Posted on 05/21/2007 7:14:42 AM PDT by nypokerface
Dear friends,
This past week, I was invited to take part with Rabbi Shmuley Boteach in a dialogue /interview on a radio show run by Roseanne Barr and someone her producer kept calling "her boyfriend Johnny." The producer kept repeating that while Rabbi Boteach was very right-wing, Roseanne was very left-wing and it would be an interesting conversation.
I sent him a few questions I thought would be interesting to pursue — the role of religion in general and Judaism in particular in dealing with wars like Iraq, wih the danger of global scorching, and with sexual ethics.
The producer called me at 8 p.m. to clear the line. He explained the phone was set up in such a way that at first I would be able to hear Roseanne and Johnny introduce the show and us two rabbi guests, but I would not yet be able to join in to create a conversation or talk to the radio audience. The real conversation was supposed to begin at 8:05.
What I heard, beginning at 8:05, was eight straight minutes of Roseanne and Johnny foul-mouthing religion in general and Judaism in particular. Not foul language in the literally obscene sense, just foul thought in stupid words. Johnny, for instance, kept coming back to how stupid the Jews were for talking about "the Holy Land" — since the whole earth is holy, and this "Holy Land" stuff and all the stupid ceremonies are just about money. Roseanne weakly pointed out that American Indians have places they call sacred too, but she agreed the whole idea was ridiculous, though Jews are not unique in the silliness. She went out of her way to say that though she was herself Jewish, she had nothing in common with Rabbi Boteach or me.
This went on and on. There are plenty of cogent critiques to be made of religion, including Judaism, but this was drivel. Stupid, ignorant, whiny and hostile, all at the same time. A poisonous stew. After eight minutes, I hung up.
I guess this dialogue of drivel went on for another five minutes, because it took that long for them to discover I was off the line and for the producer to call me back. I explained that I had good, serious and pleasant work to do and did not intend to waste time making myself into an enabler for such a stew of hateful stupidity, not even to try to explain in any sane and useful way what the joys and problems are of religious life.
Five minutes later, someone else called to ask me please to take part. This time I could hear in the background what seemed likely to be Rabbi Boteach's voice; but I was enjoying my work and explained again that I didn't want to lend credence to drivel. Then this other person asked whether I'd be willing to take part in a more debate-like format with Christopher Hitchens, who has just published a book attacking religion — not with Roseanne but with a wholly different host. I said that Hitchens was at least reputed to be intelligent, and I would think about it. (I haven't yet heard back about that notion.)
Why am I telling this story? I started out imagining that Rabbi Boteach and I could address some important issues on which we deeply disagree in a way that would encourage serious thought among a very wide audience. It became clear that this would absolutely NOT happen.
Instead, it would be something like a leering, slobbery Howard-Stern-like show about religion instead of sex, aimed to reduce the audience to about the same level of slobber. Tuned to give them the impression that they had had a conversation about God — when all they were actually doing was coming all over their pants with the "grown-up" discovery that God and religion are stupid.
With this analogy in mind, I imagine an entire generation fed up with their parents' and teachers' conventional obeisance to boring, rote-driven, hypocritical religion. (Think about learning holiness from a pastor who, you later learn, has been seducing women who come to him in profound grief after their husbands' deaths, or has been seducing/coercing young boys into sex while proclaiming eternal damnation for those who desire same-sex marriage.)
So maybe the primary blame for such a slobbery program as the Roseanne talk-show belongs in the behavior of much of established, official American religion.
But is there no better response our society can conceive, no way to introduce large numbers of people to a grown-up, thoughtful, compassionate, spiritually searching version of religion? Even one in which the erotic would be grown-up and passionate without being exploitative and obsessive?
The work I got done that night after I hung up the phone was about Passover, the Song of Songs and charoset — the mixture of chopped nuts, raisins, wine and spices that we are taught to eat at the Passover Seder. Charoset as the embodiment of the Song of Songs. A recipe for love. And loving laughter. And delicious mouthfuls of delight.
Not for malicious slobber.
With yearning for that day -
And with blessings of shalom, salaam, peace -
Arthur
Good for you Arthur, for not taking part!
Standing O for the Rabbi. Why cast pearls before swine?
Roseanne:
What in God’s name was her appeal? She is without a doubt the least talented, most grating, undesirable, hag to have ever had her own TV program.
