APOCALYPTO NOW
Email"The President believes in the forgiveness of sins for all who seek forgiveness," the WHITE HOUSE SAID when asked about Mel Gibson’s tequila-fueled anti-Semitic aria.
Out in La-la-land, my agent’s rabbi has now extended an invitation to Gibson (readable HERE; Adobe Acrobat needed) to publicly repent before a Temple full of hungry Hollywood Jews this Fall on the Jewish day of Atonement. While there is no doubt a degree of self- and shul-promotion involved here (Sen. Hillary Clinton spoke of forgiveness during last year’s Holy Day), the rabbi seems to be forcing Tinseltown’s Tribesmen into accepting Braveheart’s self-flagellation — in Judaism, if someone asks for your apology before Yom Kippur you MUST accept it. In fact, the day before Yom Kippur is reserved for those apologies.
BUT…what should Gibson apologize for? Drunken words? Or does it go beyond that… As we discussed yesterday there’s his refusal to distance himself from HIS FATHER’S particularly odious Holocaust-denying, Jewish-cabal-alleging anti-Semitism. In fact, when asked about it, Gibson’s response was to say that his father had never told him a lie.
There are the decisions he made in making The Passion of the Christ that SOME CRITICS HAVE FOUND went out of their way to portray Jews in a particularly nefarious way. ….New York Times op-ed writer Frank Rich says Gibson promoted his film by JEW-BAITING.
Are these to be discussed as well? Or just last week’s events?
"Are you a Jew?": Los Angeles County Sheriff deputy James Mee, who arrested Gibson Friday. (Answer, btw: Yes.)
More later…we have several wars, many political developments, and other more important things to discuss….
jt
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters 
Obama Backs Off Birth Control Battle?
See, it was all about him making that movie. Had he scandalized Jesus like Martin Scorcese, you wouldn’t even care. You’d just lump him in with the passive treatment you provide Kofi Annan, Ahmedinejad, the United Nations and the rest of the ant-semitic world.
Why the hunt and kill on Gibson’s old man? We all have old men in our lives who make salty comments. I know I wouldn’t toss my dad under the bus to appease the hapless eunuchs who tried to derail the “Passion of the Christ” while pushing “Brokeback Mountain.”
Gibson’s movie was a historical portrayal–not an anti-semitic screed–which by the way was bornew out in the complete lack of “anti-semitic backlash” when the movie ran.
-T
Posted by: The Therapist | August 2, 2006, 10:48 am 10:48 am
Although Rabbi Baron’s invitation contains a little bit of self-promotion, I believe that it was offered sincerely and should be accepted by Mr. Gibson in the same way. What better venue in which to apologize than before members of the community he offended? But for this to be effective–and meaningful–contrition, Mr. Gibson will not only have to apologize for his venomous and hateful words, but will also clearly and unmistakably have to disavow and disclaim his father’s rabidly anti-Semitic comments.
True contrition is only accomplished when one’s behavior is changed after a heartfelt apology; otherwise, the apology is meaningless. Mr. Gibson will unequivocally have to demonstrate in his actions from now on that he is not a bigot. He should get the opportunity to do so.
Posted by: chuck | August 2, 2006, 11:47 am 11:47 am
Sorry for the additional posting, but I believe that the first posting of the day misses the point about how Mr. Gibson publicized his movie before its release. Mr. Gibson took valid concerns that a small number of Jewish organizations had in the portrayal of Jews in “The Passion of the Christ” and distorted and magnified them to carefully craft a message that his rights to present his movie were somehow being abridged by this very “vocal” group BECAUSE OF HIS PORTRAYAL OF JEWS. (As I recall, the groups involved were very polite and hardly “vocal.”) Of course, such cynical publicity only increases everyone’s interest in seeing the movie, which is what happened and what I believe Mr. Gibson wanted all along, since no major studio would release his film. In the end, anyone who rationally looks at this must agree with Mr. Rich’s assessment: if this cynical advertising campaign designed to play off ancient hatred toward Jews isn’t baiting an ethnic group for one’s own purposes, I don’t know what is. Since prejudice and bigotry are now displayed in subtle, but unmistakable, ways, I would also never expect any “anti-Semitic backlash” to occur.
And, despite evidence to the contrary, there is a significant difference between “salty comments” and bigotry, no matter how thickly it is disguised, when uttered by one’s own parent.
One of my favorite columnists, Neil Steinberg of the “Chicago Sun Times,” summarized his feelings about prejudice and bigotry in his column today:
“Prejudice — not just anti-Semitism, but bigotry against any group — is wrong. I don’t mean morally wrong — though it’s that, too. I mean wrong as in factually incorrect. Jews don’t control the world. Blacks aren’t lazy. Muslims aren’t murderous. Not generally.
Anyone who vigorously subscribes to these prejudices is sort of an idiot. That gets lost, because the meanness of these particular mistaken notions give them a weight they don’t deserve. Shorn of a kind of dark glamor, believing that Jews cause all war is like believing in fairies.”
I wish I’d been able to say that so eloquently.
Posted by: chuck | August 2, 2006, 3:21 pm 3:21 pm
It seems that anyone who loves God should forgive an offense and not make very public hay out of someone’s disgrace.
Posted by: Eric | August 3, 2006, 4:11 am 4:11 am