Should Hollywood actors have to apologize for anti-Christian remarks? as Mel Gibson had to?

Question

secular media ridcules creationist, pro life people, many hollywood figures insuly relgious views as loopy all the time
even characturizeing them almost allways in bigotted ways

so, if Mel has to appologize for what he said once privately when drunk... should they for what they say habitually pulblically when not drunk

inquiring minds wanna know

as an example
http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/faq/scopes.asp

Jesus never called his disciples to a fair fight

so you have to appologize if you offend a minority group... but offending a majority group you personally label oppresive is ok.. hmm? perhaps the only respectable form of gibotry is religous bigotry particularly against chrsiians?

Answer 1

haha, thatd be pretty interesting if they did. of course, im sure if crazy cruise came out and said he hates christians and christians are the cause to all wars, he'd probably come out and apologize for it due to christians, like the jewish people, wont take crap from him...we'll stop seeing his stupid movies, and since america is mostly christian, that will be a nice dent in the films revenue, see if he gets as many offers after that!

Answer 2

Christians are the dominant group in America. Why do they still have a persecution complex?! Mel Gibson, a prominent christian actor, made slandering comments to a minority religious group. That's not the same as slandering the majority. There is a lot more threat when you threaten or slander a minority. Nobody blinks an eye if you say slanderous things against white people, but they do when you say those same things against a minority group, and they should!!! Minority groups have less political leverage and less overall power in our society, so insulting or slandering them carries more weight and more of a threatening undercurrent than threatening the majority. I'm white BTW and I think it's OK to criticize white people in America because they hold all the cards, they hold the vast majority of the power.

Answer 3

First of all Mel said anti-semite remarks IN PUBLIC while drunk not private. Second, Jews are a minority and historically repressed, unlike the christians that do the repressing, and finally I don't believe he HAD to apologize, but rather did so of his own free will. Most others that make fun of religion, like South Park, stand by their remarks as parody and commentary and get denounced. Mel certainly had the option.

Answer 4

This is an example of twisting words and spreading erroneous rumors - Mel Gibson's remarked about Jews not Christians.

They are required to apologize because their careers are at stake.

Personalily I do not believe those apologies are sincere. I think normal people should decide on their own whether or not they wish to support the speaker.

Answer 5

No...Mel Gibson insulted the Jews and the media has been covering it non-stop. If he insulted Hindu's, you would never have even heard about the DUI in the firstplace.

That's what living in a country with the most powerful Jewish lobby in the world will do.....

Answer 6

I do think so cuz they have a whole public that looks up to them, whether it's right that the society put him or other celebrities on a pedistal is a whole other argument ...

Answer 7

he apologized to protect his reputation, something like that could really hurt his career, since he is one of the few actors whoisn't famous for just being famous.

Answer 8

no.

what a **** storm over nothing.

get over it!!!

Answer 9

no

Answer 10

no