Mel Gibson & Anti-Semitism

[The Young Son]

What does everyone think Mel's drunken outburst?

I like Mel as an actor, but this has left a bad taste in my mouth. He says that he is extremely sorry and that he is not anti-Semitic, and has even requested to meet with Jewish leaders to explain himself and talk one-on-one to solve this problem.

I think deep down, Mel is anti-Semitic after hearing about this incident. I believe that he had no control over what he was saying, and when you're drunk, your true feelings tend to come out.

What I don't understand is this hatred for Jewish people. Catholics that are anti-Semitic always come up with the same excuse: "They killed Christ."

Okay, fair enough. That's a historical fact. But why hate people today for something that someone else did over two thousand years ago?

[Vong]

Okay, fair enough. That's a historical fact. But why hate people today for something that someone else did over two thousand years ago?

They hold grudges? :rolleyes:

Personally, I don't care what Mel Gibson said. He was drunk, he wasn't himself, that should be enougn to excuse his behaviour.

I try to avoid all the tabloids and bad publicity the paparazzi does to celebrities.Their personal life should not change the way anyone feels about the person's acting or professional life. In this case, Mel Gibson is an amazing actor and director. He has shown alot of talent and has directed, produced and starred in alot of good movies, with the exception of Passion of the Christ.

I hope this bullshit dies down and we can let the man get the help he needs for his drinking problem.

[jolanar]

People don't understand anti-semitism today because they almost always seen as victims ever since the holocaust. Hatred towards the Jews comes from a lot different sources over time. All the way from the black plague (Jews had good hygene practices which more often than not saved them from diseases/plagues which brought suspicion) to pre holocaust (many Jews were bankers etc which made many people jealous.) Before WW2 Jews also had no nation. Jews living in France were never truly considered French etc. I don't think it's possible to pinpoint it down to one single event. Mostly it's probably just people looking for a scapegoat for their own faults.

There is no plausible explanation for racism because racism itself has no rational explanation.

[Monotreme]

Vong, how much do you want to bet that if Gibson had made racist remarks against black people, you'd be shitting all over him?

His appology was indeed sincere, and yeah, he WAS drunk, but as they say, "The drunk man says what the sober man believes." People say what they reallly think when they're too drunk to apply that filter that usually keeps these things in and a smile on their face.

Does this mean that I won't be going to see Apocalypto when it comes out? No. Mel's still an extremely talented director/actor, and I'll be checking it out regardless. Does it mean that he's a closet anti-semite? It most certainly does. My respect for him has been lowered, and now it's plainly obvious that the guy is an asshole, but I think that shunning and boycotting him is a little harsh. Still, as The Young Son said, this most certainly left a bad taste in my mouth.

[Vong]

Vong, how much do you want to bet that if Gibson had made racist remarks against black people, you'd be shitting all over him?

Buddy, the guy was drunk. Drinking does not release your deepest and darkest secrets. Fuck, you should hear the shit I say when I'm drunk. Doesn't mean I believe any of it when my friends remind me what I said. It's your unconcious mind running amuck.

but as they say, "The drunk man says what the sober man believes."

By that logic, you can assume then that if anyone dreams of having sex with someone of the same sex, he/she is a homosexual. What "they" say is wrong.

And the same token goes to the drunk 20 year old on Canada Day who pissed on the National War Memorial in Ottawa. Does this mean he has something against veterans? No, he had no control of his body and mind. That is what being drunk is all about.

Besides, if you believe that Mel Gibson is saying what he believes, then you can link that belief to the fact that he is a Christian. Which can mean that deep down inside every Christian they secretly hate Jews. Which I doubt is the case.

[Thrizzle]

He's obviously anti-semetic; ive been around a lot of drunk people and they dont go on rascist diatribes like Gibson did.

And i agree with Monotreme, if he had been insulting black people, this would be a completely different story.

[JohnTheHenchman]

This might mark the first time I've ever agreed with Vong.

I sincerely doubt the man is anti-semetic, just because he says some stupid things when he's drunk. Hell, I say stupid shit when I'm sober that I don't even mean.

It's just convienent for the press, because they've been trying to paint him as a jew hater forever. If he really hated jews though, I doubt he'd have cast any in Passion of the Christ.

[The Young Son]

I've always admired Mel, and as I said before this has left a bad taste in my mouth.

But I'm glad he is trying to fix the problem with thoughts of rehab and things like that.

[electriclite]

Originally posted by Vong

By that logic, you can assume then that if anyone dreams of having sex with someone of the same sex, he/she is a homosexual. What "they" say is wrong.

A dream is your unconsciousness mind making a little movie out of every image and thought your mind has dealt with since you've been conscience while you are asleep. Gibson was conscious.

Originally posted by Vong
And the same token goes to the drunk 20 year old on Canada Day who pissed on the National War Memorial in Ottawa. Does this mean he has something against veterans? No, he had no control of his body and mind. That is what being drunk is all about.

If you've got 4 hours worth of drinking in your bladder, you're going to piss anywhere you're at. The difference between a drunk guy whose gotta pee and a sober one is that the sober guy gives a damn where and will probably hold it longer. Being drunk has levels: There's being nicely buzzed, then there's the "I don't care" mode and then finally "You don't know what you're doing". Gibson wasn't even twice over the legal limit. I don't believe drinking brings out your deepest, hidden parts, just the stuff that's up at the top. Easier to access.


Originally posted by Vong
Besides, if you believe that Mel Gibson is saying what he believes, then you can link that belief to the fact that he is a Christian. Which can mean that deep down inside every Christian they secretly hate Jews. Which I doubt is the case.

If this had been an isolated incident, then I'd chalk this up to a far too loosened tongue brought on by alcohol. But there's prior matters that make this current event seem less like a one time flub and more like the sum of a very nasty equation.

I gave him defense on The Passion, even the Pope said "It is as it happened", but you add the dad factor, the Passion and this, and I'm sorry, you just become suspect.

At this point I'm pretty apathetic to him.

[Jon Lyrik]

As I've said before, alcohol does not make you spout racist bullshit.

[The Heart Collector]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
This might mark the first time I've ever agreed with Vong.

I sincerely doubt the man is anti-semetic, just because he says some stupid things when he's drunk. Hell, I say stupid shit when I'm sober that I don't even mean.

It's just convienent for the press, because they've been trying to paint him as a jew hater forever. If he really hated jews though, I doubt he'd have cast any in Passion of the Christ.

It's not 'convenient for the press' it's convenient for anyone that has a little bit of common sense.

Let's look at the facts:

1. Mel Gibson's dad is a pretty hardcore anti-semite. Therefore Mel Gibson was probably exposed to racist ideas since he was a child.

2. Mel Gibson's movie "The Passion of the Christ" was an anti-semite film. This isn't some little opinion I hold, it's fact.

3. Mel Gibson apparently said some anti-semitic comments while drunk. Drunk people are notorious for saying shit they were probably thinking about since before.



Put 1, 2, and 3 together, and logic demands you conclude this guy is probably a bit of an anti-semite. Logic does not demand that you suggest Mel Gibson's just been painted by that by the media.


I said it in an earlier thread, and I'll say it again: If it had been Michael Jackson drunk, and he said something about little children, everyone defending Mel would have said "AHA! I KNEW IT"

[bigred760]

I don't believe Mel Gibson is racist against Jews or any other race or religion. He was drunk. He didn't know what he was doing or what the hell was going on. He probably doesn't even remember saying it.

2. Mel Gibson's movie "The Passion of the Christ" was an anti-semite film. This isn't some little opinion I hold, it's fact.

That's not fact; it's opinion. I don't think it's anti-semitic.

[jeo4]

I agree with you on everything but the statement about The Passion being anti-semite, THC. This is only because I know scriptures enough to know Jesus Christ was offered back to the people to execute because the Romans didn't want to do it (but still did). And unfortunately, those people are Jews. Pontius Pilate even argued in the book of Matthew that Jesus had done nothing to deserve execution. His people chose to crucify. The torture, whipping and crucifixion scenes are also accurate according to scripture.

Now, was it a coincidence that Gibson created such a graphic depiction of this execution and heavily involved Jews? I'd say definitely not, especially in light of what was said. And Gibson has been drinking alcohol for over thirty years. Apparently heavily. Yet I highly doubt the following:

1. ...that his comments were "just the alcohol talking", considering that drinking is an ongoing issue for him. I don't think the alcohol impaired him enough to make him say things he didn't believe. I'm not a medical expert, I'm just some guy off the street that used to drink excessively. And I never said what wasn't on my mind, even when I was fully inebriated.

2. ...that he has made any serious effort to kick this drinking habit before this incident. Yet suddenly, he's in rehab now. Why just now?

3. ...that he genuinely wants to rehabilitate himself for any reason other than his image/career. And why now, of all times, ask for help from the Jewish community instead of exchanging dialogue with them when The Passion was released? After all, he could have given some satisfaction to the Jewish community about his work being unbiased and historically in line with scripture. Instead, he made no effort at all to reach out and maintain the trust of the very people he depicted in his film in such a violent manner. That's yet another reason I don't buy Gibson's statement about not being anti-semite, faith or not.

As an aside: since the topic came up, I still think Michael Jackson is guilty. But that's another discussion altogether.

[QUENTIN]

As a 19-year-old Irishman in a college fraternity, I think if there's one thing I know more about than movies, it's heavy drinking. And I can say that in all my experiences, people when drunk may say silly things, may exaggerate, may be honest, may lie, but I've never known anyone who suddenly becomes racist when drunk. I've told strangers I loved them, hooked up with girls I'd otherwise never give a second glance, and sung at the top of my lungs, but being drunk is not going to bring out a feeling like anti-semitism if it didn't exist previously. People without prejudice don't leave bars suddenly spouting ignorant drivel like "Puerto Ricans are lazy". I want to ask the people who are defending him, have you ever been drunk? Yes, you behave differently, but it's not Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hitler.

The drunk excuse is lame. Gibson's father is a well-documented virulent anti-semite, The Passion of The Christ was a great movie in my opinion and it was not an anti-semitic diatribe, but it certainly did paint an unflattering picture of Jews and brought a lot of questions of Gibson's views on Judaism to light. This has answered them. I simply find it ridiculous that anyone can really say they don't think Gibson is an anti-semite after his history and particularly these remarks. These remarks alone are more than enough to conclusively prove he's an anti-semite. There's no media crusade against him, it's simply covered in everything from the rags to CNN because he's a big celeb and it's "shocking" news.

I think Gibson is an excellent actor and director. Braveheart is one of my favorite movies of the 90's, I love the Lethal Weapon and Mad Max series, and The Passion was a little overrated by the Christian crowd, but was still a powerful, well-made movie. I'll see Apocalypto because it looks intriguing. But my opinion of Gibson now is that as a person, he's a douchebag. You can separate art from an artist, lots of great entertainers are pricks, and Gibson has now just solidly confirmed his spot on that list.

I'm curious of two things now:

1.) So much of Hollywood is Jewish, particularly behind the scenes, I wonder if he will become a pariah and no longer be offered roles (not that I've seen him act in anything in a very long time anyway).
2.) Will South Park do another Gibson-themed episode?

[jeo4]

South Park should definitely do a new Gibson episode. maybe have the Scientologists sue him and then he and Tom Cruise settle it in Thunderdome.

:D

[Vong]

2. Mel Gibson's movie "The Passion of the Christ" was an anti-semite film. This isn't some little opinion I hold, it's fact.

Christians believe Christ was crucified. If it indeed happened, how is it anti-semetic? Mel Gibson is just telling the story as it is told in the bible. Don't kill the messenger. If you want to blame someone for what you think is anti-semetic, blame the institution that originally told the story and made it part of their core beliefs.

To claim that it is anti-semetic would be to claim it a work of fiction.

Also, wasn't Jesus a Jew? How is it anti-semetic when Jews killed a fellow Jew?

[darchangel]

Originally posted by jeo4
South Park should definitely do a new Gibson episode. maybe have the Scientologists sue him and then he and Tom Cruise settle it in Thunderdome.

:D



Have Kevin Costner a la Waterworld show up, and I'm so there...


:D




~darchangel~

[Lynn7]

I think most people wouldn't say racist or anti-semetic comments if they were drunk but if those voices had been planted in his head from youth then they could come up even if Mel didn't really believe it and had tried to fight against them. It is very hard to get rid of the voices of our childhood. People who were abused as children spend their lives trying to get over it As I said in the celeb thread- we should judge him by his actions. Let's see what he does with this. His redemption should not be connected to making movies. He should do stuff on the quiet within the Jewish community.Although I think Mel is a great movie maker he should remove himself from Hollywood and start doing stuff that will help him be a success in his real life. Hollywood is a killer. Maybe he could make some indies. After he redeems himself, of course.

[The Heart Collector]

Originally posted by jeo4
I agree with you on everything but the statement about The Passion being anti-semite, THC. This is only because I know scriptures enough to know Jesus Christ was offered back to the people to execute because the Romans didn't want to do it (but still did). And unfortunately, those people are Jews. Pontius Pilate even argued in the book of Matthew that Jesus had done nothing to deserve execution. His people chose to crucify. The torture, whipping and crucifixion scenes are also accurate according to scripture.

There's no part in the Bible where the Jews all line up for the sole purpose of going to Jesus' face and spitting on it, let alone described in graphic detail.

Not to mention there's about one million historical reasons why the events wouldn't have been able to play out like that, but let's just stick to the Bible. Scripture doesn't have pieces of Jesus' flesh getting ripped apart and the blood spraying all over everyone. Scripture isn't a violent porno, Mel's movie is.

I mean for fuck's sake, In Mel's movie Pontius Pilate was such a swell guy that just had to give in to the jews. In documented history, Pontius Pilate was a massive, crazy, bloodthirsty asshole.

Passion Of The Christ: anti-semitic. It's not about the Jews killing Jesus, it's the fact that the movie's only missing a scene of a jew twirling his little moustache.

Originally posted by Vong
Christians believe Christ was crucified. If it indeed happened, how is it anti-semetic? Mel Gibson is just telling the story as it is told in the bible. Don't kill the messenger. If you want to blame someone for what you think is anti-semetic, blame the institution that originally told the story and made it part of their core beliefs.

To claim that it is anti-semetic would be to claim it a work of fiction.

Also, wasn't Jesus a Jew? How is it anti-semetic when Jews killed a fellow Jew?

Have you read Matthew, Luke, Mark, or John?

It's a known fact that The Passion Of The Christ is not telling the story as it is told in the bible. This has been a known fact since before the movie was even released, when many people said "but... how are you going to make a 2 hour movie about the cruficixion, since it isn't really that detailed and epic in the bible?".

