(Oct. 23) – What would appear like an easy stop at ‘The Tonight Show’ promoting her new film has turned into a PR nightmare for Halle Berry . The Oscar-winning actress went onto Jay Leno’s show to talk about her latest movie, the drama ‘Things We Lost in the Fire.’ Page Six reports that during the interview, Leno showed the audience manipulated photos of the actress created with the Apple Photo Booth application. One image showed Berry with an elongated nose. An audience member says that Berry quipped “‘Here’s where I look like my Jewish cousin,” which was greeted with crickets from the studio audience. Leno tried to save the moment, saying “‘I’m glad you said that and not me.” On the final show that aired Friday night, Berry’s comment was edited out. Berry spoke with Page Six to explain herself and apologize. “I so didn’t mean to offend anybody, and after the show I realized it could be seen as offensive, so I asked Jay to take it out, and he did.”
And, from the world of overreaction, we have Jay Leno editing out a legitimately funny joke, not because of the backlash, but out of the FEAR of backlash.I’m glad that no Jewish orgs have complained (I think), but still… Did they have to panic over such a small joke? Do they think the Jews would have been THAT bothered? Would they have been?This kind of stuff is silly. We have to worry about Jewish nose jokes, N-words on stage, and drawings of Muhammed, but we ignore the real problems of ALL Americans losing Constitutional freedoms every time we pay higher taxes so churches pay none. We must be prepared to make people understand the difference between silly political correctness and real bigotry.By the way, Arabs have big noses too.
Phreedm,
I have no doubt that AA’s actions can often be political in nature. But that’s not how the law is set up.
There is certainly a thin line between endorsing a candidate and speaking out against everyone else. And there is no doubt that AA is just barely skirting the legal side of that line.
But it’s not like non-religious conservative organizations have to follow different rules. They do the same thing.
The problem here is the religious organizations are allowed to follow a different set of rules based solely on the fact that they are religious in nature.
Your attack on AA’s non-profit status is irrelevant to our attack on the lack of taxation for non-charitable churches. It’s a Red Herring.
I also disagree that the simple act of taxation is a reduction of freedoms. By living in this country you accept that in order to receive services from the government (such as police, clean air requirements, and your right to complain about taxes) you must pay taxes for these things.
There is a way to opt-out of paying taxes. It’s called leaving the country.
So you either accept that taxes are necessary for society to function, or you go someplace else.
Oh, and I completely agree with you that democrats spend more than they need to on frivolous things. But I think the only other team in town would do an even worse job at protecting the personal freedoms that are important to me.
TX,
Like it or not…you are contributing the a christian organization…:)
Regardless…Kudos just the same…
Hey…Does anyone support censoring history…?
I witnesses a christian trying to start a car yesterday. The christian tried lots of times, each time having faith that the car would start and yet each time the car failed to start. Eventually the christian apparently didn’t have faith anymore because the attempts to start the car ended. Thus proving that faith is a fleeting emotional experience and cannot legitimately be used to justify a god-idea.
I never had a preacher that drove a Cadillac. Second hand minivan, maybe and Phreedm, I agree with you. Both side can get pretty whiny.
Churches should be taxed. Actually, the whole damn system needs to overhauled. Tax 10% to everyone and get rid of the adventageous tax hole for cooperations.
You have faith all wrong. Faith is believing it will get better. You can call it God, Jesus, gods, karma, luck, kismet, whatever. It is not just a religious thing.
Phreedm,
Or you could say those christian kids are being guided by an atheist
You accept that taxes are necessary for government to function, not society.
The Amish have no need for taxes (though they’re often forced to pay our taxes though they do not accept benefits from the government) and they get along just fine. Their society isn’t breaking down or falling to ruin – they simply help one another when help is needed.
Yeah! Don’t we know!
Comment from: dsuesimon
Corporations don’t pay taxes…you do…
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2004/04/16/corporations-never-pay-taxes.aspx
atomictesting,
That’ll teach me to make grand sweeping statements about societies.
No doubt there are some forms of society that can do without taxation. But they’re few and far between (if any even exist at the moment).
However, I don’t think anyone can make the argument that our current society could function without some form of government. I’d personally like it to be smaller, but I’m willing to deal for now.
I do have to disagree that the Amish don’t get anything from the government. They get the same rights under the constitution that any other member of this country gets (that they choose not to exercise them is of no consequence). They also get free reign to keep their women educated less than their men (boo hiss) by running their own schools (I’m not 100% sure of this one).
The Amish are as much a part of our society as any other piece of it. They may do their best to keep themselves separated, but they are still protected by the government and benefit from it. How quickly do you think their communities would evaporate if they suddenly lost their right to own property or be protected by the police?
Anyone? Tell that to anarchists.
Me too. Vote to make it happen.
They don’t get anything they can’t do for themselves.
Which of the 27 amendments to the U.S. Constitution guaranteed any citizen Social Security, Welfare, or any other entitlement program?
I’ll help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution
I’ll help even more. They’re not there.
Even if this is true (and I confess a certain level of ignorance about this point) it is hardly the equivalent of a human rights violation. If these women felt they were being repressed they don’t have far (walking distance) to go to avoid it (the country is big and Amish land holdings are small).
Every other piece of our society counts as “almost not part of it at all?”
Enumerate the benefits that the Amish benefit from, if you can. I’ll give you a head start: they sometimes use roads.
Some questions:
If they do not make use of much else, should their tax burden be anywhere even near that of non-Amish society?
Are there even enough of them to actually make a dent in the tax budget?
Would most of society care if they were tax exempt entirely because their impact on our tax burden is negligible?
Not very quickly at all. Though the Amish are forbidden from violence, even in the protection of their own, their neighbors are not. Their neighbors are every other American citizen. Many of us are armed and proud to be. Many of us would fight to the death to defend them and their way of life even if it’s a world apart.
Would you take up arms to protect innocents from harm? Would you be willing to put your life on the line for that protection? Do you believe that you have to be a police officer or a solder of the military to stand up for what is right?
Read the Constitution you mentioned. See that part about a “well-regulated militia?” That’s you and me. That’s the promise our government made to us that we may always be able to take up arms in defense of our own.
We need to take back what has been lost and we need our children to understand what it is that our Constitution is about.
alatham… you asked for an example of how taxation destroys our freedoms…
Here’s another myth…
NO ONE owns their property…we merely rent it from the local government…better known as property taxes…
Personal ownership of property was a cornerstone to the foundation of this country…now, people are willing to give up that freedom in exchange for a monopoly…
Oh crap, screwed that one up!
If you guys are setting up the Amish as the libertarian utopia, that’s going to be a tough sell to the general public.
AT, the Constitution does not guarantee the right to “entitlement” programs, as you call them. They are authorized under Congress’ Article I power to provide for the general welfare.
atomic,
How’s that anarchy thing workin’ out for the Iraqis?
Huh? What? I said no such thing. I merely stated that they get by just fine without tax collection or the need for them.
Still, this minor use of public services is so meager that we could probably just let ‘em slide on it, no?
The government taxing Americans more than the British were taxing them when they had the Boston Tea Party is probably not what they had in mind when they put that clause in.
Ah, but now we have taxation with representation. Call your Congresspeople, AT, and give ‘em a piece of your mind!