New topic
PrintableCrozzaUK said: But your the one who's determined to draw all the attention only to her. Those who've criticised her have completely tried to seperate the message from the visual, when the two are intended to go hand in hand - its the simplest form of manipulation. I ask you a question: If her sole intention really was - as you so vehemently insist - to generate as much attention as she could for herself - why have you chosen to take the bite? Who cares what anyone says on the org? Hell, even Prince don't pay us no mind! Sophistry 101: 1. Watch Madonna exploit religious imagery. 2. Wait for someone to call her on it. 3. Then accuse that person of supporting it by criticizing it. I've issued no public statements condemning Madonna. I made one post, you completely missed the boat on it, and since then we've been discussing the merits of MY opinion. It's become less about Madonna itself. Those who criticize her are now the story. But your rationalizations for her behavior have been worth the "price of admission," so to speak. If, as you insist, the message and the visual go hand-in-hand, then if a noble message is mixed with a self-aggrandizing visual, then the self-indulgence has caused the noble venture to fail. Could it be your own fake self righteousness? Your snide comments about her sincerity may well be accurate, but as far as we can know they are nothing but pure conjecture. As you infer she's used this stunt to sell more tickets, if this were true would it justify the $3m or so that it's helped donate to the charity involved? Life is complicated, just as people are. Madonna's charitable acts may not manifest themselves in the most palatable way for you, but does it make them wrong or misguided?
My, how the hit dog hollers. First blanket statements about Catholics; now specific insults against me. Have you learned nothing from Madonna?  You're making this easy.
You and ehuffsnd insist or imply that the performance was intended to promote Christ's teachings, right? Okay. Let's look at that. From Jesus' perspective. 1 "(But) take care not to perform righteous deeds in order that people may see them; otherwise, you will have no recompense from your heavenly Father.
2 When you give alms, do not blow a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets to win the praise of others. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. 3 But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right is doing, 4 so that your almsgiving may be secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you. 5 "When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on street corners so that others may see them. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. That applies to namepeace or Mrs. Ritchie. I already said the point she was trying to make was valid. I already said her heart was in the right place. But she has a pattern of appropriating religious imagery, symbols and doctrine, not to celebrate faith, but to make a point. The point is: support Madonna This was the most overt example to date. If that's the way you like to get down, fine. If you continue to fall for her schtick, that's cool. Until, of course, she offends you. But somewhere, P.T. Barnum is having a chuckle right now. [Edited 8/10/06 9:28am] Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016
Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
namepeace said: Who cares what anyone says on the org? Hell, even Prince don't pay us no mind! 
Have you learned nothing from Madonna?
Dude, stop! I'm sick and tired of the Prince fans being sick and tired of the Prince fans that are sick and tired! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
namepeace said: I already said the point she was trying to make was valid. I already said her heart was in the right place. But she has a pattern of appropriating religious imagery, symbols and doctrine, not to celebrate faith, but to make a point. The point is: support Madonna This was the most overt example to date. If that's the way you like to get down, fine. If you continue to fall for her schtick, that's cool. Until, of course, she offends you. But somewhere, P.T. Barnum is having a chuckle right now. [Edited 8/10/06 9:28am] And that there is the crux of our disagreement - a matter of interpretation. My interpretation - falling for her schtick , being just another sucker as you put it - makes me no more a fool than your devotion to an organised religion that is riddled with hypocrisy and deceit. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
namepeace said: CrozzaUK said: She's always been a shameless self promoter, thats always been part of the appeal. What I cant get is why this performance is offensive? She doesnt mock christianity. More like she is trying to encourage people to think about some of the teachings in christianity and apply them to the world around us.
Well, if being a self-promoter and a mediocre talent is appealing to one, then that's one's business. But I digress. I don't think you've been reading my posts very carefully. "Offensive" isn't a word I used. She can do whatever the hell she wants. It doesn't offend me per se because Jesus can take care of Himself. Madonna's use of Jesus' Passion to draw attention only to herself is the antithesis of Christ's teaching. So why not promote the cause outside of her performance? If it was a cause she felt seriously about, then she should have done it seriously than in the context of her show (she did that before with some pretty effective PSAs on AIDS and STDs). Do her fans REALLY need to be entertained and interested to pay attention to a cause? Seeing a pop star crucified on a golden cross with a glittering crown of thorns is what y'all need to pay attention to the world? She's either indicting or insulting you then. As I said before people will take what they want from the performance. I dont see anything provocative or insensitive in what she's done, those who were offended by it chose to be offended by it - for whatever reason.
