jerry Lewis. Every time a celebrity offends a segment of the population, he pays a price, in one way or another. The question now is whether Kathy Griffin will pay a similar price for her outburst. And as we have learned, her verbal assault was calculated.

 

“In an interview with Houston’s gay magazine, OutSmart, Griffin described herself as a ‘complete militant atheist.’ Unfortunately, her kind of vulgar in-your-face brand of hate speech found a receptive audience on Saturday: The Hollywood Reporter says her foul remark ‘drew laughs.’

 

“It is incumbent upon Dick Askin, chairman and chief executive officer of the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, to denounce Griffin’s obscene and blasphemous comment; a statement should also be read on Sunday. After all, it is his organization that is responsible for the Creative Arts Emmy event. Moreover, given the way the Hollywood crowd received Griffin’s remark, it falls to Askin to distance the Academy from this outrageous incident. We are contacting Griffin’s agent as well.

 

“It is sure bet that if Griffin had said, ‘Suck it, Muhammad,’ there would have been a very different reaction from the crowd and from the media who covered this event. To say nothing of the Muslim reaction.”

link

So Mel Gibson, Michael Richards, Isaiah Washington, Imus, and Jerry Lewis making inflammatory comments about a specific demographic of actual people is comparable to making a joke about a mythological figure? Hmmmm...

 

Her "verbal assualt" was not leveled at any individual or protected class. She made a controversial joke about judeo-christian religious icons. What Donohue does get precisely right is the comparision of his behavior to those of muslims, although I doubt he realizes that he was making the comparison.

 

Here's more:

Responding to complaints from the Catholic League, the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences has decided to censor the vulgar remarks that comedian Kathy Griffin made when receiving her Creative Arts Emmy for her show, “My Life on the D-List.” Last Saturday, Griffin, upon winning the award for Outstanding Reality Program, blurted out a scripted remark, “Suck it, Jesus, this award is my God now.”

 

The Associated Press reports today that Griffin’s comment will be censored from the taped airing of the awards ceremony this Saturday on E! On Sunday, Fox will carry the live Primetime Emmy Awards show.

 

Catholic League president Bill Donohue had this to say about the news:

 

“The Academy of Television Arts & Sciences reacted responsibly to our criticism of Kathy Griffin’s verbal assault on 85 percent of the U.S. population. The ball is now in Griffin’s court. The self-described ‘complete militant atheist’ needs to make a swift and unequivocal apology to Christians. If she does, she will get this issue behind her. If she does not, she will be remembered as a foul-mouthed bigot for the rest of her life.”

Link

Jae, according to this resource, it would appear that the network is going to voluntarily censor her religious speech. I'll start the ACLU countdown

 

Funny that Donohue once again completely mischaracterizes her comments as verbal assault leveled at christians

[Jae Onasi]

Well, I don't think saying 'suck it, X' is appropriate for prime-time TV, nor are the expletives. Doesn't matter whether Jesus is involved or not.

 

It's a crude remark, period, whether it's about an historical/religious figure or a contemporary.

[Achilles]

That sounds like a great topic for another thread.

[Totenkopf]

There's no mystery here. She was crude, but the government ain't forcing the network (based on anything posted here, at least) to "censor" her. Don't see any reason for the ACLU to get involved, surely they've better things to do . However, if they think it's truly an issue......maybe I should contact them about the profanity/obscenity rules on this forum. It's about as important, and as trivial. Frankly, George Carlin did a pretty funny bit on the thanking of Jesus whenever something positive happens (a touchdown), but never giving Him any blame (Jesus tripped me on the 40 yd line) schtick. At least he was funny.

[Darth InSidious]

The Catholic League are frequently somewhat...over-protective and reactionary. While it wasn't an insult towards Christians, many may have found it insulting. I think that was what Donohue was getting at, if not putting it very clearly.

[Achilles]

I think that was what Donohue was getting at, if not putting it very clearly.

Bummer they couldn't find someone more articulate. It is unfortunate for catholics that his statements appear to be representing that demographic at this time. I imagine it would probably be in the church's best interest to find another voice with a more well-reasoned message.

[Darth InSidious]

Frankly, right now, Donohue's inarticulate and constant criticism - reasonable or otherwise - is pretty low on the priorities list.

[Corinthian]

I'd say it was an insult to Christians. She should get in trouble, what she did was just as bad as insulting any other religion. If she had said "Screw you, Allah", I have a feeling there'd be a lot more indignation here and a lot less rationalizing. But I might just be paranoid.

