Sunday, March 12, 2006

Coverage on Global

There should be a small snippet on 'Support the Sheaf' on Global tonight at 6. I have all the media savviness of a turnip so it'll be interesting to see how we're portrayed. One question they asked me that really threw me was, "Do you think the person responsible for this cartoon should be disciplined?"

This had honestly never occurred to me as even a potential course of action, so I had no idea how to respond. My first instinct was to say, "What, like cutting off his hand?" because punishing someone for creating controversial material seems to be in complete violation of our charter of rights and freedoms. Even if discipline was an appropriate response to the cartoon, I don't see how it could be done in such a way that wouldn't be viewed as a threat by every student at the U of S to not write/draw/sing/sculpt or otherwise express anything controversial. So for the record, no, I don't think Mr. MacDonald should be punished.


Blogger jefman said...

I propose that MacDonald be disciplined through confinement in a lavish hotel with vast gardens and court yards and an abundance of fruits, wine, scented oils, and other such delicacies.
To seal the deal, there should be a hot tub, sauna, pool, and weight room, many classical works of fiction, and a healthy selection of pretentious art-rock should be provided.
The result of this will be the creation of a tantalizing environment in which the creator of such corruptive filth as the recent Capitalist Piglet will be passively restrained and isolated and prevented from further corrupting the youth of our society and challenging the supremacy of theocracy.
Further to that, any and every individual who might continue to challenge the necessity of tongue biting before the actualization of free speech will realize that there is little value in their exercising of that right, since the result would be their removal from society for the defense of purity. Purity must be maintained at all cost, and dissenting voices such as MacDonald’s must be removed in a morally superior manner.

10:17 PM  
Blogger tomax7 said...

Maybe help me on this as I must be really ignorant on society morals - where do we cross the line of this being soft porno? You know, like on TV where they always have the "blah blah blah viewer discretion is advised" type thing preceding the shows.

Ok, we'll call it "tolerance" towards one's preference.

So then where does a law about gross negligence come against the Sheaf for publishing possibly hate literature with the 'Kosher' remark in a bad light?

Could I substitute OBL giving head to Mohammad, or your sister/mom doing it to her Dad, (you know incest type thing), then that would be bad right?

So I seem to have missed something in this crusade about "Freedom of Speech" retort.


1:17 PM  
Blogger Jess said...

One thing that I find fascinating about this whole incident is how so many people view sex as more offensive and as a greater threat to society and civilization as we know it than violence and destruction. If there was a comic showing Jesus holding a machine gun or a bomb, would the outrage be as great?

I also don't understand why Jesus being caught in the act of fellatio is so contentious. Is giving a blowjob degrading? Should men and women everywhere forsake giving head because it will demean them in the eyes of their partner? Also, (and I freely admit that this is not the issue at stake) I don't think we have proof one way or the other on which way Jesus swung.

I'm getting far, far away from the point, which is still that freedom of speech is a fundamental right which has thankfully been protected in our charter of rights and freedoms, and that freedom of speech is being threatened here by individuals who want to either boycott the Sheaf or shut it down entirely. (My name for today is going to be Captain Run-On Sentence). I think an appropriate response for those who were offended by the cartoon is to make the Sheaf better - write an article or draw your own cartoons to express your point of view, and your message will be less ambiguous and reach a wider audience than if you try to suppress or shut down the Sheaf.

Tom, I think I should say that I really do appreciate your input on our blog and that you express yourself much more intelligently and rationally than many of the individuals who are sharing their views on this issue. At this point, though, I'm curious as to what your goals are. Do you want the Sheaf to be boycotted or shut down, or are you looking for a restructuring of the editorial process?

3:02 PM  
Blogger tomax7 said...

Jess...knowing a couple of people who have turned from Homosexuality towards Christianity, the cartoon was a double slap to them.

So while the sexual aspect affects them differently from me, I found it degrading to the most single person on this planet who one would say was "pure".

I mean, do it with my picture or some other Christian leader, sure I'd be upset, but don't do it to someone who has helped me and others overcome sin in their lives.

Basically it boils down to those who think Christianity or Jesus as either being a religion or fake.

They are neither. TO portray Jesus in a compromising manner is akin to putting my mother, my sister, or my brother doing the same.

I know Jesus is big enough to handle this Himself and has a sense of humour - He created mankind, but when family is attacked, one can't just sit idly by on things like this.

Something about integrity and principle, which is sadly lacking from the Sheaf.

But that's my opinion, in less than x number of words, whereas a picture is worth a 1000 words.

3:54 PM  
Blogger tomax7 said...

Sorry Jess, forgot to answer your point.

No, don't shut the Sheaf down. As for reviewing the purpose and policies and procedures of the paper, yes.

Regarding the editor leaving, well someone's head had to fall - it is a fact of life - albeit possibly the wrong person judging from his interview with the Star-Phoniex.

Finally the cartoonist hiding behind 'freedom of speech' is bunk.

Hey, believe it or not I ran a semi-vulgar underground newspaper in high school and produced twisted versions of Cheech-n-Chong stuff on cassettes. These were like but made before Brocket '99 came on the scene - which I laughed so hard I was crying sometimes listening to it. (No lie, a Metis friend of mine gave the tape.)

'Stupid whities...' Ha, loved that Safeway commercial!

There was a limit to our vulgarity also...common sense and respect. I never touched Jesus or Mother Theresa (or others who helped humanity).

Freedom isn't freedom without guidelines and rules.


4:08 PM  
Blogger jefman said...

Captain R.O.S., you are brilliant and eloquent as always.
I suppose since Tom missed my reference entirely, I will ask if you would be satisfied if we were all to just bite our tongues before we speak. Would that work?
And to continue on with what Jess said, I think it's interesting to consider what parts of the comic people have considered offensive. If it is the sexual act that you have no respect for, then how can you expect respect from others? If you don't treat everyone as equals, how can you expect them to respect your values?
That aside, I still fail to see how it's valid for one christian to assume superiority and rights to judge other christians..... Oh well, I guess I missed where Jesus said "Judge thy fellow man and cast your values onto him."

6:06 PM  
Blogger tomax7 said...

Oh well, I guess I missed where Jesus said "Judge thy fellow man and cast your values onto him."

I must have missed that too, where is it found?

As for biting tongue, well there is a time to do that. Speaking one's mind, or drawing it, before engaging the brain is a dangerous thing...

11:15 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home