So she wants to make it interesting and entertaining but you don't see it as provocative? And some people don't want to call BS on Madonna's fake righteousness. For whatever reason. [Edited 8/10/06 7:47am] she did need to be on the cross to draw attention to her cause. you didn't know that on the ReInvention Tour she used the image of the Crucified Jesus until i told you because most people didn't notice that it was there while she was singing Mother and Father. she got on the cross knowing it would dire people's attention to her and her cause. You CANNOT use the name of God, or religion, to justify acts of violence, to hurt, to hate, to discriminate- Madonna
authentic power is service- Pope Francis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
it's like when she showed the Picture of JP2 during Who's That Girl Tour and showed the Safe Sex message right afterwards... she knows how to get people's attention. You CANNOT use the name of God, or religion, to justify acts of violence, to hurt, to hate, to discriminate- Madonna
authentic power is service- Pope Francis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
CrozzaUK said: And that there is the crux of our disagreement - a matter of interpretation. My interpretation - falling for her schtick , being just another sucker as you put it - makes me no more a fool than your devotion to an organised religion that is riddled with hypocrisy and deceit.
You're not only making this easy. You're making it fun. After you decided you couldn't debate the merits, and after you had NO answer for the scriptures that expose Madonna's gimmick for what it is, the truth REALLY comes out. You love the schtick because you don't like Catholicism, or apparently, organized religion. Catholicism is about the faith moreso than "the Church." Hypocrites and deceivers among men and within the Church is nothing new. So if believing in Christ makes me a fool, okay, you got me. Not a big leap to say I'm a fool for believing carpenters can be resurrected. But what does that say about your basic inability to distinguish between belief in Christ and the practice of that belief within the Church? Jesus never saw a dime from His Cross. Can Madonna say the same? Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016
Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: she did need to be on the cross to draw attention to her cause. No she didn't. She could have done a press conference for that. She knew exactly what she was doing. It's her right to do it, but she knew what she was doing. you didn't know that on the ReInvention Tour she used the image of the Crucified Jesus until i told you because most people didn't notice that it was there while she was singing Mother and Father.
You can do better than that. You only re-emphasized my point. She knew there was another way to make her point, which I said from the very beginning, was a noble one. As a matter of fact, I made it clear that I understood her point. But what she chose to do was consistent with her pattern of using religious imagery to promote herself. You know it. Deep down, you know it. Even if she didn't intend to promote herself, as savvy as she is, she should have known that the act itself would generate more controversy and buzz around her than it would about the cause. And that's exactly what's happened. She did her cause a disservice. And she played herself. And when you expose most of her defenders, like CrozzaUK, you see that they appreciate her disdain for religious conventions moreso than the point she was trying to make about those in need. And let's assume that she couldn't get her message across any other way. Is she so enamored with her own ego that she couldn't accept that no one would listen to her, and simply lend her name and money to the "cause"? Does she HAVE to have people listen to HER to get the message that people are suffering? she got on the cross knowing it would dire people's attention to her and her cause.
Her MUCH moreso than her cause. Look, most celebrities are in a catch-22 when they advocate for charity. They inevitably wind up getting exposure for themselves, which is why most people are cynical about them. When you consider Madonna's history -- as a self-promoter, provocateur, a critic of the Catholic Church and the clergy -- it is easy to see what this was all about. This wasn't about drawing attention to a cause. She coulda called a press conference or gone on Larry King for that. It was a laughable publicity stunt designed to stoke interest in her tour and her new music. Look, Madonna's criticisms of the Church and its clergy are not new. Some of them have merit. But this was designed to shock for the sake of shock. Not to shock people into action. Even a devoted Madonna fan can and should see right through that. [Edited 8/10/06 12:13pm] [Edited 8/10/06 12:51pm] Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016
Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
namepeace said: ehuffnsd said: she did need to be on the cross to draw attention to her cause. No she didn't. She could have done a press conference for that. She knew exactly what she was doing. It's her right to do it, but she knew what she was doing. You can do better than that. You only re-emphasized my point. She knew there was another way to make her point, which I said from the very beginning, was a noble one. As a matter of fact, I made it clear that I understood her point. But what she chose to do was consistent with her pattern of using religious imagery to promote herself. You know it. Deep down, you know it. Even if she didn't intend to promote herself, as savvy as she is, she should have known that the act itself would generate more controversy and buzz around her than it would about the cause. And that's exactly what's happened. She did her cause a disservice. And she played herself. And when you expose most of her defenders, like CrozzaUK, you see that they appreciate her disdain for religious conventions moreso than the point she was trying to make about those in need. And let's assume that she couldn't get her message across any other way. Is she so enamored with her own ego that she couldn't accept that no one would listen to her, and simply lend her name and money to the "cause"? Does she HAVE to have people listen to HER to get the message that people are suffering? she got on the cross knowing it would dire people's attention to her and her cause.
