Academy Awards.

Posted by Viktoria Michaelis on February 28, 2011 in News & Opinion |

Please explain something to me: why is it fine to say that someone who might possibly have existed at some time in the past, helped, but not fine to say that he had nothing to do with something?

I am thinking about Kathy Griffin’s winning of an Emmy in 2007 against Melissa Leo using the F word this year. Griffin’s words were not broadcast, for some reason, even though they are probably truer than many others uttered at such ceremonies. She said:

A lot of people come up here and thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus.

Why is the F word more acceptable than the truth?

Love & Kisses, Viki.

Tags: , , , ,


  • Katharina says:

    Why? because Kathy Griffin should not have won the award to start with. Who the f thinks she’s a comedian?

    • viki says:

      There are many, many people who should never win an award … I was just intrigued by the pseudo-religious hypocrisy of censorship in the Academy Awards by certain television companies. Is this a trait in America these days? Allow a once banned swear word through but not a valid comment?

  • Francois Demers says:

    Let’s say that I am a Jesuit and a historian. I have not doubt about the historical Jesus (vs. the one who requires faith) because of his impact on human history. As a historian, I do have a problem: he left no documentary evidence at all. Yet, he lived in the Roman empire, during its most bureaucratic stage. But I am satisfied that he existed because of contemporary testimonies.

    As a Jesuit, I believe that he is the Son of God, the Redemptor, the Christos, etc. He was for all time and will be for all time as sits at the right of the Father. From them proceed the Holy Spirit and I have my One God in three Persons. Jesus being the Logos of Plato.

    My faith teaches me that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. It also teaches that humans have free will and are responsible for their actions and their outcome.

    Certainly, this Jesuit would be stunned if he found out that Jesus has anything to do with winning an Academy Award. Or preventing it. From “Fiat Lux” to “and the award goes to…” ?

    So I would see nothing wrong with saying that Jesus had nothing to do with winning an Oscar. In fact, I am absolutely convinced he is not a voting member of the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences. I would also regard people who thank him for winning as… misguided.

    Religious zealots typically know nothing about religion. Nowhere truer than in the USA. Meanwhile, Obama extended the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act, now, I believe in nothing.

    Does Kathy Griffin exist and would it be wrong to thank her for not writing this comments? Billions of people did not write this comment and we should be grateful to each and everyone of them: it is my typical rambling, pointless drivel.


    p.s.: written with only one eye

  • viki says:

    I, too, see Jesus as an historical figure. I can’t say that I necessarily believe all the miracles he is purported to have performed but many of the words he is thought to have said – whether he did or not, whether they were written hundreds of years later or not – have some good about them. Some bad too, but aren’t all figures in religion like that?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2010-2018 Viktoria Michaelis All rights reserved.
This site is using the Desk Mess Mirrored theme, v2.5, from BuyNowShop.com.

error: Content is protected !!