Offensive cartoon of the Pope

  • Thread starter Thread starter yinekka
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Y

yinekka

Guest
This is the cartoon. :mad:

timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00505/Cartoon_505242a.jpg

Here are email addresses if you wish to register a complaint.

A big thanks goes to the *Mulier Fortis *blog owner who found all the addresses to make it easier for us to complain.

This from *mulier fortis *blog.

The Times decided to run an extremely offensive cartoon last Wednesday (18 March 2009) which depicted the Holy Father with a condom on his head.

The Pope is Christ’s representative on earth for around 1.13 billion people.

A similar attack on the Prophet Mohammed was greeted with outrage by Muslims worldwide, and the cartoon was deemed unacceptable.

So why is it unacceptable to depict the Prophet Mohammed in a cartoon, but it is ok to pillory the Holy Father for stating the teaching of the Catholic Church (especially when those teachings are actually backed up by evidence)?

Is it possibly because Catholics don’t answer back or protest when the Church is attacked?

Time to speak up in defence of our Holy Father. Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor did actually write to the Editor to complain, but we need to drive the point home.

First, write to the Editor in Chief. I have to admit that I couldn’t quite work out, from The Times website, who that was. However, the Times Online Editor in Chief can be reached by email, as can The Times Editorial Departments for Home News and Foreign News. There’s no harm in sending emails to all three… better to send too many than too few.

And then, contact the Press Complaints Commission. They have an online complaints form, which makes it easier. You can have a look at the Code of Practice, but the category you need to note is Section 12 (i):

**Discrimination **

i) The press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s race, colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation or to any physical or mental illness or disability.

The publication date was 18 March 2009. You also need to include the internet link. The most relevant one is, I think, this one.

timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00505/Cartoon_505242a.jpg

**Online Editor **
online.editor@timesonline.co.uk

The] Times Editorial Department **home.news@thetimes.co.uk

**Foreign News **foreign.news@thetimes.co.uk

Press complaints commission pcc.org.uk/complaints/process.html

Online Complaint Form pcc.org.uk/complaints/form.html

Code of Practice pcc.org.uk/cop/practice.html

The category you need to note is **Section 12 (i): **

**Discrimination **

i) The press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s race, colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation or to any physical or mental illness or disability.

The publication date was 18 March 2009. You also need to **include the internet link[to the cartoon]. **The most relevant one is, I think, this one.

timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00505/Cartoon_505242a.jpg**
 
Thank you for this information. I will definately write to them, and pray for them.

In fact, I’ll tell them that too. I’m sure they could care less but maybe just knowing that someone is praying for them might help them to realize how truly sick and sad what they have done is and that some of us believe they need a lot of prayer.
 
Save your breath. I’ve been reading Time magazine for a little over five years now. Trust me, this cartoon is nothing compared to the anti-Catholic garbage they’ve spewed out before. They don’t care what the Church says, either - in fact, they use Catholic reponses to stir up more trouble.
 
I know. Let us take to the streets, riot and threaten to kill all non-Catholics.

Oh, that’s the Muslim thing to do over offensive cartoons.

I’ll pass.
 
What’s the big deal? there have been far more offensive cartoons of other people that they got away with.
 
What’s the big deal? there have been far more offensive cartoons of other people that they got away with.

The big deal teen is that this cartoon is lampooning the Vicar of Christ on earth, the spiritual leader of the Catholic Church on earth.He is my papa.

I don’t know if you are correct in saying that Time has ‘got away with far more offensive cartoons of other people’ I must have missed the one about Mohammad and Martin Luther King and the Dali Lama and Billy Graham and Buddah and the chief Rabbi of Jerusalem - perhaps you could provide me with a link for them. If Time got away with lampooning these and other figures shame on the people who loved them for not protesting loud and long. Shame on us Catholics if we don’t protest.
 
yinekka said:
Shame on us Catholics if we don’t protest.
Click to expand...
If the one who was lampooned asks us to protest, then I will protest. Until then I will not behave like the radical Muslims over such things.
 
pwnewton, so you equate sending an email protesting the disgusting cartoon of the pope to behaving like radical Muslims? :confused: Would you care to elborate on that comment?
 
yinekka said:
pwnewton, so you equate sending an email protesting the disgusting cartoon of the pope to behaving like radical Muslims? :confused: Would you care to elborate on that comment?
Click to expand...
No. I said taking to the streets in protest would be like that. If you think an email is called for, that is not the same.
 
yinekka said:
This is the cartoon. :mad:

timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00505/Cartoon_505242a.jpg

Here are email addresses if you wish to register a complaint.

A big thanks goes to the *Mulier Fortis *blog owner who found all the addresses to make it easier for us to complain.

This from *mulier fortis *blog.

The Times decided to run an extremely offensive cartoon last Wednesday (18 March 2009) which depicted the Holy Father with a condom on his head.

The Pope is Christ’s representative on earth for around 1.13 billion people.

A similar attack on the Prophet Mohammed was greeted with outrage by Muslims worldwide, and the cartoon was deemed unacceptable.

So why is it unacceptable to depict the Prophet Mohammed in a cartoon, but it is ok to pillory the Holy Father for stating the teaching of the Catholic Church (especially when those teachings are actually backed up by evidence)?

Is it possibly because Catholics don’t answer back or protest when the Church is attacked?

Time to speak up in defence of our Holy Father. Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor did actually write to the Editor to complain, but we need to drive the point home.

First, write to the Editor in Chief. I have to admit that I couldn’t quite work out, from The Times website, who that was. However, the Times Online Editor in Chief can be reached by email, as can The Times Editorial Departments for Home News and Foreign News. There’s no harm in sending emails to all three… better to send too many than too few.

And then, contact the Press Complaints Commission. They have an online complaints form, which makes it easier. You can have a look at the Code of Practice, but the category you need to note is Section 12 (i):

**Discrimination **

i) The press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s race, colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation or to any physical or mental illness or disability.

The publication date was 18 March 2009. You also need to include the internet link. The most relevant one is, I think, this one.

timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00505/Cartoon_505242a.jpg

**Online Editor **
online.editor@timesonline.co.uk

The] Times Editorial Department ****home.news@thetimes.co.uk

**Foreign News **foreign.news@thetimes.co.uk

Press complaints commission pcc.org.uk/complaints/process.html

Online Complaint Form pcc.org.uk/complaints/form.html

Code of Practice pcc.org.uk/cop/practice.html

The category you need to note is **Section 12 (i): **

**Discrimination **

i) The press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s race, colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation or to any physical or mental illness or disability.

The publication date was 18 March 2009. You also need to **include the internet link[to the cartoon]. **The most relevant one is, I think, this one.

timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00505/Cartoon_505242a.jpg
You know if that was a cartoon of Muhammad, there would be riots out in the streets and the paper would have never published it. We need to pray hard for our Holy Father. Truly sad.:(😦
Click to expand...
 
The needle piercing the crest of the fanciful headpiece provides the key: this is a baby bottle’s rubber nipple, which of course, must first be pierced in order to function properly.

Clearly one cartoonist’s stab at depicting the Holy Father as “the Milk of Human Kindness.”

Milk of Human Kindness

A phrase from Macbeth, by William Shakespeare, meaning humane feeling, concern for other people: “Everyone agreed that Houston was a brilliant thinker and an excellent lawyer, but some people worried that he lacked the milk of human kindness.”

Artistically, the coloration is outstanding. The figure itself is not without merit. While the leprechaun ears are somewhat prosaic, it is often a challenge beyond the ability of the ordinary cartoonist to comically depict handsome Teutonic men such as our beloved pontiff.
 
yinekka said:
Is it possibly because Catholics don’t answer back or protest when the Church is attacked?
Click to expand...
No; in fact, it’s the opposite. Bullies respond to action, not inaction–though I’d hardly label the creators of the cartoon bullies.

Your feeding the bully as we speak. 👍
 
Paganus said:
…Clearly one cartoonist’s stab at depicting the Holy Father as “the Milk of Human Kindness.”

Artistically, the coloration is outstanding. The figure itself is not without merit. While the leprechaun ears are somewhat prosaic, it is often a challenge beyond the ability of the ordinary cartoonist to comically depict handsome Teutonic men such as our beloved pontiff.
Click to expand...
I like your style. ;);)😉
 
Eucharisted said:
Save your breath. I’ve been reading Time magazine for a little over five years now. Trust me, this cartoon is nothing compared to the anti-Catholic garbage they’ve spewed out before. They don’t care what the Church says, either - in fact, they use Catholic reponses to stir up more trouble.
Click to expand...
i just sent them a complaint via email, but i did have to wonder about including the link to the cartoon itself. all our hits to that page earns them more advertising revenue.
 
Eucharisted said:
Save your breath. I’ve been reading Time magazine for a little over five years now. Trust me, this cartoon is nothing compared to the anti-Catholic garbage they’ve spewed out before. They don’t care what the Church says, either - in fact, they use Catholic reponses to stir up more trouble.
Click to expand...

Time magazine =/= The Times of London. One is from the US, the other is British. The offending cartoon (which was in rather poor taste) appeared in the paper - not in the magazine.​

If “Time” is not an organ of the Catholic Church, why should it care one iota what the Church says ? Catholics are only one segment of the market, no more (if no less) significant than any other.
 
allhers said:
Thank you for this information. I will definately write to them, and pray for them.

In fact, I’ll tell them that too. I’m sure they could care less but maybe just knowing that someone is praying for them might help them to realize how truly sick and sad what they have done is and that some of us believe they need a lot of prayer.
Click to expand...

I doubt you’ll achieve anything. In fact, it’s almost certain you won’t, because the view of religions that is general in society here is that they are all pretty much as bad as each other; that they are all equally Fundamentalist, the Church of England as much so as the RCC, house churches as much as so as Muslims. God is taken out & brushed off for certain occasions, but that is it. The deference paid to Catholic bishops in the USA is almost unimaginable here - it’s been dead for quite a while.​

As for convincing anyone that that cartoon was out of order (which it was - it was a deplorable exhibition of discourtesy and bad taste, and an indication of just how far that paper has slid since Rupert Murdoch took it over); you’ve got your hands full there. Personally, I wouldn’t bother.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top