Her MUCH moreso than her cause. Look, most celebrities are in a catch-22 when they advocate for charity. They inevitably wind up getting exposure for themselves, which is why most people are cynical about them. When you consider Madonna's history -- as a self-promoter, provocateur, a critic of the Catholic Church and the clergy -- it is easy to see what this was all about. This wasn't about drawing attention to a cause. She coulda called a press conference or gone on Larry King for that. It was a laughable publicity stunt designed to stoke interest in her tour and her new music. Look, Madonna's criticisms of the Church and its clergy are not new. Some of them have merit. But this was designed to shock for the sake of shock. Not to shock people into action. Even a devoted Madonna fan can and should see right through that. [Edited 8/10/06 12:13pm] [Edited 8/10/06 12:51pm] First of all, congratulations on kicking these guys' asses. But you're underestimating just how blind devoted fans(of any artist) can be. Sometimes it takes an outsider to point out the bleeding obvious to them. Like the fact that Madonna is doing the same thing with spirituality as she did with sex before. If you ask her about the Sex book now for instance, she'll freely admit what most of us knew at the time; i.e that it was about publicity and attention for herself and nothing more. At the time however she was saying it was a social and artistic statement and that she was on a mission to enlighten us poor, repressed souls. As if she was the only person in the world with an active sex life. But the thing is; these suckers (her fans and feminist critics who had a vested interest in Madonna at the time) totally bought that bullshit. 
Years on, she's now decided her mission is to enlighten us spiritually. What neither she nor her fans realise is that it's just an extension of the sex thing. A way to pose as a "thinker" and a "radical"; two things she very clearly is not. In other words yet more self important BULLSHIT! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whoknows said: namepeace said: Her MUCH moreso than her cause. Look, most celebrities are in a catch-22 when they advocate for charity. They inevitably wind up getting exposure for themselves, which is why most people are cynical about them. When you consider Madonna's history -- as a self-promoter, provocateur, a critic of the Catholic Church and the clergy -- it is easy to see what this was all about. This wasn't about drawing attention to a cause. She coulda called a press conference or gone on Larry King for that. It was a laughable publicity stunt designed to stoke interest in her tour and her new music. Look, Madonna's criticisms of the Church and its clergy are not new. Some of them have merit. But this was designed to shock for the sake of shock. Not to shock people into action. Even a devoted Madonna fan can and should see right through that. [Edited 8/10/06 12:13pm] [Edited 8/10/06 12:51pm] First of all, congratulations on kicking these guys' asses. But you're underestimating just how blind devoted fans(of any artist) can be. Sometimes it takes an outsider to point out the bleeding obvious to them. Like the fact that Madonna is doing the same thing with spirituality as she did with sex before. If you ask her about the Sex book now for instance, she'll freely admit what most of us knew at the time; i.e that it was about publicity and attention for herself and nothing more. At the time however she was saying it was a social and artistic statement and that she was on a mission to enlighten us poor, repressed souls. As if she was the only person in the world with an active sex life. But the thing is; these suckers (her fans and feminist critics who had a vested interest in Madonna at the time) totally bought that bullshit.
Years on, she's now decided her mission is to enlighten us spiritually. What neither she nor her fans realise is that it's just an extension of the sex thing. A way to pose as a "thinker" and a "radical"; two things she very clearly is not. In other words yet more self important BULLSHIT! but you are forgetting two things that are constant in her. The support of HIV/AIDS because of the loss of many close friends and her distain for the Catholic Church. Those have been the same since the begining. Remember in 1984 she was with her friend Martin Burgouyne when he died when most people thought you could catch HIV from just touching someone. She shared his food, laid in his bed and held him as he died. Her teacher Christopher Flynn she did the same thing. She watched Keith Haring die, Jean-Michelle Basquit, and Herb Ritts die of the the same disease. She has donated hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars to AmFAR, AIDS WALK LA, Life Cycle, AIDS RIDE, Keith Haring Fund, and countless other HIV/AIDS Charities. She held the first AIDS benefit concert, attended all AIDS Danceathons... This is not a new cause for her. Safer sex messages are found in Who's That Girl Tour, Blonde Ambition and the Girlie Show. She knows full and well people are going to watch and talk about her and the cross. If it gets them to think about the Malawi fund and the CLinton AIDS fund than she's done her work. [Edited 8/10/06 13:56pm] You CANNOT use the name of God, or religion, to justify acts of violence, to hurt, to hate, to discriminate- Madonna
authentic power is service- Pope Francis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: whoknows said: First of all, congratulations on kicking these guys' asses. But you're underestimating just how blind devoted fans(of any artist) can be. Sometimes it takes an outsider to point out the bleeding obvious to them. Like the fact that Madonna is doing the same thing with spirituality as she did with sex before. If you ask her about the Sex book now for instance, she'll freely admit what most of us knew at the time; i.e that it was about publicity and attention for herself and nothing more. At the time however she was saying it was a social and artistic statement and that she was on a mission to enlighten us poor, repressed souls. As if she was the only person in the world with an active sex life. But the thing is; these suckers (her fans and feminist critics who had a vested interest in Madonna at the time) totally bought that bullshit.
Years on, she's now decided her mission is to enlighten us spiritually. What neither she nor her fans realise is that it's just an extension of the sex thing. A way to pose as a "thinker" and a "radical"; two things she very clearly is not. In other words yet more self important BULLSHIT! but you are forgetting two things that are constant in her. The support of HIV/AIDS because of the loss of many close friends and her distain for the Catholic Church. Those have been the same since the begining. All major public figures and corporations support charitable causes. Even P Diddy does that. It's standard operating procedure. Not saying it's a bad thing, but let's not make it out to be some noble act. She's never stuck her neck out or invested serious time in AIDS charities. Showing up at some fundraisers and making some (pretty meagre considering her wealth) donations is hardly a big stretch. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: whoknows said: First of all, congratulations on kicking these guys' asses. But you're underestimating just how blind devoted fans(of any artist) can be. Sometimes it takes an outsider to point out the bleeding obvious to them. Like the fact that Madonna is doing the same thing with spirituality as she did with sex before. If you ask her about the Sex book now for instance, she'll freely admit what most of us knew at the time; i.e that it was about publicity and attention for herself and nothing more. At the time however she was saying it was a social and artistic statement and that she was on a mission to enlighten us poor, repressed souls. As if she was the only person in the world with an active sex life. But the thing is; these suckers (her fans and feminist critics who had a vested interest in Madonna at the time) totally bought that bullshit.
Years on, she's now decided her mission is to enlighten us spiritually. What neither she nor her fans realise is that it's just an extension of the sex thing. A way to pose as a "thinker" and a "radical"; two things she very clearly is not. In other words yet more self important BULLSHIT! but you are forgetting two things that are constant in her. The support of HIV/AIDS because of the loss of many close friends and her distain for the Catholic Church. Those have been the same since the begining. Remember in 1984 she was with her friend Martin Burgouyne when he died when most people thought you could catch HIV from just touching someone. She shared his food, laid in his bed and held him as he died. Her teacher Christopher Flynn she did the same thing. She watched Keith Haring die, Jean-Michelle Basquit, and Herb Ritts die of the the same disease. She has donated hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars to AmFAR, AIDS WALK LA, Life Cycle, AIDS RIDE, Keith Haring Fund, and countless other HIV/AIDS Charities. She held the first AIDS benefit concert, attended all AIDS Danceathons... This is not a new cause for her. Safer sex messages are found in Who's That Girl Tour, Blonde Ambition and the Girlie Show. She knows full and well people are going to watch and talk about her and the cross. If it gets them to think about the Malawi fund and the CLinton AIDS fund than she's done her work. [Edited 8/10/06 13:56pm] You think her gimmick on the cross is gonna make people think about the Clinton AIDS fund? Have you listened to anything that's been said here? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whoknows said: ehuffnsd said: but you are forgetting two things that are constant in her. The support of HIV/AIDS because of the loss of many close friends and her distain for the Catholic Church. Those have been the same since the begining. Remember in 1984 she was with her friend Martin Burgouyne when he died when most people thought you could catch HIV from just touching someone. She shared his food, laid in his bed and held him as he died. Her teacher Christopher Flynn she did the same thing. She watched Keith Haring die, Jean-Michelle Basquit, and Herb Ritts die of the the same disease. She has donated hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars to AmFAR, AIDS WALK LA, Life Cycle, AIDS RIDE, Keith Haring Fund, and countless other HIV/AIDS Charities. She held the first AIDS benefit concert, attended all AIDS Danceathons... This is not a new cause for her. Safer sex messages are found in Who's That Girl Tour, Blonde Ambition and the Girlie Show. She knows full and well people are going to watch and talk about her and the cross. If it gets them to think about the Malawi fund and the CLinton AIDS fund than she's done her work. [Edited 8/10/06 13:56pm] You think her gimmick on the cross is gonna make people think about the Clinton AIDS fund? Have you listened to anything that's been said here? Have you seen the show? Cause you can't talk about the impact it has on the people who the see show unless you've seen it. [Edited 8/10/06 14:08pm] You CANNOT use the name of God, or religion, to justify acts of violence, to hurt, to hate, to discriminate- Madonna
authentic power is service- Pope Francis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: Have you seen the show? Cause you can't talk about the impact it has on the people who the see show unless you've seen it.