As an aside, she called our Beverly Hills store and wanted us to close it to the public for a couple hours so she could shop in private. Our response was, “No.”
Meah-chuz!
The worst thing you can do to a radio person, or anyone in media for that mater, is give them ‘dead air’ to chew on.
Nicely done.
On the other hand ... it was the right thing to do, nonetheless. Next time check out the show first.
To be fair, if I were unfortunate enough to be Roseanne Barr’s “boyfriend,” I’d be full of hatred and bitterness too. Just sayin’.
That is absolutely untrue, and I hotly resent this calumny. Roseanne is far from being the most detestable person ever to have her own TV program. That crown goes to Rosie O'Donnell. I will defend Rosie's disgustingness over Roseanne's any day! ;-)
Hmmm....touche`. :)
Having an intelligent debate with Roseanne Barr is on par with making a nice pet out of an rabid raccoon.
That is a man I could have a wonderful, well reasoned, thought provoking discussion of religion with. Blessings to him.
I’m going to send this to some of my fundamentalist atheist friends. No, I don’t expect them to become believers, but I am hoping they’ll stop making asses of themselves with their childish and ignorant attacks on beliefs they can’t be bothered to understand.
I would almost agree with you -- except for this little nugget from his essay:
Tuned to give them the impression that they had had a conversation about God — when all they were actually doing was coming all over their pants with the "grown-up" discovery that God and religion are stupid.With this analogy in mind, I imagine an entire generation fed up with their parents' and teachers' conventional obeisance to boring, rote-driven, hypocritical religion. (Think about learning holiness from a pastor who, you later learn, has been seducing women who come to him in profound grief after their husbands' deaths, or has been seducing/coercing young boys into sex while proclaiming eternal damnation for those who desire same-sex marriage.)
So maybe the primary blame for such a slobbery program as the Roseanne talk-show belongs in the behavior of much of established, official American religion.
Contrary to the notions of this learned rabbi, using phrases like "coming all over their pants" to describe these juvenile nihilistic rantings of the hosts of the show debases him nearly to their level. Further, his characterization of the miniscule exceptional minority of pastors and priests as "much of established, official American religion" is so grossly wrong on so many levels that it completely marginalizes anything else he has to say.
I would probably ask him why he was comfortable using such uncouthe terminology as "coming all over their pants" to describe the participants in the discussion. Then I would probably ask him whether he considers Christianity in general, or Catholicism, or perhaps fundamentalist protestantism to be the "established, official religion of America" and how it is that it became the "established, official religion of America".
"... I imagine an entire generation fed up with their parents' and teachers' conventional obeisance to boring, rote-driven, hypocritical religion. (Think about learning holiness from a pastor who, you later learn, has been seducing women who come to him in profound grief after their husbands' deaths, or has been seducing/coercing young boys into sex while proclaiming eternal damnation for those who desire same-sex marriage.)"
An entire generation? Wouldn't that require, I don't know...at least HALF of ALL pastors to be guilty of sexual perversion?
So maybe the primary blame for such a slobbery program as the Roseanne talk-show belongs in the behavior of much of established, official American religion.
Did any of you read this, or were you just pleased that someone hung up on Roseanne? I expect idiocy and misunderstanding--if not outright hatred--of faith from the likes of Mz Barr et al. The fact that the good rabbi is being given a pass for stating the same but dressing it up intellectually is disgusting.
What a mess. I see nothing worthy of applause here.
I should have read all of the comments, because you summed it up much better than I.
Why did this Rabbi ever imagine that any type of serious discussion would take place on Roseanne’s ‘show’? Did he not have a clue who she is?
I suppose you could say he walked away from a commitment in the same way a consumer might refuse an obvious lemon in a car dealership after being bait-and-switched. One is a smart move by a savvy consumer. Why ought the other be judged differently?
That’s because Rosie is an apostate Irish Catholic where as Barr, I suppose, is merely an unbelieving Jew. Apposite Catholics tend to be the most vicious, in the manner that a daughter might hate her own mother. But from this description, maybe Barr IS the same.
Well said. The rabbi's broad-brush hatred for Christianity, along with his blame of elements within the organized church for the social depravity that spawns shows such as Rosanne's, would have made him fit right in with the discussion that he supposedly deplores.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.