There's a world of difference between believing Jews killed Jesus and believing The Passion Of The Christ is an accurate portrayal of that. Because it's not. It's a ridiculously insane portrayal. To quote Ruthless Reviews:

We have all heard that The Passion of the Christ is supposedly anti-Semitic and that Jewish groups all over the country are and have been boycotting it and calling for edits in order to (I'm quoting a rabbi whose name I forget here), "prevent pogroms in Pittsburgh." As a Jew, my thinking was that anti-Semites tend to be supremely uneducated –- that there is no way a two-hour-plus movie filmed entirely in Latin, Aramaic and Hebrew with subtitles would hold their interest past the opening credits. I felt my fellow Jews and organization like the anti-Defimation League and the Simon Wiesenthal Center were over-reacting as to the potential threat The Passion of the Chirst poses to Jews. Dude, was I ever wrong. See, the Jews in Passion--actually forget the Jews--the Rabbis in Passion--the high priests of the temple of Jerusalem--continually curse and beat Jesus. Worse, on at least three occasions they spit in his face. The rabbis then follow Jesus around as he is repeatedly tortured. They even ride up on Donkeys to Golgotha to watch him hang, er crucify. Too bad Leni Riefenstahl passed away last year, because she could have seen what was lacking from Triumph of the Will. But honestly, Gibson is an out and out hate-monger who also knows how to work a camera. Your IQ could be as low as our current president's and you would still walk away from Passion with enough Jew-hatred to last unitl 4.20 (Hitler's birthday). There can be no excuse other than Mel Gibson just really hates Jews. My heart is heavy and sad at how horribly savage Jews are made to look in this film. It is disgusting. The Third Reich would have sat through the entire ordeal with erections and than applauded at the conclusion. I know that's what John Ashcroft did. And please don't write and tell me that I am missing the larger picture; I'm not. If this film reaffirms your faith in your religion than you are fucking ill. Like the book Hitler's Willing Executioners, which proposes that only a country as rabidly anti-Semetic as Germany could have perpetrated the Holocaust, only a true died-in-the-wool Jew hater could have concoted this hurtful bullshit. And Gibson saying over and over again that the film is not in fact anti-Semetic is not only salt in a wound, but a bold lie.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Originally posted by Jon Lyrik
As I've said before, alcohol does not make you spout racist bullshit.

And last time I checked, jews weren't a race.

[The Heart Collector]

Hey, Johnny:

Originally posted by QUENTIN
It's very annoying. It seems like a thread may be on the topic of something like missing WMDs for instance, and there are 50 replies, and in one of them, someone calls Bush dumb as a throwaway line in a longer post, and all you do is quote that comment and say "Bush isn't dumb". I appreciate everyone's contribution and it's not about your viewpoints, as I consider Lynn among the hardest working schmoes on this forum, in terms of time and energy put into her posts. You are the opposite though. If you have something to say, say it, but just agreeing, disagreeing, or more often merely mocking people without giving any reasoning adds nothing to the conversation and isn't much of a contribution.

This isn't primarily about your posting in this thread, which isn't actually that problematic, but more your one sentence posting style in general.

It's getting old.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by The Heart Collector
There's no part in the Bible where the Jews all line up for the sole purpose of going to Jesus' face and spitting on it, let alone described in graphic detail.

Not to mention there's about one million historical reasons why the events wouldn't have been able to play out like that, but let's just stick to the Bible. Scripture doesn't have pieces of Jesus' flesh getting ripped apart and the blood spraying all over everyone. Scripture isn't a violent porno, Mel's movie is.

I mean for fuck's sake, In Mel's movie Pontius Pilate was such a swell guy that just had to give in to the jews. In documented history, Pontius Pilate was a massive, crazy, bloodthirsty asshole.

Passion Of The Christ: anti-semitic. It's not about the Jews killing Jesus, it's the fact that the movie's only missing a scene of a jew twirling his little moustache.

1. Matthew 26:67 - They spat on Jesus' face and hit him. Others slapped him with their hands.

2. John 19:1 Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him.

Scourging was done with a flagrum, a short whip with several leather strips which were either embedded with pieces of metal and glass or small metal balls were tied to the ends of the leather strips. The victim was either tied to a post or tied bent over an object with his back exposed. The person inflicting the blows had been trained on how to properly administer the beating so as to assure the most painful and damaging punishment. The whipping consisted of 39 lashes. Each lash was administered and pulled across the back so as to rip the back open. Often the back muscles were so badly shredded that the skeletal structure was exposed. People very often died from this punishment alone.

3. No argument there. Pilate was a horrible man. He had Jesus whipped and tortured, then sent him to be crucified. But he did tell the people in John 19:6 - "Take ye him, and crucify him: for I find no fault in him."

If you read my entire previous post in this thread, you have seen that I agree with you about Mel Gibson being prejudiced against Jewish people. But that doesn't change the fact that a mob of Jewish people chose to crucify Christ.

That said, I stand behind what I said in my last post. Gibson is very obviously anti-semite.

[echo_bravo]

Why cant the Jews be the bad guys in at least one movie? I mean COME ON! LOL

[JohnTheHenchman]

Originally posted by The Heart Collector
Hey, Johnny:



It's getting old.

but that wasn't even my first post in the thread

my first post had three or so sentences I think :eek:

wanna know what's really getting old? Having people tell me I can't voice my opinion. I have no reason to believe if I felt different politically it would not be an issue.

[electriclite]

Originally posted by echo_bravo
Why cant the Jews be the bad guys in at least one movie? I mean COME ON! LOL

Ironically, it didn't look like there were any Jewish actors playing the Jews in The Passion. Most of the actors were Italian. Unless they were Italians who practiced Judaism?

[Thrizzle]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
And last time I checked, jews weren't a race.

That's not true. Most (probably all) people of Jewish decent who dont practice the religion consider themselves to be Jewish, and those within the religion consider anyone of Jewish decent to be Jewish, with or without a belief in God.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Just because they consider it, that doesn't mean it's true.

If I converted to judaism, I'd convert races too?

[MacReady]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Just because they consider it, that doesn't mean it's true.

If I converted to judaism, I'd convert races too?

It's a race and a religion. If you did convert you'd be a jew by choice. Christ, I learned about this shit years ago.

Also, you don't post opinions, just really hollow comments that don't really add anything to the discussion at hand.

[Monotreme]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Just because they consider it, that doesn't mean it's true.

If I converted to judaism, I'd convert races too?
Tell that to Adolf Hitler. Would have saved my ancestors a lot of trouble.

Race and religion don't cancel each-other out. You can convert to Judaism and you'd be Jewish by faith. But historically, the Jewish people, or the Hebrews as we were referred to in the bible, were always considered a race, or a "people", that happened to practice the same specific religion. I am not the slightest bit religious, but I still consider myself Jewish, because of my heritage, history, ancestry.

Also, what difference does it make if Mel made racist remarks or insulting remarks against another religion? It's the same in my book.

[jolanar]

Why are people even arguing about whether or not Judaism is a race?

Gibson is being accused of anti-semitism, not racism.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Someone said that drinking doesn't make you spew racist shit.

But anyway there's no way anyone's gonna tell me they are a race.

[MacReady]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Someone said that drinking doesn't make you spew racist shit.

God, he won't stop doing it.

