Friday, April 15, 2011

Hell's Bible on the attack again


Passion For Reason by Raul Pangalangan
[I think this is more passion against religion and against Catholics, if you ask me.  You'll later learn why.]

Last week I argued that there is a downside to ad boycotts. I warned of the dangers of moral majorities flexing muscle through the power of the purse, and raised several “what ifs” to test the wisdom of market-based censorship. Fellow columnist Conrad de Quiros [the greatest jackass of all time!] agreed, and we asked: What if the Catholic Church calls for an ad boycott to oppose reproductive health?

Well, as if by way of response, earlier this week the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines showed us exactly what it was capable of doing. The CBCP objected to a 30-second ad of McDonald’s showing a little girl asking a boy, apparently while they’re in a playground, if she could be considered his girlfriend. The boy said no, girls were too demanding. And the girl said all she really wanted was McDonald’s P25 French fries—and they traipsed happily soon after to a McDonald’s shop[Now you tell me if this is something that kids ought to learn and know.  Tell me, what is SOOO GOOD and CUTE about this?]

Fr. Melvin Castro of the CBCP’s Episcopal Commission on Family and Life condemned the ad as “very shallow” and “superficial,” saying it cheapened human relations by equating love with French fries. “[A]ng human relationship ba ay French fries lang ba ang katumbas?”

I am not surprised at the CBCP’s gumption to object to an otherwise innocuous ad on puppy love. An Indian version of exactly the same storyline ends with a peck on the cheek, horrors! [Idiot!  Indians and Filipinos have different set of moral values!]   But who after all wouldn’t be emboldened by the power of the anti-Willie Revillame ad boycott campaign? Power intoxicates, and unchecked power intoxicates absolutely[And idiocy intoxicates, well, idiots.  And idiots with a pen are well, dumb and dangerous!]

What proves this is the panicky response by McDonald’s, obviously wary of that it would unfairly suffer the same backlash that Revillame worthily endured.  [Wow!.....Really....w....o....w!]

A McDonald’s spokesman announced: “We recognize and respect the stand of the CBCP and have stopped airing the said commercial across all television stations as of noon today... We would like to inform the public that McDonald’s decided to pull out the commercial because we respect the call of Bishop Iñiguez and we will replace the spot with an old commercial.”

But the real clincher is the smug post-victory reply of the CBCP, as it were, a modern-day Padre Salvi licking his chops. It celebrates self-censorship. “Sana lang huwag nang dumating ulit sa ganitong punto. Sana on their own, ang kanilang sensitivity sa culture, sa faith ng isang bansa ay kilalanin.” I understand the call for sensitivity, but I am all-out against self-censorship.  [Of course.  For brash idiots like you who does not care about the people's cultural sensitivities, you would!]

Sensitivity is fine, but it can dampen our daring and creativity. [So what?  Creativity over sensitivity?  No surprise if this bastard is all for condoms!]  A blog commentator asked about the potential blasphemy of Lenten advertisements like “Fish be with you” and “Our Daily Shrimp.” Another commentator wondered about ads that feature Robin Padilla’s “laging handa” plug for Trust condoms. Advertising works by finding fresh ways to see the day-to-day; it thrives on taking risks, not on playing safe.  [Oh really?  And not about creating controversy to draw attention which is the primary purpose why you spend huge money to advertise in the first place?  You know Aida?  Guess not, because you are no advertising practitioner.  Fact check.  I am!  Ha!]

I object to self-censorship. The bishops’ test - “sana on their own”—is precisely the chilling effect that the Bill of Rights would guard against. [Bing! Bing! Bing!  And survey says....RH BILL!!!]  And even Ronald
McDonald quakes in his red boots at the threat of a new Inquisition.


When do you self-regulate?  When do you self-censor?

If this Pangalangan ends up in court and the magistrate tells him to shut the hell up because he is out of order, but he instead keeps yapping his old head off saying it is his human right to free speech...

Well, he can take his right to free speech behind bars and yack all day long while caressing the cold bars.

Pangalangan and his lot are typical people of go have sex all you want and cry your heart out and ask for taxpayers money, most of them from Catholic citizens of this country, after they get infected with a life threatening disease.

Then, you tell me not to practice self-control and censorship.

Dumb *ss!

No comments:

Post a Comment