Members You're Soaking in it Posted September 8, 2009 Members Share Posted September 8, 2009 I believe it's that poster's roundabout way of saying homosexuality is deplorable, while heterosexuality - in or outside of marriage - is just dandy. If there were another way of taking it, it would have been stated differently. Of course it won't take a rocket scientist to figure out what we can do with such an opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members You're Soaking in it Posted September 8, 2009 Members Share Posted September 8, 2009 And after she does that, maybe we can all get together and collectively shove a pie in her face! I don't need to "feel better" or anything, but I'm always open to a good laugh at a bigot being humiliated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted September 8, 2009 Members Share Posted September 8, 2009 Works for me. Anything to get all the posturing out of it on both sides. One kick in the balls, one pie in the face and we're done. No lawyers, no Fox News, no Nelson Branco. Win-win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ChitHappens Posted September 8, 2009 Members Share Posted September 8, 2009 Speak for yourself because that is not what I was saying... ANDREA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Doyen Posted September 8, 2009 Members Share Posted September 8, 2009 What in the hell are you telling about? If they wanted Carlotta to suddenly turn into murderer, Mauceri would be as justified in not believing that it was aligned with the character as she is with her reaction to this gay thing. However, I bet that if writers had turned Carlotta into a killer and PM refused to play it, 80% of the people pitching a bitch about her not living up to her "duties" as an actress here wouldn't blink twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members quartermainefan Posted September 8, 2009 Members Share Posted September 8, 2009 What were you saying, because I assumed that is what you said too. Your post sort of implies there is some sort of threshold for acceptable sin, and while coveting thy neighbor's wife is acceptable, coveting thy neighbor is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members R Sinclair Posted September 8, 2009 Members Share Posted September 8, 2009 Why are people being so dense when it comes to this thing?! It's not about gay or straight, killer or be killed... it's about how she CHOSE to REFUSE to play a scene in a piece of FICTION because it goes against her personal BELIEFS... and is now bitching about the fact that she's been replaced. That's her job, to act. She refused to do it, the show had no contractual obligation to keep her, and they replaced with an actor who would. What next? A vegetarian getting a job in a slaughterhouse, only to refuse to kill the cows because it goes against their personal beliefs and then whine to PETA, of all places, because she was fired after refusing to perform a job function that is required in that field? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members You're Soaking in it Posted September 8, 2009 Members Share Posted September 8, 2009 Oh, then please clarify it for me, otherwise there really is no other way of reading it. I mean, were you intending to say that you support full equality in terms of sexual orientation? Because I don't think that was the message coming through... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vee Posted September 8, 2009 Members Share Posted September 8, 2009 I think I understand the new rule: Even when they didn't do anything and tried to keep the bigoted actor on the show, it's still the homosexuals' fault for writing or producing it. They just can't stop their "my gay or the highway" agenda! Even though Carlotta has been gay-friendly for years! Am I right, America? Take it, marceline! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members brimike Posted September 8, 2009 Members Share Posted September 8, 2009 This is actually the best analogy I've seen anybody present on this topic. Well said, RSinclair! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted September 8, 2009 Members Share Posted September 8, 2009 I'm keeping the faith that one day Valentini, Carlivati, Frons, Guza and Pratt will all get the nut shots they deserve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vee Posted September 9, 2009 Members Share Posted September 9, 2009 It's refreshing to see a case where people can't get away with defending a bigot through parsing language, just so they can attack a show. I don't care how I feel about a show, I'd have to be pretty hell-bent on just bashing it on a blanket principle in order to ignore the facts so as to defend Mauceri's side, any side against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members brimike Posted September 9, 2009 Members Share Posted September 9, 2009 I'll bring the popcorn and junior mints. You bring the lawn chairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MarkH Posted September 9, 2009 Members Share Posted September 9, 2009 Really? Really? Is this all still about misogyny, violence glorification, and rapemance? Or is there a specific grudge I'm missing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members You're Soaking in it Posted September 9, 2009 Members Share Posted September 9, 2009 There isn't anything that Valentini & Carlivati have done wrong in regards to this subject. And Guza & Pratt aren't in this mix. I suppose we're talking about something altogether different than the Mauceri story here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.