[Web Rider]

'Girl, you know you ain't supposed to be saying no mess like that.'

lolwut? I mean, seriously, people who talk like this sound like idiots.

 

Anyway, this reminds me of the anti-islimization protest in, uh, norway? I think, sorry article not in hand, short story: it was all legit with cops, government, ect, till the mayor stepped up and said no because Muslims might get offended.

 

uh...wasn't that the point?

[Achilles]

I'd say it was an insult to Christians.

How? Her comments were not directed at christians. She did not say anything duragatory about christians.

 

She should get in trouble, what she did was just as bad as insulting any other religion. If she had said "Screw you, Allah", I have a feeling there'd be a lot more indignation here and a lot less rationalizing. But I might just be paranoid.

Here, you might have an argument. Unfortunately, one would have to accept that christians are just as hypersensitive and reactionary toward criticism of their religion as muslims though. Can't have it both ways.

[Darth InSidious]

No, she didn't. But I think its quite clear that the comment was intended to insult.

[mimartin]

I'd say it was an insult to Christians.

I’m a Christian and I don’t feel insulted by her comments. All she was trying to do is make a joke at the expense of people that thank God and Jesus for their achievements. Unfortunately for her career she just isn’t that funny.

 

She should get in trouble, what she did was just as bad as insulting any other religion.

With whom should she get in trouble with? We have a thing called freedom of speech and freedom of religion in this country, so it isn’t really any of the governments (federal, state or local) business what she said.

 

I’m not going to judge her as it isn’t my place. Even if I didn’t believe in God I’d still believe in “judge not lest ye be judged. I have no way of knowing if she had malice in her heart when she said this, so I have no way of judging her. I would hope if I said or did something monumentally stupid people would give me the benefit of the doubt, so I must do the same for others including Kathy Griffin.

[Totenkopf]

Censorship is a curious thing. Some prefer to attempt it through economic pressure (boycotting sponsors), some through political activism (demonstrations vs Savage in SF), other's through violence (Theo van Gough) and of cource through government fiat as well. This case doesn't fall into the last two, only the last of which would be arguably unconstitutional, the former "merely" illegal. That said, I think mimartin is correct and that it fails to rise to an issue worthy of any legal maneuvering.

 

Btw, what "religious persecution" is going on here, as the term is commonly used w/regard to the status of the alleged victim? Or have you finally copped to atheism being a "religion"? muhahahahah

[Achilles]

No, she didn't. But I think its quite clear that the comment was intended to insult.

If by "insult" you mean "mock" then I'll concede. But mocking an irrational belief system with no supporting evidence is a far cry from practicing bigotry against a specific person or group of people.

 

If this is to be the new standard for censorship, then I think we're at the edge of a very slippery-slope that may affect more people than the current "victims" may realize.

[John Galt]

Given that this is an action taken by a private corporation, I have no problem with them covering their own bases, protecting their profits. Had it been a government action, however, I'd be rather angry. It doesn't sound like what she said was "hate speech," which I don't think should be illegal in the first place, just a bit of poorly-executed mockery.

 

And since when are we guaranteed the right not to be offended in the first place? So much for objective rules...

[Ray Jones]

I think this is obscene. If they are censoring Griffin's "Jesus didn't win me this award" then they damn well ought to be censoring everyones "Thanks Jesus!" as well.

Seconded.

[Totenkopf]

I think this is obscene. If they are censoring Griffin's "Jesus didn't win me this award" then they damn well ought to be censoring everyones "Thanks Jesus!" as well.

 

Seconded.

 

Only if they curse someone else in the process. Get a grip, guys. If they thanked Zeus or Odin (Buddha?), would you get equally bent out of shape? However, I'm pretty sure that if militant atheists made up most of the population, they'd probably blurt out any thanks to "mythological" figures w/o batting an eyelash.

[Darth InSidious]

If by "insult" you mean "mock" then I'll concede. But mocking an irrational belief system with no supporting evidence is a far cry from practicing bigotry against a specific person or group of people.

 

If this is to be the new standard for censorship, then I think we're at the edge of a very slippery-slope that may affect more people than the current "victims" may realize.

It was a comment calculated to cause offence, hence designed to insult. And mocking a belief system because you think it's irrational is no different from mocking a type of human because you believe them to be genetically inferior, or mocking people with a certain melanine-level in their skin because their culture is different to your own and you perceive it as less worthy.

 

No, perhaps she shouldn't be censored, but nevertheless, there are unwritten rules which those of us who know of them like to call 'tact'.