NZ Catholics at it again

Catholic groups in New Zealand, who last summer complained about the Popetown cartoon, are now kicking up a holy stink about the South Park episode entitled “Bloody Mary“. It features a statue of the Blessed Virgin miraculously “bleeding out of her ass”.

The NZ branch of Family Life International are fuming:

Family Life International is outraged at the unbelievably arrogant, insensitive, and confrontational decision by CanWest to advance the broadcast of the highly offensive Bloody Mary episode of the South Park cartoon series.

CanWest will now insult Catholics on free to air television on Wednesday 22nd February (tomorrow night) by screening Bloody Mary over two months ahead of schedule.

They have set up a protest website, where they complain that they are being “bullied”.

(From Ekklesia, who like South Park)


19 Responses to “NZ Catholics at it again”

  1. Andrew Nixon says:

    Article on the Beeb too: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4735216.stm

    Includes a comment from the PM of New Zealand.

    It’ll be interesting to keep an eye out for what happens when the episode hits these shores.

    Interesting to see that the protestors against this cartoon are handling their protest in a realtively respectful manner. No placards saying “Kill those who insult Catholicism”, no burning down embassies, no offering rewards for the killing of Matt Stone and Trey Parker.

  2. martyn says:

    What a laff that would be to protest in support of south park, dressed as the characters. Bags Cartmen!! Can’t wait till its aired here!

  3. Craig says:

    bags Mrs Garrison, i wanna be pounded in my Vag

  4. Andy Gilmour says:

    I’ve just been on their website, and sent them a polite email inviting them to stop imposing their personal irrationalisms on others. Won’t do any good, but thought it might be a laugh to engage the blackmailers on their own turf, for a change! :-)

  5. Steve says:

    From the Ekklesia website the NZ PM (pre-menstrual?):

    “Helen Clark said the issue would add poignancy to a speech she will give next month at an “interfaith dialogue” conference in the Philippines.”

    And you can guarantee they won’t be saying to each other what they are actually thinking: “Your religion is a load of bollocks – mine is the true one.”

  6. Sam Hayes says:

    How stupid do you have to be to advertise a show you disagree with? Giving the day its aired in their attack on it, along with the publicity they’ve caused, will probably double the expected viewing figures.

  7. Sam Hayes says:

    The protest website gives contact adresses. Email r.friesen@tv3.co.nz, gelliot@canwest.com and feedback@c4tv.co.nz to voice your support for braodcasting the show.

  8. G. Tingey says:

    Excellent stuff!

    I see someone else has picked up on the “all religion is blackmail” idea – keep at it.

  9. Andy Gilmour says:

    G. Tingey –

    re use of “blackmail” – while I’ve felt this way for about..oooh..argghhh 24 years now (that makes me feel OLD…noooo!) it was actually your use of it that finally convinced me it was an acceptable “catch-all” term as a shorthand for the whole misinformation-cajoling-threats-promises process. Of course, it does lose some of the subtleties & detail, but then who’s got the time to keep repeating complex arguments on *EVERY* occasion some supernaturalist comes to play??

    Give yerself a shiny! :-)

  10. martyn says:

    I emailed my support and recieved an email of thanks in return from Geoffrey Elliot Vice President, Corporate Affairs, CanWest Global Communications Corp. Now, I must get started on that Cartman outfit………

  11. Stuart says:

    Why are all these so called family value groups run by the kind of freaks any sane kid would leave home ASAP to forget?
    Can you beleive this mob even have a link to the ‘Joseph Ratzinger Fan Club’ on their site – and it isn’t a pisstake!
    AAAAGGGHHH!!!!

  12. Andy Gilmour says:

    If you go onto the “Myths about Bloody Mary” section of their site, you get such great arguments as this:

    “But doesn’t the law allow this program to be broadcast?

    The law allows a lot of things that we don’t always consider acceptable behaviour.

    The law allows us to travel 100kph on the open road, but if the road is stacked with traffic, and it is raining with visibility of no more than 5 metres ahead then it would be grossly irresponsible to travel at the allowed 100kph.

