- The Washington Times - Monday, February 14, 2000

Hollywood hypocrites

"Hollywood stars line up on daytime talk shows to preach advocacy of liberal programs 'for the kids,' but behave like morons and derelicts in their own lives… .
"How about star Rene Russo? This attractive woman had become a huge A-list Hollywood star and never posed naked in a movie. In a recent interview, she said her Christian faith had kept her from delving that low into the gutter of hedonistic morass.
"Yet in her latest film … 'The Thomas Crown Affair,' she bared all during several sex scenes, overcoming her inhibitions and, obviously, her beliefs, for the audience and, no doubt, for the bucks… .
"If you complain about these things to the media or the entertainment industry, they shove the First Amendment in your face. They may be right about the freedom of expression thing, but I don't want to hear these hypocrites on national TV complaining about violence, hedonism and cultural rot if they're not willing to accept at least partial responsibility and tone their messages down… .
"Too many parents are willing to be scapegoats for this rotted cultural sewer we live in. We shouldn't accept that, especially when we know we're trying to do a good job with our kids, but get slapped down at every turn by officialdom and irresponsible, hypocritical people."
Jon E. Dougherty, writing on "How Can Parents Raise Virgins These Days?" in WorldNetDaily at www.worldnetdaily.com

Totalizing ambitions

"The darkest nightmare of the literature on power is George Orwell's '1984,' where there is not even an interior space of privacy and self. Winston Smith faces the ultimate and consistent logic of the argument that everything is political, and he can only dream of 'a time when there were still privacy, love, and friendship, and when members of a family stood by one another without needing to know the reason.' …
"Political correctness is not the end of human liberty, because political correctness does not have power commensurate with its aspirations. It is essential, however, to understand those totalizing ambitions for what they are.
"O'Brien's re-education of Winston in '1984' went to the heart of such invasiveness. 'We are not content with negative obedience… . When finally you surrender to us, it must be of your own free will.' The Party wanted not to destroy the heretic, but to 'capture his inner mind.' "
Alan Charles Kors, writing on "Thought Reform 101," in the March issue of Reason

Final taboo

"I was still quite young when I first heard there were three things you shouldn't talk about at a social gathering: sex, politics and religion. All three, my advisers pointed out, were calculated from the get-go to produce little profit and much embarrassment.
"Over the last generation, of course, items one and two tended to disappear from that short list of forbidden topics. If there remained any inclination to keep them there, Bill Clinton, all by himself, almost forced their inclusion into everyday discussions.
"But religion? At any serious level, it's still too hot to handle in most contexts. And even as a casual matter of reference, 'religious' allusions tend to produce discomfort and unease. Sports reporters … for example, responded awkwardly to the frank Christian witness of the Super Bowl champion St. Louis Rams quarterback Kurt Warner and his wife, truncating interview after interview as soon as the two got a little too explicit about their faith in Christ.
"It's easier today to talk in public about the details of a sex-change operation or what you did in the secrecy of a voting booth than to talk about where you put your ultimate trust for eternal issues."
Joel Belz, writing on "Can We Talk?" in the Feb. 12 issue of World

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide