Jerry Springer - The Opera forced to stay off Broadway- Page 3

[Unknown User]

Posted: 3/1/05 at 1:35pm

So the cast of JSTO in London was like, what, 40 people? A full, large production, whereas I think the Fringe version was a much smaller cast. I'm guessing the "studio audience" just wasn't as big, whereas the "principals" were probably also in the studio audience....

Anyway, I sort of wonder if they'll be doing the cheaper smaller-cast version on Broadway that they were considering. I think the show's less of a hilarious spectacle without all of those choral voices and the large studio audience, but I'd rather see a 20 person cast than no production here at all.

[keggss23]

Posted: 3/1/05 at 2:16pm

I haven't seen or heard this show, but it pisses me off when these ridiculous groups ruin it for everyone. If you are religious and it works for you, that's great, but don't push your religion on other people. If this show offends you, DON'T SEE IT and don't ruin it for the rest of us. This goes for tv (that's what remotes are for), radio (change the station) and movies (don't go see it) too. I hate Howard Stern, not because he is offensive, but because I think he's predictable and boring, but I'm not going to go picket the radio station or write letters to the station, I simply turn the channel and listen to something else. Shame on the producers for giving in to a bunch of morons who have nothing better to do with their time than cause such a stir over a musical. Sorry about such a long post, this kind of asinine crap just pisses me off!

Updated On: 3/1/05 at 02:16 PM

[Godlovesyou]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 11:51am

What none of you seem to realise is that Jerry Springer - the Opera is deeply offensive to Christians because it mocks and ridicules the one that we love, "Jesus Christ".
Why do we love him? Because he died on the cross for our sins so that we would not have to go to hell.
How many people would get offended if someone mocked and ridiculed their spouse or parent or someone they loved? Everyone.
A relativly small group of us have caused mayhem to JSTO in England, if it ever tried to open in the USA, the objections and protests would be on a much grander scale.

The Titanic sank but the Ark did not.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 12:04pm

Why do we love him? Because he died on the cross for our sins so that we would not have to go to hell.

The "we" is a bit too all-inclusive. I personally do not believe that he died for my sins so that I would not have to go to hell. I do believe, however, that America was found on the notion of Free Speech.

So while I don't have the same belief as you do, I will argue nail and tooth so that you have the right do believe in what you believe. That is the (idealized) America.

[keggss23]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 12:07pm

Godlovesyou-

That is great that you have found religion and it works for you but if you find JSTO offensive, then don't see it. No need to ruin it for everyone. It makes me sick to my stomach that these people forced a charitable organization to refuse a donation because the money was raised in connection with JSTO. Apparently children dying of cancer is ok, but seeing JSTO will send you right to hell. Please...

[musicalfandukie]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 12:15pm

i agree with keggss23 if christians are anyone finds the show offensive don't see it don't support it you don't have to..that's your right as an american to express you don't like it...so why don't you give the show the same right stop trying to close it down..it has a right to be open and express whatever it likes.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 12:16pm

"What none of you seem to realise is that Jerry Springer - the Opera is deeply offensive to Christians because it mocks and ridicules the one that we love, "Jesus Christ"."

What about the non-Christians who would like to see the show? Who are YOU to prevent them from doing so? If you find it's subject offensive, then the solution is easy. DON'T BUY A TICKET AND LEAVE EVERYONE ELSE ALONE!

Do you not believe in freedom of speech or religious choice? The musical does not so much mock or ridicule Jesus as it does explore the possibility of what he would say or do in a contemporary societal situation.

"Why do we love him? Because he died on the cross for our sins so that we would not have to go to hell."

That is what you personally believe, but there are others besides you in this world.

"A relativly small group of us have caused mayhem to JSTO in England, if it ever tried to open in the USA, the objections and protests would be on a much grander scale."

Hopefully, all you will do is create more publicity and increase attention in the show as well as ticket sales. Why not try something that desperately needs some Christian attention such as the White Supremacy groups who believe in murder and terrorism in the name of Jesus? Why do Christians focus so narrowly on forcing their views and opinions on others? Isn't tyranny one of the problems Jesus had with the Romans? Stop calling the kettle black and get your priorities straight.

[keggss23]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 12:25pm

"Why do Christians focus so narrowly on forcing their views and opinions on others? Isn't tyranny one of the problems Jesus had with the Romans? Stop calling the kettle black and get your priorities straight."

Mister Matt - That is exactly what I wanted to say, but couldn't figure out how to say it!

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 12:26pm

PS - "The Titanic sank but the Ark did not."

Neither did the QE2. What on earth does that have to do with anything?

[matthius202]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 12:27pm

Updated On: 9/9/08 at 12:27 PM

[Gothampc]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 12:31pm

Godloves you, I agree completely. Christians have the same right to protest as anyone else.

How come nobody whined when there were protests against Showboat and The Capeman?

[Unknown User]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 12:42pm

Didn't people actually whine when there were protests against Showboat and The Capeman?

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 12:43pm

"How come nobody whined when there were protests against Showboat and The Capeman?"

How do you know they didn't? I don't remember BWW being around during those runs.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 12:55pm

"How do you know they didn't?"

Because I went around taking polls in NYC asking people "Do you care that people are protesting these shows thereby hurting their chances of having a Broadway run"? And everyone I asked said No.

[WindyCityActor]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 1:09pm

Reminds me of when I was a high school sophomore and the seniors came back from their trip to New York.

They found themselves attending a new Broadway show what was so profane that they left en masse during intermission.

They came home to Baton Rouge, Lousiana and said they were absolutely horrified by this production....called "Grease."

Some folks love to be offended.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 1:22pm

"Christians have the same right to protest as anyone else."

The irony is, in this case, they are protesting against freedom of religion and freedom of speech, which could ultimately mean (in the extreme) that they could be banned from practicing Christianity and protesting.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 1:38pm

I agree with everyone but Godlovesyou in this case. Come on, Jesus didn't die so WE wouldn't go to hell. That's assinine. He died on the cross because people wanted to get rid of him.

[keggss23]

Posted: 3/8/05 at 1:43pm

I guess I just don't understand why everyone feels the need to push their beliefs on others. If you believe in God, great; If you don't believe in God, that's great too.

[Godlovesyou]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 2:11pm

Well well, my short response certainly proved to be quite controversial, but that is hardly a surprise as Jesus himself was also very controversial in what he had to say.

As John 3: 16 tells us, Jesus did indeed die for the sins of the world, that’s everybody. However our sins are our only forgiven if we truly believe in him, so if you don’t want to believe in him you can remain in this life with your sins unforgiven, the only problem with that, is that your eternal destiny will be affected.

The Charity “Maggie’s Centres” that turned down the £3000.00 did so because they realised that accepting it would be a public relations disaster, also many of their employees are Christians and would have been offended at tainted money being received. We know only too well of the tainted 30 pieces of silver that Judas received for betraying Jesus. By refusing the money their Charity has been highlighted and they will gain far more than the measly £3,000.00 that they rejected.

Sure, I would not waste my money going to see the show but when the BBC used TV licence payer’s money in order to screen it, we in Britain were all indirectly paying for it.

I do believe in freedom of speech insofar as it does not cause serious offence to any other person, freedom of speech is not an unqualified right.

There are already many laws in Britain place that prevent freedom of speech, such as the Section 5 of the Public Order act, which makes it an offence to use Threatening, Insulting or Abusive words which are likely to cause Harassment, Alarm or Distress, (people still regularly get arrested for swearing in the street). On top of this the offence can become more serious if it is aggravated by the use of racist or homophobic words. There are also libel offences under civil law and of course the common law offence of blasphemy.

It is right to be allowed to racially abuse someone because you have freedom of speech? NO, neither is it right to blaspheme God and his son Jesus Christ.

Matthius referred to being a gay Christian, this is a contradiction of terms, the bible refers to homosexuality as an abomination in Romans 1. We can all see what God thought about this when he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19.

Anyway I am digressing from JSTO, which remains an offensive blasphemous production. It is aimed at Christians because we are seen as peaceful, non-violent and therefore fair game for any kind of abuse.

I wonder what would happen if the producers of JSTO had replaced Jesus and God with Allah and Mohammed? It would never have even been considered.

Those in the Ark were saved, those outside were not!

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 3:29pm

Where to begin...

"Well well, my short response certainly proved to be quite controversial, but that is hardly a surprise as Jesus himself was also very controversial in what he had to say."

Wouldn't comparing yourself to Jesus be considered blasphemous and offensive (not to mention highly arrogant)? By your own qualifiers, you should not be allowed the freedom to make such a statement.

"As John 3: 16 tells us, Jesus did indeed die for the sins of the world, that’s everybody. However our sins are our only forgiven if we truly believe in him, so if you don’t want to believe in him you can remain in this life with your sins unforgiven, the only problem with that, is that your eternal destiny will be affected."

Only if you are Christian. Remember that there are other religions in this world that also believe they are correct. And for the record, John 3:16 does not mention that Jesus died for our sins. It says only this according to the King James translation (which is far removed and retranslated from countless other versions):

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Which literally translates as: If you believe in Jesus, you will live forever. That particular piece of scripture which is so commonly thrown about does not mention Heaven or sins. Since fundamentalists revel in literal translations, they are often telling people out of context that Christians will never die. When taking scriptures out of context, it is so easy to apply them to just about anything, isn't it?

