The Limits of South Park Conservatism

Craig from Lead and Gold has the best line of the week:

Jonah Goldberg generally doesn't care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their home. But he is willing to make an exception when it comes to Mel Gibson and his accountant.

Joe Carter

| March 16, 2004 | Permalink | Comments [12]

12 Comments

Sean Thomas writes:

What these types of people don't seem to realize that Gibson went into this knowing that he could lose a lot of money on it. The fact that it made as much money as it did was a surprise to everyone. It seems to me that he is being blessed for his faith. I also believe that it's no ones business what he does with the money. I would hope that he would pay the Lord His tithe, but that's between Gibson and his God. The same people that are crying about how much money he's made I'm sure were busy trying to come up with Jokes about how much he lost a few months ago.

Secondly, I want to know where the roving bands of marauding Christians seeking Jews to beat up are?

March 16, 2004 3:32 PM | Comment # 1

David writes:

Sean,

Haven't you been to any of the meetings?

We won't start marauding until after Easter.

March 16, 2004 4:55 PM | Comment # 2

ambra writes:

Oh now this has just made my day.

March 16, 2004 5:46 PM | Comment # 3

Mike writes:

Jonah Doesn't Get It...

March 16, 2004 7:26 PM | Comment # 4

Mike writes:

David,

<sarcasm>How do you expect us to carry out the American Kristalnacht and set up death camps if people like you give the Jews advance warning so they can leave the country or buy guns?</sarcasm>

March 16, 2004 7:29 PM | Comment # 5

David Johnson writes:

Mike,

Oops! My bad.

Jews, forget what I said previously. I was only kidding.....

March 16, 2004 8:45 PM | Comment # 6

Rhesa writes:

Why the heck is how Mel Gibson spends the money he rightly earned through that film any of Mr. Goldberg's business?

March 17, 2004 1:13 AM | Comment # 7

Josiah writes:

Well, first, Goldberg is against gay marriage, against abortion, pro-drug war, and has written many many critiques of libertarianism. I doubt very much that he would make the "none of our business" claim you ascribe to him.

Second, the contrary idea, expressed by many commenters, that it's nobody's business what Gibson does with his money, doesn't strike me as very Christian. I seem to recall St. Paul saying that having money was good because it enabled us to give to the poor.

March 17, 2004 9:20 AM | Comment # 8

Joe Carter writes:

Josiah,

I doubt very much that he would make the "none of our business" claim you ascribe to him.

Since he favors civil unions I imagine that he does take the "none of your business" position.

Second, the contrary idea, expressed by many commenters, that it's nobody's business what Gibson does with his money, doesn't strike me as very Christian.

Christians, naturally, might have an opinion about what he should do with it. But since Gibson earned the money legally and in a legitimate business enterprise what he does with the profits is between him and God.

March 17, 2004 9:36 AM | Comment # 9

Linoge writes:

But since Gibson earned the money legally and in a legitimate business enterprise what he does with the profits is between him and God.

Precisely. Complaining about Gibson making money off The Passion would be equivalent to complaining about Webber making money off Jesus Christ Superstar. If people had a problem with either entity making money off either show, those people probably did not go to see it... and if they did, I need not point out how hypocritical that is :).

At any rate, he certainly did nothing illegal, and (as I see it) nothing immoral (at least nothing any more immoral than all of the tens (possibly hundreds?) of other stage/screen/etc. representation of this chain of events). Of course, I fail to see how that could be described as "immoral"... but that is just me :).

March 17, 2004 11:41 AM | Comment # 10

Josiah writes:

Remember, no one is claiming that Gibson ought to be forced to do anything with his profits from the film. The issue is whether or not it's wrong to express an opinion on the ethics of the situation. If Christianity (or morality in general) has implications on this point, then presumably it is okay to point those implications out. Saying what Gibson does with his money is between him and God is like saying that what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their home is between them and God. It's true, but not particularly relevant.

As for Goldberg and civil unions, I think he's wrong on the issue. But he doesn't support them because he thinks it's not the government's business what consenting adults do at home (that would be absurd). Rather he favors them as a compromise measure that avoids gay marriage but recognizes the fact that homosexuals aren't going away any time soon.

March 17, 2004 2:33 PM | Comment # 11

Linoge writes:

Josiah, by making your statement "I seem to recall St. Paul saying that having money was good because it enabled us to give to the poor," people could (easily) assume you mean to tell Gibson what it is he should do with his hard-earned money - as in give some/all of it to the poor. While that may have not been your initial purpose, that is how it can easily be interpreted.

As for what Christianity may say about this particular situation... so far as I know, it says absolutely nothing. The only possibly-relevant issue is John's exhortation not to edit, adjust, augment, or change the Bible, or face the risk of eternal damnation (see Revelations, somewhere). Now, granted, Gibson certainly did change the story, adapting it to his desires, the time limitations, the screen, and so on, so forth. However, he did not attempt to pass it off as verbatim Bible in the first place, nor did he attempt to say it was the inspired word of God.

At any rate, that is the only Christian legality I can see coming into effect. Again, if Gibson did something "immoral" (highly doubtful), so did Weber, and every other author, screenwriter, playwrite, and other artists who attempted to put across their own interpretation of the Bible. Granted, everyone doing something wrong does not make that something right, but I have a remarkably hard time seeing God having a problem with what amounts to be the spreading of the Word of God, verbatim or not - the meaning, the spirit, and the feeling is being passed on.

March 17, 2004 7:12 PM | Comment # 12