[Edited 8/10/06 14:08pm] ehuffnsd, I know your love for both "sides" of this dispute. My respect for Madonna as a "show[wo]man" and entrepreneur is immense. This particular issue is different. And basic. Was she promoting herself in the guise of "artistic or social expression"? I say yes and reasonable minds can disagree. This is a gimmick, plain and simple. Notwithstanding what she's done offstage for social causes. Notwithstanding how people may FEEL about it because they LOVE Madonna. Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016
Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
namepeace said: ehuffnsd said: Have you seen the show? Cause you can't talk about the impact it has on the people who the see show unless you've seen it.
[Edited 8/10/06 14:08pm] ehuffnsd, I know your love for both "sides" of this dispute. My respect for Madonna as a "show[wo]man" and entrepreneur is immense. This particular issue is different. And basic. Was she promoting herself in the guise of "artistic or social expression"? I say yes and reasonable minds can disagree. This is a gimmick, plain and simple. Notwithstanding what she's done offstage for social causes. Notwithstanding how people may FEEL about it because they LOVE Madonna. namepeace i'd agree with it being a gimic if it wasn't for the fact that the tour was sold out before we knew anything about the cross.... If her tickets hadn't sold out and she planned this as a way to get people to buy tickets than i would have to say it was a desperate plea for attention. However the tickets sold out within minutes of going on sale a full 2 months before the tour started. there would be on reason for her to do a stunt like to get people to see a show they all ready paid for. she has us talking about 1. her and 2 her reason behind doing it. You CANNOT use the name of God, or religion, to justify acts of violence, to hurt, to hate, to discriminate- Madonna
authentic power is service- Pope Francis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
and don't forget not only am i fan of Madonna i'm an HIV positive gay male who is on his to becoming nun to raise money for HIV/AIDS Charities, [Edited 8/10/06 15:39pm] You CANNOT use the name of God, or religion, to justify acts of violence, to hurt, to hate, to discriminate- Madonna
authentic power is service- Pope Francis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: namepeace i'd agree with it being a gimic if it wasn't for the fact that the tour was sold out before we knew anything about the crossIf her tickets hadn't sold out and she planned this as a way to get people to buy tickets than i would have to say it was a desperate plea for attention. However the tickets sold out within minutes of going on sale a full 2 months before the tour started. there would be on reason for her to do a stunt like to get people to see a show they all ready paid for.
she has us talking about 1. her and 2 her reason behind doing it. But, as you know, many stars who don't need to resort to gimmicks . . . resort to gimmicks. Madonna wants to sell tickets, records, merch, etc. Most of all, she wants, very desperately, to remain relevant in an era which would otherwise consider her "old folk." So this stunt accomplishes most of those goals. We're talking about her, that's for sure. But my interest in this thread relates to the orgers' opinions about her, and the critiques of my previous posts. That, as you know, doesn't necessarily require Madonna.  and love.Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016
Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
namepeace said: You're not only making this easy. You're making it fun.