    Some countries have laws that allow men to beat women – is this okay too?

    The Nazis enacted laws that authorised the death of millions – was that okay?”

    Yes folks, they just compared allowing South Park to be broadcast to the rule of Hitler!

    :-)

  13. [...] More pictures at The Jawa Report, and Mediawatchwatch has more on the protest. «« Previous: Muslim Hack Attack Next: Viva Free Speech: Just Dont Upset The Jews! »» 4 Comments » [...]

  14. Sam Hayes says:

    Sent an email via the protest website explaining how stupid they were, this was the reply I got

    Which I think rather proves my point.

  15. Rod Langlands says:

    I posted this comment on their protest web site.
    “Just don’t watch it.
    Your reaction has simply created a lot of publicity for the program and now many more people WILL watch it whenever and wherever it is broadcast.
    Have you thought about the possible affect you will have on the employees of the companies that you choose to boycott? There may be many innocent people in these companies that have a similar view to your own. Are you willing to cause them harm to make your point?
    Will you compensate any of these people if they loose their jobs? Will you apologise to them? Will you feed their families and pay their rent or mortgage?
    Can I come and arrange a boycott of any of your business interests because I disagree with your views and think what you are doing is wrong? Would you mind if I put you and your family at risk by my actions?
    You need to think more deeply before acting in this way.
    Let people know your views but don’t set about causing actual harm.
    It is after all a cartoon.
    It did not steal from you. It did not physically attack you.
    It poked fun at one of the icons of your religion.
    Is your belief system so fragile that you can be affected so deeply by a cartoon?
    It’s starting to sound a bit like the Mohamed cartoons isn’t it? Perhaps you all have more in common than you think.

    Regards
    Rod Langlands”

  16. [...] (via MediaWatchWatch) Posted by Paul in New Zealand (February 26, 2006 at 10:01 am) [...]

  17. Katrina says:

    It makes me sick. Christians object to something which blasphemes their God and it is laughed at – in fact, the powers that be go out of their way to let everyone see what they objected to. Muslims object to something and what happens? The whole world rushes around trying to placate them! How many Muslims have actually SEEN the Muhhamed cartoons? I know I haven’t seen them and I would like to, if only to redress the balance a bit. It makes me sick, it really does. Let’s have real religious equality and give something to the Christians as well as the Muslims. One world. One rule. For everyone.

  18. Andy Gilmour says:

    Katrina,

    Yes, absolutely, let’s have “One world. One rule. For everyone”. Here’s a suggestion that would guarantee everyone’s religious freedom:

    “No-one has the right to impose their personal moral code on others’ freedom of expression, especially when they base their claim to authority on the alleged collected wit & wisdom of an undetectable, unprovable supernatural being.”

    Will that do?

    Or how about – No censorship without a replicable, falsifiable body of evidence?

    Or – Anyone claiming “absolute truth” must provide reliable empirical evidence as per the example above?

    If I don’t believe in your mythical deity, then how can I blaspheme against it? I could be rationally judged to be denigratory, derogatory, insulting, rude, flippant, ironic, sarcastic, etc,etc (frequently, I confess), but not blasphemous (or slanderous, or libellous – they’d require proof existence) – that’s merely an opinion – and one based on belief without proof. Which is highly irrational, now isn’t it?

    Attested to any good miracles lately?

  19. Terry Bowden says:

    C4 have issued an apology for giving offense.
    Note that this program gave offense to Catholics because they hold Mary in high regard, and to Muslis, who also hold Mary in high regard.

    “No-one has the right to impose their personal moral code on others’ freedom of expression, especially when they base their claim to authority on the alleged collected wit & wisdom of an undetectable, unprovable supernatural being.”

    Cute. Nor has anyone the right to impose their particular moral code (such as religious offence) through the media. If only people who use (or abuse) the term “right” would give equal use to the term “responsiblity”. Sigh!