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
But anyway there's no way anyone's gonna tell me they are a race.

Prove they ain't.

[ilovemovies]

Originally posted by electriclite
I gave him defense on The Passion, even the Pope said "It is as it happened", but you add the dad factor, the Passion and this, and I'm sorry, you just become suspect.



My parents share beliefs that I do not. My parents go to church and are fairly religious/spiritual people. I do not. So it's not really fair to use Gibson's father as a reason for him being an anti-semite. I also will argue that The Passion of the Christ does not have anti semite messages. Everyone gets pretty equal blame and there is a jewish character in the movie who is sympathetic. So not only is the movie not have anti-semitism messages, but infact Gibson goes out of his way to proove that the movie isn't anti semite. Infact, one could argue that he's goes too far out of his way as the jewish character in the movie wasn't really neccessary and arguably detracts from the movie.

So that just leaves this incident and he was drunk.

Jay Leno said the other day that he's known Mel Gibson for a long time and he's always been really nice and has never even cracked an inappropriate joke concerning the matter.

And the man has apologized. For crying it's not like he's a racist and is proud of it. He's asked for forgiveness. And the fact that people don't seem willing to want to forgive is reason number 1, 110, 245 why I LOATHE religion.

[The Young Son]

Originally posted by ilovemovies
My parents share beliefs that I do not. My parents go to church and are fairly religious/spiritual people. I do not. So it's not really fair to use Gibson's father as a reason for him being an anti-semite. I also will argue that The Passion of the Christ does not have anti semite messages. Everyone gets pretty equal blame and there is a jewish character in the movie who is sympathetic. So not only is the movie not have anti-semitism messages, but infact Gibson goes out of his way to proove that the movie isn't anti semite. Infact, one could argue that he's goes too far out of his way as the jewish character in the movie wasn't really neccessary and arguably detracts from the movie.

So that just leaves this incident and he was drunk.

Jay Leno said the other day that he's known Mel Gibson for a long time and he's always been really nice and has never even cracked an inappropriate joke concerning the matter.

And the man has apologized. For crying it's not like he's a racist and is proud of it. He's asked for forgiveness. And the fact that people don't seem willing to want to forgive is reason number 1, 110, 245 why I LOATHE religion. Good post, man.

I also believe that Passion Of The Christ is not anti-semitic. I don't agree with what Ruthless Reviews said. I did not walk out of the movie with a new hatred of Jews. All I saw was one man being wrongly tortured and killed by other people.

I also agree with the fact that Mel could have been so heavily influenced by dear old dad, even if he didn't share the same views. It would be easy to slide back to old "teachings" in that kind of situation.

Mel is going out of his way to put things right and I admire him for that. How many other famous people could say they have done that?


P.S - While I don't always agree with her, I will agree with what someone else said earlier and say that Lynn7 puts a lot of effort into her posts. Good quality posting is what I like to see on these boards.

[EVILxxx]

Apparently Mel's bodyguard is an Israeli.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,207059,00.html

Mel Gibson Has Israeli Bodyguard
Friday, August 04, 2006
By Roger Friedman


Mel Gibson may have a problem with Jews — they’re responsible for all the wars, they’ve inflated the number of dead in the Holocaust, etc.

But Gibson likes one Jewish person a lot. His personal bodyguard for more than a decade turns out to be an Israeli.

Avi Korein, 45, is a name you don’t hear very often. That’s because Korein is famous for being nearly invisible and staying in the background.

A former nightclub bouncer, Korein worked through the '80s as Bruce Willis’ muscle. He even picked up a few minor screen credits along the way.

But sometime before 1996, Korein went to work for Gibson.

Now Korein has his own agency, Screen International Security Services, which has done private security over the years for a lot of Hollywood stars, including Will Smith, Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise.

(Story continues below)

ADVERTISEMENTS
Advertise Here

But sources tell me that it’s Korein — who did not return calls from this column — upon whom Gibson has relied over the last decade to keep him out of trouble.

It’s ironic, since Korein is Jewish. But so is Gibson’s publicist.

Korein — who is also rumored to have once been in the Mossad — or Israeli CIA — has his own inner conflicts to deal with.

In 2002 he made a $500 donation to the National Republican Congressional Committee. In 2004, however, he gave money to John Kerry’s presidential run.

Is he a Democrat or a Republican? More importantly, is he even a U.S. citizen?

Korein’s assistant would only say, “I can’t answer any questions,” when I posed that last one. She did, however, acknowledge that her boss works for Gibson.

Gibson, however odd a client for Korein, might take some of his advice. On the Web site for SISS, Korein states: “We realize that 'perception is reality.' How our clients are perceived by the public can impact corporate, diplomatic or personal objectives positively or negatively.”

Those are words Gibson might have taken to heart a while ago.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Originally posted by MacReady
God, he won't stop doing it.



Prove they ain't.

Sure.

A religion can not be a race.

Proved.

[Monotreme]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Sure.

A religion can not be a race.

Proved.
It has been mentioned time and time before here, the fact that Judaism exists as a race does not contradict the fact that it is also a religion. There are many different races and nationalities in the world that believe in christianity. There is ONE race in the world that believes in Judaism, and that race just happens to be called the Jewish race. Perhaps if it had a different name it would be easier for you to make the separation. As I said before, I am not a religious person nor are many people that I know, but we are still Jewish by RACE. Descendants of Abraham and Isaac, call it whatever you want. Judaism is a race, my friend, that happens to believe in a religion that's also called Judaism. Call up any Jewish person and ask him what race he belongs to. Guess what he'll tell you.

[bigred760]

Originally posted by Monotreme
IAs I said before, I am not a religious person nor are many people that I know, but we are still Jewish by RACE. Descendants of Abraham and Isaac, call it whatever you want. Judaism is a race, my friend, that happens to believe in a religion that's also called Judaism. Call up any Jewish person and ask him what race he belongs to. Guess what he'll tell you.

Is that why I hear people calling themselves, or others, a quarter Jewish - like in Adam Sandler's Hanukah (I apologize for the spelling) song?

[Vong]

There is only one race, and that is the human race. Dividing it into seperate races is racism, in my opinion.

[Thrizzle]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Sure.

A religion can not be a race.

Proved.

Not race as in physical characteristics, but race as in common ancestry, history, or culture....and because they've never been a part of other cultures (due to the constant persecution), the only thing which identifies them as a people other than their religious belief is their heritage.

[echo_bravo]

In JohnTheHenchman's defense, when you are filling out a job application and it asks your race...wouldnt you put down white/caucasin instead of jewish?

[Vong]

Originally posted by echo_bravo
In JohnTheHenchman's defense, when you are filling out a job application and it asks your race...wouldnt you put down white/caucasin instead of jewish?

What kind of job asks for your race?

[Criminal Rock]

Almost every corporate job in America...

[echo_bravo]

A couple of years ago when I was applying for a telemarketing job it asked for my race.

Yeah not a lot of them do but some.

How about filling out the U.S. Census. Wouldnt jewish people put down white/caucasin?
I am not saying I am right, I am just asking.

[MacReady]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Sure.

A religion can not be a race.

Proved.

You didn't prove shit. You just said something. Don't get ahead of yourself.

Okay, I have a question for you: Woody Allen is an atheist. Marilyn Monroe was raised as a christian who later converted. Which of the two isn't a jew?

[Thrizzle]

Originally posted by echo_bravo
How about filling out the U.S. Census. Wouldnt jewish people put down white/caucasin?
I am not saying I am right, I am just asking.

They could, or they could check other. Doesnt really matter.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Originally posted by MacReady
You didn't prove shit. You just said something. Don't get ahead of yourself.

Okay, I have a question for you: Woody Allen is an atheist. Marilyn Monroe was raised as a christian who later converted. Which of the two isn't a jew?

What more do I have to say? If you wanna call jews the people in israel, they're white just like italian people are white. I fail to see how a religion that accepts people of all colors as members can also be a race. Someone should tell me why Jews are a race. Because Hitler thought so?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/Map_of_skin_hue_equi.png

Hey look, they're the same color as Italians! I guess I'm a jew then.

And the answer is Woody Allen

[Criminal Rock]

Why are you guys even arguing about that shit... it doesn't even matter.

[MacReady]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
What more do I have to say? If you wanna call jews the people in israel, they're white just like italian people are white. I fail to see how a religion that accepts people of all colors as members can also be a race. Someone should tell me why Jews are a race. Because Hitler thought so?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/Map_of_skin_hue_equi.png

Hey look, they're the same color as Italians! I guess I'm a jew then.

And the answer is Woody Allen

I can't believe I'm going into a long discussion with somebody who just said Woody Allen is a gentile.

There's more to racial difference than skin colour. Since you mentioned Italians then by your own standard if we were to gather 1000 Russians, Turks (which was in that stupid graph you linked) Italians in one spot and looked at them carefully, we'd be able to assume that they could have all come from two single parents, and that they all basically look pretty much alike.

What about Persians from Iran? Are they in fact wrong about their ethnic identity and actually arabs simply because they have similar skin?

What about the fact that I've seen quite a few asians who have skin that's white. Does that mean they're of the same race as you?

If you're gonna start using Wikipedia, go look at their article on 'Who is a jew?' What about the fact that most Halakha (Jewish law and traditions) accepts people born to Jewish mothers as jews, regardless of their respective faith?

Of course, if you're right I guess this means Monotreme is wrong and should leave his country because and look for a homeland for Agnostics or something.

[MacReady]

Uh, I think Tai Mai White Guy has a point. Even if John is right, it's petty semantics. Mel Gibson's comments is hateful and I don't think them being a race or not makes a great difference to him.

[QUENTIN]

Either way, Mel Gibson hates both the religion and the people but..

John, I thought as you did when I was younger. I tried to argue about this with a Jewish friend of mine from Israel. She told me I was wrong and then nicely explained why. "Jew" is a phrase with two meanings, just as many words have several definitions depending on context. A Jew is a person who practices the Jewish faith (like a Muslim or a Christian). A Jew is also a person descended from the Jewish people (an ethnic group like Persians or Native Americans). There are a group of people who for around 3800 years have shared ethnicity, culture, place, and history. This is an ethnicity. So Jews are BOTH a religion and a race. The religion isn't the race, and the race isn't the religion. You can be one without the other. It's simply one word used to describe two peoples who often, but not always and not necessarily, overlap into both definitions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_people

From Wikipedia:
Jews (Hebrew: éÀäåÌãÄéí, Yehudim; Yiddish: ééÄãï, Yiden) are followers of Judaism or, more generally, members of the Jewish people (also known as the Jewish nation, or the Children of Israel), an ethno-religious group descended from the ancient Israelites and from converts who joined their religion. The term also includes those who have undergone an officially recognized formal process of religious conversion to Judaism. The current Jewish population is over 14.5 million, the majority of whom live in Israel and the United States.

From the dictionary:
Jew n
1. An adherent of Judaism as a religion or culture.
2. A member of the widely dispersed people originally descended from the ancient Hebrews and sharing an ethnic heritage based on Judaism.
3. A native or inhabitant of the ancient kingdom of Judah.

Also, this is the bane of my argument with your posts, and not only as a schmoe, but as a moderator who must enforce the "post with some weight behind it" rule of the boards. Simply stating something repeatedly is not proving a point. If you wish to continue being a contributing member of our community, I implore you to contribute more. Use substance and make points, all you like, I'd appreciate hearing your point of view. But as of right now, it's rare that you do that, and that needs to change. Simply stating an opinion is often enough, but your posting style here in the politics forum is analogous to someone who posts in all of the Current Movie Talk threads or Movie Reviews threads and simply says "This movie sucks" or "This movie rules". It's not explicitly banned and once in awhile isn't a big deal, but if it makes up the majority of someone's posts and they choose not to contribute anything more, they will no longer be allowed around.

[Criminal Rock]

Originally posted by MacReady
Uh, I think Tai Mai White Guy has a point. Even if John is right, it's petty semantics. Mel Gibson's comments is hateful and I don't think them being a race or not makes a great difference to him.

I should change my name to "Tai Mai the White Guy"... thats really funny.

[The Postmaster General]

I think a couple members of Dr. Teeth and The Electric Mayhem are Jewish, so I don't know what Mel Gibson is talking about.

[Scorpio24]

Earlier on THC mentioned that if this was Jacko talking about kids then people would have shouted I knew it.


Funny cause everytime I read people defending this prick my mind keeps wandering to a question.

Would the same people be defending Tom Cruise or Madonna or a Muslim film director if they were pulled over DUI and started spouting racist remarks about Christians?

I serioulsy doubt I need people to answer that question.

[Lynn7]

Well Madonna has earned my disrespect over the way she has used the crucifixion in her entertainment act and I havne't heard her aplogize. She knew the act was offensive to the Vatican and yet she did it anyway when she appeared in Rome. I don't hear anyone in Hollywood saying she should never work again. I don't hear Barbara Walters saying she will never listen to her again. What Madonna does is anti-Christian but sadly no apology. And she is not drunk when she is doing it.

When she aplogizes I will defend her right to be forgiven.

[Vong]

Lynn, there is a difference between art and being piss drunk.

[darchangel]

Originally posted by Vong
Lynn, there is a difference between art and being piss drunk.

There's also a difference between art and being an attention whore.


Like I've said in other threads, I could give a fuck what Mel Gibson thinks about anything...his points of view, no matter how stupid, don't affect how I think, because after a while, nearly all celebrity IQs erode to somewhere between that of shoestring potatoes and pocket fuzz.

The point? Mel Gibson is now the same brand of notoriously famous as Paris Hilton, and nobody takes what she says seriously.



~darchangel~

[outsyder]

Yes, but unlike Paris Hilton, Gibson is not famous for the sake of being famous or rich. He's had a long and successful career that has resulted in some pretty good movies.

Kind of like Tom Cruise. He's batshit crazy, but he's a very talented and successful actor.

[darchangel]

Originally posted by outsyder
Yes, but unlike Paris Hilton, Gibson is not famous for the sake of being famous or rich. He's had a long and successful career that has resulted in some pretty good movies.

Kind of like Tom Cruise. He's batshit crazy, but he's a very talented and successful actor.


Exactly...and if Tom Cruise said, "I hate Jews," most people would say, "Who the fuck cares what he thinks? Tom Cruise is fucking nuts!"

I just don't see why Mel Gibson is any different.



~darchangel~

[QUENTIN]

Originally posted by Lynn7

When she aplogizes I will defend her right to be forgiven.

Hey Lynn, President Bill Clinton apologized publicly to his wife and to the American people for getting an extramartial blowjob and for lying about it. When are you willing to forgive?

[Silverload]

Originally posted by Scorpio24
Earlier on THC mentioned that if this was Jacko talking about kids then people would have shouted I knew it.


Funny cause everytime I read people defending this prick my mind keeps wandering to a question.

Would the same people be defending Tom Cruise or Madonna or a Muslim film director if they were pulled over DUI and started spouting racist remarks about Christians?

I serioulsy doubt I need people to answer that question.

Probably would say nothing since shit is talked about Christianity all the damn time. I have heard people (especially all over the net, and on these very forums) say worse shit about Christians then what Gibson said about Jews. But that’s double standards for you. If you saying anything degrading toward Christianity then you are simply stating your opinion, if you say the same things about any other religion then you are a bigot.

[outsyder]

Originally posted by darchangel
Exactly...and if Tom Cruise said, "I hate Jews," most people would say, "Who the fuck cares what he thinks? Tom Cruise is fucking nuts!"

I just don't see why Mel Gibson is any different.



~darchangel~


Before Mel Gibson's unusual statements in recent years, there was nothing to suspect that he was off-balance.

Tom Cruise however, has been regarded as odd before his statements about psychiatry and the like, mainly because of his association with Scientology.

The difference is that Gibson is deemed weird or crazy because of his statements where Tom Cruise's odd behaviour and statements are regarded as a result of his unusual off-screen life. Cause and effect.

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by QUENTIN
Hey Lynn, President Bill Clinton apologized publicly to his wife and to the American people for getting an extramartial blowjob and for lying about it. When are you willing to forgive?

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman-Monica Lewinsky"

It was said with such passion and sincerity that I beleived him. Also when his wife was on the Today show and talked about the Right Wing Conspiracy. That was not taken back. If Monica had washed that dress she would've been hung out to dry like all the other women. It was not the affair that was unforgivable but the way he degraded women and then let them be smeared in the media. It's not quite as easy as one action that he did that was wrong. Paula Jones was also minding her own business working in the lobby when she was asked to come up to Gov. Clinton's hotel room to give him a BJ. She refused but went no further with it until the state trooper who had escorted her to Clinton's room had related the story to the media. When Jones came out to tell the truth of what happened she was labeled and smeared. The whole problem with the Lewinsky thing is that it finally gave credence to what Jones had been talking about for years. Before that no one really beleived her. Then we knew that he liked to have BJS from women he came in contact with in his work which happened to be in the government. Forgive him? His actions continually degraded women. As I have said before, if it turns out that Gibson has been contributing money to anti-Jewish organizations or has acted with discrimination against them then I will not defend him at all. But it seems that his body guard and his publicist were Jewish and so it is hard to beleive he is a Jew hater.

Oh hey- here is a bible story for you- surprise surprise, lol!

In Matthew, Jesus spoke of a father who had two sons and he asked them both to go out and do some work in the vineyards. One son said no but then later went out and did the work anyway. The other son said yes but then he never did the work. Jesus asked which son obeyed the father? It was the son who said no and did it anyway. Actions speak louder than words right?

[Thrizzle]

Originally posted by Silverload
Probably would say nothing since shit is talked about Christianity all the damn time. I have heard people (especially all over the net, and on these very forums) say worse shit about Christians then what Gibson said about Jews. But that’s double standards for you. If you saying anything degrading toward Christianity then you are simply stating your opinion, if you say the same things about any other religion then you are a bigot.

Double standard? It's a different issue. Jewish people have to concern themselves with surviving future genocides and repopulating the earth after this most recent one. Anti-christian comments are seen as opinion and tongue-in-cheek. Anti-semetic comments are more like justification.

[Scorpio24]

Originally posted by darchangel
Exactly...and if Tom Cruise said, "I hate Jews," most people would say, "Who the fuck cares what he thinks? Tom Cruise is fucking nuts!"

I just don't see why Mel Gibson is any different.



~darchangel~

You're kidding right?

If Tom farts the whole worlds is up in arms. "Whats that crazy fuck doing now?"

If he said what Gibson had said he'd have been right royaly raped. Every fucker and their dog would want "the crazy guy" strung up.

Like I said earlier. If Tom said what Gibson has said then the whole board would have been salvating just as they do when ya know he jumps on a chair.

[Scorpio24]

Originally posted by Lynn7
Well Madonna has earned my disrespect over the way she has used the crucifixion in her entertainment act and I havne't heard her aplogize. She knew the act was offensive to the Vatican and yet she did it anyway when she appeared in Rome. I don't hear anyone in Hollywood saying she should never work again. I don't hear Barbara Walters saying she will never listen to her again. What Madonna does is anti-Christian but sadly no apology. And she is not drunk when she is doing it.

When she aplogizes I will defend her right to be forgiven.

Well you nearley answered the question. Noy quite but closest yet.

[Scorpio24]

Originally posted by Lynn7
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman-Monica Lewinsky"

It was said with such passion and sincerity that I beleived him.


I got to there and stopped reading.

So if something is said with passion and sincerity at the time and has YOU convinced then there is no going back huh? Thats the bar we measure it by. Fine by me.

Some people may well have been convinced by Gibson spewing anti-semite remarks at COPS of all people. So surely under your baromater of forgivness value we should discard his apologies out of hand?



Originally posted by Lynn7

Actions speak louder than words right?


Just as I was about to post I caught this little pearler.


So again the actions of a man spewing racist bulshit at policemen would speak louder than an apology he was forced to make a day later right?

[Scorpio24]

Originally posted by Silverload
Probably would say nothing since shit is talked about Christianity all the damn time. I have heard people (especially all over the net, and on these very forums) say worse shit about Christians then what Gibson said about Jews.


Care to provide any proof of that chief?

[JohnTheHenchman]

Originally posted by QUENTIN
Either way, Mel Gibson hates both the religion and the people but..

John, I thought as you did when I was younger. I tried to argue about this with a Jewish friend of mine from Israel. She told me I was wrong and then nicely explained why. "Jew" is a phrase with two meanings, just as many words have several definitions depending on context. A Jew is a person who practices the Jewish faith (like a Muslim or a Christian). A Jew is also a person descended from the Jewish people (an ethnic group like Persians or Native Americans). There are a group of people who for around 3800 years have shared ethnicity, culture, place, and history. This is an ethnicity. So Jews are BOTH a religion and a race. The religion isn't the race, and the race isn't the religion. You can be one without the other. It's simply one word used to describe two peoples who often, but not always and not necessarily, overlap into both definitions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_people

From Wikipedia:
Jews (Hebrew: éÀäåÌãÄéí, Yehudim; Yiddish: ééÄãï, Yiden) are followers of Judaism or, more generally, members of the Jewish people (also known as the Jewish nation, or the Children of Israel), an ethno-religious group descended from the ancient Israelites and from converts who joined their religion. The term also includes those who have undergone an officially recognized formal process of religious conversion to Judaism. The current Jewish population is over 14.5 million, the majority of whom live in Israel and the United States.

From the dictionary:
Jew n
1. An adherent of Judaism as a religion or culture.
2. A member of the widely dispersed people originally descended from the ancient Hebrews and sharing an ethnic heritage based on Judaism.
3. A native or inhabitant of the ancient kingdom of Judah.