After you decided you couldn't debate the merits, and after you had NO answer for the scriptures that expose Madonna's gimmick for what it is, the truth REALLY comes out. You love the schtick because you don't like Catholicism, or apparently, organized religion. Catholicism is about the faith moreso than "the Church." Hypocrites and deceivers among men and within the Church is nothing new. So if believing in Christ makes me a fool, okay, you got me. Not a big leap to say I'm a fool for believing carpenters can be resurrected. But what does that say about your basic inability to distinguish between belief in Christ and the practice of that belief within the Church? Jesus never saw a dime from His Cross. Can Madonna say the same? We're clearly missing out on several lines of communication here because now you're making assumptions about me. I believe in Jesus , I believe in many of the core values imbedded throughout all religions, but the semantics that some people play to i find intolerably ignorant and restrictive. My beef is not with the catholic faith, merely their "spokes people". Maybe it is a shallow assumption to think that someone who simply identifies themselves as a Catholic and nothing else - as you did - would tow the party line on all things "Vatican", but I kinda thought that was the point of organised religion - you know that you followed their lead? Guess I’m wrong, wouldn’t be the first time. I myself choose to define myself by MY beliefs. This isn’t defined by any one religion, but it certainly doesn’t disregard what any of them have to say Jesus may never have seen a dime for his cross but the Christian and catholic churches sure as hell did. I’m not trying to disregard your belief in a faith that in my opinion has many beautiful qualities, I‘m simply trying to say that the assumption YOU make about Madonna, I make about the supposed heads of your faith. And if you're the one preaching trust in the faith they claim to represent, shouldn't you be more concerned about their actions than Madonna's. “Catholicism is about the faith moreso than the church” – well isn’t the church the visual to the message of Catholicism. You told me that if a bad visual were mixed with a good message, the bad would surely over-ride the good –does this not count, or am I getting to pedantic now? Can we not simply put this down, as I suggested, to the interpretation, the fact that you thought Madonna was doing the crucifix act for self gain, and I thought it was simply a badly thought out piece of performance art? Seems a whole lot more civilised and rational than bringing the judgement of God into it - something Im sure even you aren't qualified to speculate over. P.S. I find your use of smiley faces, terms such as “you're making this easy”, and your quotations of the scriptures to make a point (that was not in question btw) has more than a whiff of righteousness about it – so if you do find this kind of label offensive, I suggest you review you means of communication. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
CrozzaUK said: We're clearly missing out on several lines of communication here because now you're making assumptions about me. I believe in Jesus , I believe in many of the core values imbedded throughout all religions, but the semantics that some people play to i find intolerably ignorant and restrictive.
"Intolerably ignorant and restrictive": like, say . . . catholics, always eager to be offended and outraged, have zoned in on this performance - completely ignored the message - to use as their own platform to gain attention.
Could it be your own fake self righteousness?
Get yourself. All I'm doing is pulling your card. You're indulging in the same vices you seemingly decry. My beef is not with the catholic faith, merely their "spokes people". Maybe it is a shallow assumption to think that someone who simply identifies themselves as a Catholic and nothing else - as you did - would tow the party line on all things "Vatican", but I kinda thought that was the point of organised religion - you know that you followed their lead? Guess I’m wrong, wouldn’t be the first time.
Some people just open their mouths just to swap feet. I'm being harder on you than I would otherwise because it's the only way you pay attention If you knew me -- and you don't -- you'd know that your description is inaccurate. You don't even pay attention to the posts in this thread, so I wouldn't imagine that you would be familiar with my various posts on issues and crises within the Catholic church in the P&R forum. I specifically identified the scriptural basis and other reasoning for my comments on Madonna's performance. I also spoke at length of her misappropriation of religious imagery of other faiths to enhance her own fashion and image, but you didn't see that either. You're the one who brought the Vatican into this, not me. I myself choose to define myself by MY beliefs. This isn’t defined by any one religion, but it certainly doesn’t disregard what any of them have to say
That's all fair and good, unlike the "catholics," who are, in your words, :"always eager to be offended and outraged." It seems you define others of other beliefs by your beliefs, however misguided they may be. You apparently disregarded the scriptural quote that I posted for your reference. Care to address it now? Jesus may never have seen a dime for his cross but the Christian and catholic churches sure as hell did. I’m not trying to disregard your belief in a faith that in my opinion has many beautiful qualities, I‘m simply trying to say that the assumption YOU make about Madonna, I make about the supposed heads of your faith. And if you're the one preaching trust in the faith they claim to represent, shouldn't you be more concerned about their actions than Madonna's.
Okay. I'mma say this one mo'gin. You didn't pay attention to it when I said it at first, but since you've made this about me, then let's go there. namepeace said: That being said, to my fellow Catholics, especially that blowhard William Donohue, speak your clout and move on. We have too much work to do and we're running behind.
Jesus can take care of Himself. He doesn't need us to defend Him. My opinion of Madonna is based on a history of publicity stunts, bastardization of religious imagery of all types, and her eternal struggle to remain relevant. And since you made this about the Vatican hierarchy -- which exposes the utter disingenousness of the stated motives by pulling the stunt in Rome -- again, if you'd even bother to pay attention to the P&R forum, you'd see many, many posts where I criticize the Church hierarchy. Ask Supa, Lammastide, ehuffnsd, or anyone else. If you really knew my opinions, you wouldn't say the utterly silly things you've been saying here. But what I suspect you're doing is trying to deflect the issue of Madonna's disingenuousness by bringing the Vatican into the discussion. “Catholicism is about the faith moreso than the church” – well isn’t the church the visual to the message of Catholicism. You told me that if a bad visual were mixed with a good message, the bad would surely over-ride the good –does this not count, or am I getting to pedantic now?
