Wednesday, March 30, 2005

WARNING: Important News, aparently

Nothing better to do tid-bits, celebrities attacked, abashed, and ridiculed by agencies that are mad because “they” –the wealthy, talented, and good looking- don’t fit certain ideologies which dictate their lives, nor do they sit back and let such agencies usurp their personal lives. Here are several examples, which one may wish to satirize, of recent issues of celebrity attacks in which the attacks may be more entertaining than the entertainers themselves.

Catholic Leaders Blast Madonna and Ritchie
Madonna and her film-maker husband Guy Ritchie have infuriated religious chiefs following their decision to attend a party dressed as a nun and the Pope respectively - at a time when Pope John Paul II is becoming increasingly frail. Madonna and Ritchie celebrated the Jewish holiday of Purim by dressing up for a Kabbalah bash in London last Thursday - angering Catholic leaders. America's Catholic League president William Donahue says, "It just goes to show you what a moral slug this man (Ritchie) is that he would get dressed up as the Pope at a time like this. We're quite disappointed. We Catholics thought we had finally gotten rid of the witch when she (Madonna) discovered Kabbalah." However, Madonna's publicist says, "No disrespect was intended."

Tristan says: Oddly enough, you think the American Catholic League president would show some compassion and spirit of forgiveness. Obviously, for those so high up in religious rank, they can forgoe the teachings of Christ, and lambaste with holy tongue’s so vile, call people witches. The Vatican, surely supports these curses, and so sponsors them entirely by religious creed alone. The name of the Catholic Church will be infamous in attacking Madonna, a pop-singer/diva, for having a costume party. And whether or not the Pope is ill, dressing up as someone –say Plato or Jesus, is of no consequence to a sick a dying man, and he should be so grateful people remember him enough to dress the part, if to remember him at all. What he should not be grateful about –is to be remembered for the man whose religion deemed a free woman a “bitch”…or witch. Accusations of such unrighteous slander can so often be easily confused for their vulgarity if not their intent. It is doubly funny that a man who follows the teachings that he, who judge shall be judged by God, would so pass judgment on witches where there are none. We only have Diva singers and film makes here. Good luck in your next life, oh wait, not a Buddhist. Never mind then.

Here’s another:

PETA: 'Lopez Forced Billboard to Drop Our Ad'
Animal rights charity People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals (PETA) have accused Jennifer Lopez of bullying Billboard magazine into removing their full-page ad, which lambasted the star for wearing fur. The music magazine had agreed to run PETA's advert, which features a gruesome photo of a skinned animal beside an open letter to Lopez, attacking her for glamorizing fur in her new Sweetface clothing line and encouraging the "sadistic slaughter" of rabbits, minks, foxes and chinchillas. But on Monday Billboard cancelled the $5,000 ad, leading PETA Vice President Lisa Lange to conclude that the magazine "caved to pressure" from Lopez's record label Sony Corp's Epic Records and her publicist Nanci Ryder of Baker-Winokur-Ryder. Ryder admits, "I'm doing my job, which is protecting my client. I don't understand why PETA want to meet with Jennifer. In my opinion, there would be nothing worse than a meeting, unless in the meeting we could commit to not wearing fur and not using fur in fashion. Unless we could do that, I didn't quite understand where the meeting would go." PETA have retaliated by emailing the banned advert to hundreds of radio stations nationwide.

Tristan says: I would say more, but I agree with Lopez’s agent. She should be protected from freaks like PETA. Attacking those who wear furs is stupid in this day and age of capitalistic consumerism. They can’t attack the retailers, nor can they attack the hunters of such furs. They seem, apparently, only to be good enough to attack those who wear coats made of furs –synthetic or otherwise. I’m sure that Lopez, like the mad scientist she is, genetically grew these poor endangered species from stem cells of pond scum, and no animals were harmed in the making of this new clothing line that would not have been so entirely flattened by an 18-wheeler otherwise. Not to mention Lopez is not her own costume designer, and the furs she wears in music videos and film are probably pre-scripted by an art designer or costume designer. It seems this organization would attack a woman known for showing more of her own skin than the skins of animals, seems so absurd I can hardly believe it.

These articles can be found at their original source:

The opinions of this author do not reflect those of the original articles or those parties involved. The ideas and comments by the author are purely a personal analysis and commentary should not hold accountable such idiotic actions by people, nor should it influence others’ to idioticness. The only desired outcome is a little common sense and a lot of decency, and should the author’s commentary influence other’s opinions or ideas, it is because they share the author’s good moral judgment, and should not be held accountable for their wise agreement, nor should their intellect come under attack by those who find it absolute to attack morality at any turn without showing compassion. These who wish to join the fray of personal slander and libel should worry that perhaps those who don’t pity them may in fact comment on them in satiric allegory, and at the very least flat out mocking ridicule.

No comments: