I generally agree with you, GIC. I probably wouldn’t have gone where that comedian did but then again I’m not much of a comedian. I think the joke wasn’t an attack on Christianity but witty wordplay around “nailed”. It didn’t imply anything homoerotic regarding Jesus or even doubt his existence (and Jimmy Carr’s jokes about religion do suggest there’s no God). I don’t think it crossed any line although it was easy to foresee the outrage machine cranking up.
The funny thing is that the comedian wouldn’t be worried by the backlash as I doubt devout Christians would attend his shows other than to protest. The joke he told was in response to the observation that he was getting hate from Christians anyway. As for The Project, I wouldn’t care a fig if it’s taken off air immediately.
Have a look at a debate on YouTube involving John Cleese, Michael Palin, Malcolm Muggeridge and an Anglican Bishop over The Life of Brian. The latter 2 were convinced it was blasphemous and on top of that the Bishop used his finely-honed comedic sensibilities to point out that the film just wasn’t funny.
In the past, blasphemy laws criminalised anything that might offend the staunchly religious. Thankfully, that is now a thing of the past and irreligious comments or humour are allowed. When Ghandi was filmed, Richard Attenborough was told by Hindus that he should only depict Ghandi as a moving point of light and having Ben Kingsley play him was an outrage. And of course the Charlie Hebdo killings show how far religious fundamentalists can go. In my opinion, allowing the religious to claim a special immunity from outrage is a dangerous precedent.
I am more open than you to minorities co-opting slurs as that helps to neutralise them. Nick Giannopoulos worked such a slur in the title of all his shows and it could be argued he helped take the sting out of it. But I’d never use it myself. The same thing applies to the N word. I have no sympathy for racists in the US arguing that this co-opting gives them the right to use it as a racial taunt or somehow encourages them to do so.
The funny thing is that the comedian wouldn’t be worried by the backlash as I doubt devout Christians would attend his shows other than to protest. The joke he told was in response to the observation that he was getting hate from Christians anyway. As for The Project, I wouldn’t care a fig if it’s taken off air immediately.
Have a look at a debate on YouTube involving John Cleese, Michael Palin, Malcolm Muggeridge and an Anglican Bishop over The Life of Brian. The latter 2 were convinced it was blasphemous and on top of that the Bishop used his finely-honed comedic sensibilities to point out that the film just wasn’t funny.
In the past, blasphemy laws criminalised anything that might offend the staunchly religious. Thankfully, that is now a thing of the past and irreligious comments or humour are allowed. When Ghandi was filmed, Richard Attenborough was told by Hindus that he should only depict Ghandi as a moving point of light and having Ben Kingsley play him was an outrage. And of course the Charlie Hebdo killings show how far religious fundamentalists can go. In my opinion, allowing the religious to claim a special immunity from outrage is a dangerous precedent.
I am more open than you to minorities co-opting slurs as that helps to neutralise them. Nick Giannopoulos worked such a slur in the title of all his shows and it could be argued he helped take the sting out of it. But I’d never use it myself. The same thing applies to the N word. I have no sympathy for racists in the US arguing that this co-opting gives them the right to use it as a racial taunt or somehow encourages them to do so.