Also, this is the bane of my argument with your posts, and not only as a schmoe, but as a moderator who must enforce the "post with some weight behind it" rule of the boards. Simply stating something repeatedly is not proving a point. If you wish to continue being a contributing member of our community, I implore you to contribute more. Use substance and make points, all you like, I'd appreciate hearing your point of view. But as of right now, it's rare that you do that, and that needs to change. Simply stating an opinion is often enough, but your posting style here in the politics forum is analogous to someone who posts in all of the Current Movie Talk threads or Movie Reviews threads and simply says "This movie sucks" or "This movie rules". It's not explicitly banned and once in awhile isn't a big deal, but if it makes up the majority of someone's posts and they choose not to contribute anything more, they will no longer be allowed around.

Why can't you private message me about this?

Seriously.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Why can't you private message me about this?

Seriously.



Oops - I think you hit the reply button when you meant to hit the PM button, John.

http://www.swifttechsoftware.com/uh_oh.jpg

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by Scorpio24
I got to there and stopped reading.

So if something is said with passion and sincerity at the time and has YOU convinced then there is no going back huh? Thats the bar we measure it by. Fine by me.

Some people may well have been convinced by Gibson spewing anti-semite remarks at COPS of all people. So surely under your baromater of forgivness value we should discard his apologies out of hand?






Just as I was about to post I caught this little pearler.


So again the actions of a man spewing racist bulshit at policemen would speak louder than an apology he was forced to make a day later right?

Re: Clinton- you totally mistinterpretted my Clinton remarks. Clinton did not want to be forgiven- he said he was innocent. Where's the comparison? If he admitted the act like Gibson did and then asked for forgiveness I would'be been OK with that. Its the people who have no remorse I have the problem with.


When I said actions speak louder than words I meant that it is much more poisonous if a person says he loves Jews but then won't give them a job because they are Jewish, than if a the person who says (while he is drunk) that Jews are responsible for all the worlds wars DOES hire Jews to work as his bodyguard and publicist (as Mel has).


And it seems funny that in the past week there are multiple posts on the BB from people who blame Christians for all the world's atrocities- Mel's comments about the Jews seem pale by comparison.

[Vong]

And it seems funny that in the past week there are multiple posts on the BB from people who blame Christians for all the world's atrocities- Mel's comments about the Jews seem pale by comparison.

Just as Medievil Europe blamed the Jews for the plague, Mel Gibson's comments about Jews being the cause to all wars is not based in reason. Blaming Christianity for many of the world's ills is based in reason.

[Thrizzle]

Originally posted by Lynn7
[B]When I said actions speak louder than words I meant that it is much more poisonous if a person says he loves Jews but then won't give them a job because they are Jewish, than if a the person who says (while he is drunk) that Jews are responsible for all the worlds wars DOES hire Jews to work as his bodyguard and publicist (as Mel has).


"He's jewish? Yea ok, ill let him take a bullet for me!"

:p

[darchangel]

Originally posted by Lynn7
Re: Clinton- you totally mistinterpretted my Clinton remarks. Clinton did not want to be forgiven- he said he was innocent. Where's the comparison? If he admitted the act like Gibson did and then asked for forgiveness I would'be been OK with that. Its the people who have no remorse I have the problem with.



You mean like how Bush refuses any responsiblity in the cluster fuck handling of Katrina? :D


As far as Mel Gibson goes, I'm done talking about him. After this last little publicity stunt, his days of bringing in a paycheck are numbered anyway.



~darchangel~

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by darchangel
You mean like how Bush refuses any responsiblity in the cluster fuck handling of Katrina? :D


As far as Mel Gibson goes, I'm done talking about him. After this last little publicity stunt, his days of bringing in a paycheck are numbered anyway.



~darchangel~

Bush didn't ask for forgiveness for Katrina did he? Did anyone?


Vong- blaming Christianity is reasonable? Most Christians in history are known for their great deeds for humanity or at the very least for their compassion--until recent years when there has been some revisionist history going on and now it seems like the Christians are percieved as the evil ones in the world. Isn't it ironic that it is evil to stand against abortion but people who fight to save the whales and trees are held in high esteem? Strange times we live in.

[Brando @$$ Fat]

Uh, Lynn, if you ever paid attention in history class you'd know that Christians are responsible for lots of suffering and pain in world history. Remember the Crusades? A whole lot of people died in the Crusades. The Salem Witch Trials? Those weren't good either. In fact, most people I believe would acknowledge that they were very bad.

But hey, Christians are always right, so who am I to question what wicked things they've done in history? Or at least, in your deluded view if Christianity that's how it is.

Oh, and saying that fighting for environmental causes is less Christian than taking a stance on abortion is just plain stupid. The Bible itself specifically mentions that we must take care of the Earth, something that many famous "Christians" have spoken out against. Not to say that God is pro-choice, but the Bible doesn't even mention abortion, so I think environmental causes has the upper hand here.

[Lynn7]

I never said that SOME people who CLAIMED to be Christian didn't do reprehensible things. It is basic to Christianity that we know we are all sinners and we are all capable of doing bad things- we are no worse than any other people in history. But on the other hand, there are so many great stories of Christians who do very good things in the name of our God. Christians regularly sacrifice the comforts of home to go out into the world and help the hopeless and many Christians have been killed while they are working to help the poor.

Environmentalism can be good but why does that not extend to saving babies from being aborted? They move (in vitro) and feed (off their mothers) and when emerge from their "protected" environment they soon become teachers and nurses and doctors and come up with cures for cancer and lots of other good stuff.

[Monotreme]

Originally posted by Lynn7
Environmentalism can be good but why does that not extend to saving babies from being aborted? They move (in vitro) and feed (off their mothers) and when emerge from their "protected" environment they soon become teachers and nurses and doctors and come up with cures for cancer and lots of other good stuff.
First of all, a premature fetus isn't a baby. It's a collection of cells and tissue well on its way to being a baby - but it's not a baby. At the stage at which abortions are made, the fetus has no consciousness. It doesn't have a "soul" that is murdered when the abortion is made. But I guess this re-connects us to the whole Bible versus science and logic thing. Nevermind.

As humanitarian, considerate people-lovers, Christians sure do a good job at showing compassion for the 15 year old girl who lives with her poor single mom and who was coaxed by her boyfriend into having sex at such a young age. Would you actually expect her to raise a child? Is that showing compassion for the child? Or for her? And what about a deformed fetus. Or one with mental illness. Or one with a disease that will kill it at age 6. Is that showing compassion for both child and family, allowing such a baby to be born, a baby that will only bring them grief and sadness?

And let's not forget for a moment that these same compassionate Christians who so firmly stand against euthanasia and abortion also advocate the death penalty as punishment for crimes. What a way to show a love for human life, eh?

Honestly, Christinity is so full of contradictions, I'm really shocked that the Romans didn't pick up on at least SOME of them at the Council of Nicaea, before signing the paperwork...

[Scorpio24]

Originally posted by Lynn7
I never said that SOME people who CLAIMED to be Christian didn't do reprehensible things.

Haha. Classic.

Originally posted by Brando @$$ Fat
Uh, Lynn, if you ever paid attention in history class you'd know that Christians are responsible for lots of suffering and pain in world history. Remember the Crusades? A whole lot of people died in the Crusades. The Salem Witch Trials? Those weren't good either. In fact, most people I believe would acknowledge that they were very bad.


No no Brando. You go it all wrong. Those were just SOME people that CLAIMED to be Christian.


Originally posted by Lynn7
And it seems funny that in the past week there are multiple posts on the BB from people who blame Christians for all the world's atrocities- Mel's comments about the Jews seem pale by comparison.


It's funny because someone else said this just the other day also. I asked for the proof and none was given. Prehaps you could supply some...

[Brando @$$ Fat]

Originally posted by Monotreme
First of all, a premature fetus isn't a baby. It's a collection of cells and tissue well on its way to being a baby - but it's not a baby. At the stage at which abortions are made, the fetus has no consciousness. It doesn't have a "soul" that is murdered when the abortion is made. But I guess this re-connects us to the whole Bible versus science and logic thing. Nevermind.

As humanitarian, considerate people-lovers, Christians sure do a good job at showing compassion for the 15 year old girl who lives with her poor single mom and who was coaxed by her boyfriend into having sex at such a young age. Would you actually expect her to raise a child? Is that showing compassion for the child? Or for her? And what about a deformed fetus. Or one with mental illness. Or one with a disease that will kill it at age 6. Is that showing compassion for both child and family, allowing such a baby to be born, a baby that will only bring them grief and sadness?

And let's not forget for a moment that these same compassionate Christians who so firmly stand against euthanasia and abortion also advocate the death penalty as punishment for crimes. What a way to show a love for human life, eh?

Honestly, Christinity is so full of contradictions, I'm really shocked that the Romans didn't pick up on at least SOME of them at the Council of Nicaea, before signing the paperwork...

Took the words right out of my mouth, Monotreme.

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by Monotreme
First of all, a premature fetus isn't a baby. It's a collection of cells and tissue well on its way to being a baby - but it's not a baby. At the stage at which abortions are made, the fetus has no consciousness. It doesn't have a "soul" that is murdered when the abortion is made. But I guess this re-connects us to the whole Bible versus science and logic thing. Nevermind.

As humanitarian, considerate people-lovers, Christians sure do a good job at showing compassion for the 15 year old girl who lives with her poor single mom and who was coaxed by her boyfriend into having sex at such a young age. Would you actually expect her to raise a child? Is that showing compassion for the child? Or for her? And what about a deformed fetus. Or one with mental illness. Or one with a disease that will kill it at age 6. Is that showing compassion for both child and family, allowing such a baby to be born, a baby that will only bring them grief and sadness?

And let's not forget for a moment that these same compassionate Christians who so firmly stand against euthanasia and abortion also advocate the death penalty as punishment for crimes. What a way to show a love for human life, eh?

Honestly, Christinity is so full of contradictions, I'm really shocked that the Romans didn't pick up on at least SOME of them at the Council of Nicaea, before signing the paperwork...

If your collection of cells and tissue had been aborted then you would not have been here having this conversation with me. You would have been killed---the end for Monotreme.

Since when is it a punishment to have a child? It is a wonderful experience and not the horror show pro-choicers seem to beleive it is. Look at the pregnant women you meet- are they sobbing and crying about theri fate or are they radiant? Deformed babies- that's just awful! One of my sister-in-laws is mentally retaded and yet everyone loves her. My cousin's son has cerebral palsy is in a wheel chair, cna't use his legs and has minimal use of his hands- wears diapers. Everyone loves him and he is one very happy 15 year old! Who are we to decide who is expendable or not? And at 1 million babies aborted each year in the US it is not about rape or incest- it is about convenience.As I have said before, I challenge people who are going to ahve an abortion to first have an ultrasound. Look at what you will be aborting and then go for it! But abortion doctors forbid the ultrasonagrophers to show the moms the ultrasounds because it may cause them pain or to want to change their minds. Why would looking at a collection of cells and tissues cause anyone to have pain? It wouldn't. These cells are babies and they are actively moving around by 7 weeks gestation. If it was really just cells then the docs would have all the women looking at the ultrasounds to assure them they were not doing anythign wrong- but they don't.

Many Christians are against the death penalty. i would be too if it wasn't for the fact that so many liberal judges are giving sentences that allow murderers and rapists out to hurt and kill innocents. If they can stay in jail for life I am fine without the death penalty. and Euthanasia and abortion are practiced on people who have not killed or murdered. So where is the justice in that?

It is not contradictory to value human life. If someone does get a death penalty it is because the life of the victim or the future victims have value.

[electriclite]

Originally posted by Lynn7

Since when is it a punishment to have a child?


When its not the proper time to have a child.

[KcMsterpce]

It puzzles me how someone who is "an adamant Christian" feels justification in the death penalty AT ALL.
What I don't ever understand is the kind of people that twist and shape the Bible to whatever they see fits within their realm of reality, yet takes no chance in listening or understanding other peoples' point of view on things, because if it doesn't fit that persons' ideals, then OBVIOUSLY that second party is absolutely wrong.

I really don't get it.

[Lynn7]

Electriclite- women have been having babies at inconvinent times since the beginning of time. Women have never had it easier than they do in these modern times with all of the conveneinces that we have not to mention the safety net of public assistance. Women of old had to actually worry about starving AND there was no birth control. And their dads could marry them off to whomever, whenever and there was no recourse. Now, if women don't want to keep their babies their are plenty of couples who would love to adopt.

KC MAsterpiece- I don't understand what you don't get. You say it is hypocritical for a Christian to be AGAINSTeuthanasia and abortion and be FOR the death penalty and yet on the other side it is exactly reversed- they want to END the death penalty and see NOTHING wrong with euthanasia and abortion. So both sides being equally divided I guess everyone is hypocritical......or maybe they are not equivalent issues?

[electriclite]

Originally posted by Lynn7
Electriclite- women have been having babies at inconvinent times since the beginning of time.

And concurrently, women have been performing abortions since the beginning as well, but they didn't call them abortions, they were inducing miscarriages, but the idea behind it was same. There's has always been a recognized importance in the maintaining of populations, and the connection between money, success and/or power and creating/controlling new offspring.

Abortion is not a 21st or 20th century phenomena. Legalizing and having it performed by medical physicians IS.


Originally posted by Lynn7
Women have never had it easier than they do in these modern times with all of the conveneinces that we have not to mention the safety net of public assistance.

Coming from a conservative I find that answer surprising, since the argument against welfare is that it encourages more children to be born out of wedlock and puts an even greater burden on taxpayers. But of course Clinton did change that with welfare reform, so now women only have a couple years to get off it.

Originally posted by Lynn7
Women of old had to actually worry about starving AND there was no birth control. And their dads could marry them off to whomever, whenever and there was no recourse. Now, if women don't want to keep their babies their are plenty of couples who would love to adopt.


There are still some families in this country, who are not on welfare who are in danger of starving. That boogeyman hasn't completley disappeared. I had a period in my life when I was still living at home where my mother didn't have money to buy groceries for a month. Thank God my brother was working at Pizza Hut at the time. I know others aren't that lucky.

And there are women who exercise the option of giving their children away directly or indirectly to wanting couples, and good for them. But there are children up for adoption in the system and they go wanting for families. There are no easy answers or happy endings with this, and there is no real "convenience" in any scenario. Becoming pregnant, whether you keep the child, give it away or end the pregnancy changes your life irrevocably forever.

What do you suggest people do to stop abortion without government interference or the hard forced manipulation of others? The core truth behind the abortion issue, is that NOBODY likes abortions but that we have them legalized so we do not have to deal with the aftermath of illegal abortions. The rationale is either way someone ends up dead: The mother and child or the child.

Those are your options in this scenario. Sad as is, these are the cards we have been given to play.