Clang . . . missed again. Here's what I actually said. If, as you insist, the message and the visual go hand-in-hand, then if a noble message is mixed with a self-aggrandizing visual, then the self-indulgence has caused the noble venture to fail.
The Church isn't a VISUAL -- it is a BODY united by its faith. Your points about the sins of the Church are well known and well taken. The Church hierarchy has failed us on numerous occasions. We like everyone else fail in our private lives every day. But those Catholics you smeared in your first post, those billion or so people, are the bricks and mortar, and are keeping the faith alive in word and deed. So when Catholics like myself see Madonna engage in a publicity stunt, we may call her on it, but caution that the Church shouldn't devote our attention to the problems of the world. So, Madonna shot and missed badly on this. It doesn't make her a bad person. The Church shoots and misses. But it makes much more of a difference in the world. People who want to focus on the corruption of its clergy, which historically cannot be denied, to discredit the Church as a whole know too little to open their mouths on it. Can we not simply put this down, as I suggested, to the interpretation, the fact that you thought Madonna was doing the crucifix act for self gain, and I thought it was simply a badly thought out piece of performance art? Seems a whole lot more civilised and rational than bringing the judgement of God into it - something Im sure even you aren't qualified to speculate over.
You could have left it at that, but you chose not to. To the contrary, your speculations on my motives would make Madonna proud. And you tried to show that Madonna was actually trying to send a positive message about Christianity. Remember? She doesnt mock christianity. More like she is trying to encourage people to think about some of the teachings in christianity and apply them to the world around us.
In response, all I did was point out the Scriptures -- you know, those documents that CONTAIN the teachings of Christ? And asked you. Again and again. To tell me how you thought the performance measured up. All I said was, in light of her history, Madonna was promoting Madonna. Not her cause. I didn't specualate on God's judgment. I have enough outstanding warrants in that regard. All I did was point to the book, potna. Your problem is that you failed from the get-go to read my original post in its proper context: 1) Madonna's promoting herself; and 2) Catholics shouldn't worry about it. The reason I mentioned Catholics is that they employ the Crucifixion imagery much moreso than Protestants, she staged the performance in Rome, and the article itself mentioned Catholic critics. I criticize Madonna in this thread because I am cyncial about her motives, especially when she, and others, try to draw some religious virtue out of it. P.S. I find your use of smiley faces, terms such as “you're making this easy”, and your quotations of the scriptures to make a point (that was not in question btw) has more than a whiff of righteousness about it – so if you do find this kind of label offensive, I suggest you review you means of communication.
Are you serious? You're the one who couldn't read my original post correctly. I've been refuting you ever since. You're the one who smeared Catholics. I called you on it. You're the one who tried to use Christ's teachings as an excuse for Madonna's motives. I pointed to the book. You're the one who started out making uninformed presumptions about me. I've simply picked them apart. All that being said, I'll mark your comments down for what they're worth . . .  [Edited 8/13/06 11:56am] Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016
Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
namepeace said: All that being said, I'll mark your comments down for what they're worth . . .
Aw come on, at least make it a nickel! How often is it that a Maddonho fan gets all intellectumacated when defending her? That's pretty cool. I'm sick and tired of the Prince fans being sick and tired of the Prince fans that are sick and tired! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
namepeace said:[quote]
1 "(But) take care not to perform righteous deeds in order that people may see them; otherwise, you will have no recompense from your heavenly Father.
2 When you give alms, do not blow a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets to win the praise of others. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. 3 But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right is doing, 4 so that your almsgiving may be secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you. 5 "When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on street corners so that others may see them. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. LOL, I don't think anyone is arguing that Madonna will be canonized into sainthood any time soon. But there are a lot worse sins committed than Madonna's. To give her a little credit, she did not claim to be donating proceeds to any cause as far as I could tell, following her recent concert rather closely. There were long controversies on this board about her high-priced tickets and how she could have used some of that money to donate rather than simply making an artistic statement. Now we find out that she has been donating millions (oh, what grave error!). Do you know that she deliberately trumpeted her contribution? Or was it the persistent press that uncovered it? Doesn't matter really... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
heartbeatocean said: LOL, I don't think anyone is arguing that Madonna will be canonized into sainthood any time soon. But there are a lot worse sins committed than Madonna's.