"I do believe in freedom of speech insofar as it does not cause serious offence to any other person, freedom of speech is not an unqualified right."

So it's ok for Christians to offend others for centuries, but not anyone else? That doesn't sound very Christian, but then few "Christian" acts these days rarely have anything to do with the teachings of Christ any more. And if you really mean any other person, then that would include virtually any statement made by anyone of any religion. What is considered "offensive" is highly arguable and subjective. Careful what you wish for. You may find your own freedom as easily revoked as those of the others you wish to revoke.

"Sure, I would not waste my money going to see the show but when the BBC used TV licence payer’s money in order to screen it, we in Britain were all indirectly paying for it."

TV license money has paid for everything broadcast by the BBC and Sky in the UK including numerous shows that have included sex, foul language and religious mockery. Why such an uproar this time? Why not the works of Monty Python, Absolutely Fabulous, Coupling, Queer as Folk, etc.? People are behaving as if the broadcast of a production like Jerry Springer The Opera is somehow a unique circumstance, when it really isn't.

"It is right to be allowed to racially abuse someone because you have freedom of speech? NO, neither is it right to blaspheme God and his son Jesus Christ."

You're comparing apples to oranges. Religion is a choice (whether you like it or not) and race is not. I'm sure you feel that blaspheming Buddha is of no consequence, but it probably is to a Buddhist. The difference is, they are more likely to recognize your right to do so.

"We can all see what God thought about this when he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19."

That is the most common misinterpretation of homosexuality in the Bible. God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of an act of rape, not because they were homosexuals. Funny how Christians never mention that the same story condones whoring your daughters to strange men, incest, and raping your father to impregnate yourself.

In addition, in Romans I, Paul condemns the acts of homosexuality as a lustful and pagan act of idolotry just as loveless carnal sex and pagan idolotry is considered a sin among heterosexuals elsewhere in the Bible. There is conveniently not one passage in the Bible that addresses love between two men or two women other than of a fraternal nature.

"Anyway I am digressing from JSTO, which remains an offensive blasphemous production." (to you) "It is aimed at Christians because we are seen as peaceful, non-violent and therefore fair game for any kind of abuse."

Peaceful? Non-violent? Since when? Christians are notorious for some of the most bloody and gruesome acts of violence in world history including sending their children off to their deaths in the Crusades, to the Spanish Inquisition, to the Protestant/Catholic war that still rages in the UK, to the Holocaust of WWII, to the torture and slaying of minority groups by White Supremists, to acts of violence against abortion clinics and patients. My father grew up in Irish Catholic schools and he can dispel that myth of Christians "seen as peaceful, non-violent".

"I wonder what would happen if the producers of JSTO had replaced Jesus and God with Allah and Mohammed? It would never have even been considered."

You probably wouldn't have protested because it would not have been considered blasphemous according to Christianity. But you may have given them an idea for their next show which they have already been contracted to produce.

Updated On: 3/9/05 at 03:29 PM

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 4:13pm

PS - Still not seeing the relevence in your Ark quotes to this discussion.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 4:16pm

"PS - Still not seeing the relevence in your Ark quotes to this discussion."

Possibly what the poster is referring to is a quote that goes:

The ark was built by amateurs, the Titanic was built by professionals.

[keggss23]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 4:21pm

I don't understand how some Christians can say that God loves every man, woman and child unconditionally (as long as you believe in him and confess your sins to a priest and then do your pennance of 2 Hail Mary's or whatever) and that he died for the sins of the WORLD and then in the same breath condemn gays and everyone else who isn't a Christian. Sounds like very CONDITIONAL love to me. I also don't understand how someone can rationalize discrimination with the very thin veil of "well, it's in the Bible" and "the Bible says..."

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 4:47pm

Gothampc - That makes no sense either. Does that mean professionals are doomed to failure. Wasn't Jesus a carpenter by profession? Or are we just talking about sailing vessels?

keggss23 - The few Christians who do say that God loves every human unconditionally generally don't condemn gays and those of other faiths. A really good example is Tammy Faye. She is a devout Christian and embraces gays while claiming that we are all loved by God and Jesus as long as we love them and each other in return. My mother and my uncle (who is an Episcopalian priest) are also devout Christians who have the sense to actually understand the Bible, its evolution and its teachings without adding unfounded interpertation based on personal preferences or changing the meaning of scriptures used out of context.

I don't believe all Christians are bad. Just those who try to force Christianity on the rest of the world. That's the funny thing about religion. Each religion believes it is the correct religion, but they can't all be, can they? Then who is to say the others are wrong.

[matthius202]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 5:29pm

Updated On: 9/9/08 at 05:29 PM