Y'all need to start paying attention. It was suggested that Madonna was trying to emphasize Christ's teachings, not mock Christianity. I merely pointed out that such overt displays of "piety" are inconsistent with what Christ SAID about charity and piety. To give her a little credit, she did not claim to be donating proceeds to any cause as far as I could tell, following her recent concert rather closely. There were long controversies on this board about her high-priced tickets and how she could have used some of that money to donate rather than simply making an artistic statement.
Her donations go to a good cause. But, again, pay attention. Here's what I said. Look, most celebrities are in a catch-22 when they advocate for charity. They inevitably wind up getting exposure for themselves, which is why most people are cynical about them. When you consider Madonna's history -- as a self-promoter, provocateur, a critic of the Catholic Church and the clergy -- it is easy to see what this was all about. This wasn't about drawing attention to a cause. She coulda called a press conference or gone on Larry King for that. It was a laughable publicity stunt designed to stoke interest in her tour and her new music.
It was designed to provoke and stir up controversy . . . about Madonna. The publicity gives her more exposure and thus more relevance than money could buy. That was her intention. Whatever she donated, she got something out of it. Now we find out that she has been donating millions (oh, what grave error!). Do you know that she deliberately trumpeted her contribution? Or was it the persistent press that uncovered it? Doesn't matter really...
Your assertion of "uncovering" Madonna's largesse in connection with a controversial performance on her world tour, like it was the Book of Judas or something, is laughable. Especially since Madonna publicized that angle herself. http://cbs5.com/topstorie...05614.html But I digress. I'mma say this one mo'gin. Because y'all are missing the boat. I'd accept the point she's trying to make -- that of drawing attention to suffering and pain around the world -- but for the fact that the act itself draws attention to no one but Madonna. This is simply an academic question that Madonna apologists here are trying to distort. All I said was that the display itself was intended as a publicity stunt. Madonna knew what the reaction was going to be. And you knew it too. If you're a Madonna fan, you know exactly why she does these things. To get people talking. About her. All I'm saying is, when you put yourself on the Cross, you open yourself up to these questions. And all I did was point out the inconsistency between the very public emulation of Jesus and the way that Jesus said people should emulate him. Jewish and Muslim leaders in Rome denounced the stunt too. I guess the Jews and Muslims are eager to be offended too. Dag. Be honest with yourselves. The girl pulled a stunt. [Edited 8/14/06 13:37pm] Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016
Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
namepeace said: heartbeatocean said: LOL, I don't think anyone is arguing that Madonna will be canonized into sainthood any time soon. But there are a lot worse sins committed than Madonna's.
Y'all need to start paying attention. It was suggested that Madonna was trying to emphasize Christ's teachings, not mock Christianity. I merely pointed out that such overt displays of "piety" are inconsistent with what Christ SAID about charity and piety. Well...her acts will seldom stand up against scripture. It was designed to provoke and stir up controversy . . . about Madonna. The publicity gives her more exposure and thus more relevance than money could buy. That was her intention. Whatever she donated, she got something out of it.
I personally value controversy. It gets people to think and discuss. That's the artist's role, in my opinion, and she's great at it. It doesn't make her less of an artist or a person, in my opinion. That's her role, and I think she sees it that way. And the fact that she knows how to survive as an artist, I actually admire. But that's just me. This is simply an academic question that Madonna apologists here are trying to distort. All I said was that the display itself was intended as a publicity stunt. Madonna knew what the reaction was going to be. And you knew it too. If you're a Madonna fan, you know exactly why she does these things. To get people talking. About her.
All I'm saying is, when you put yourself on the Cross, you open yourself up to these questions. And all I did was point out the inconsistency between the very public emulation of Jesus and the way that Jesus said people should emulate him. Jewish and Muslim leaders in Rome denounced the stunt too. I guess the Jews and Muslims are eager to be offended too. Dag. Be honest with yourselves. The girl pulled a stunt. I still disagree.  Just because people are alarmed or find it distasteful does not make it any less art. To me she is a performance artist on a grand scale, taking the avant-garde into mass consciousness. Call it a "stunt" if you wish, but it's still valid. She, herself, is part of her art and I personally think it's good art. All her work draws attention to herself because Madonna and her image is the object of her art. She plays with fame, and she plays with representation. In my opinion, it's very compelling.
But no, of course not. Her life does not hold up to scripture. But that's okay. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |