[ptmQqoxw]

It's a carry-over from the temperance movement of the 19th Century. Alcohol abuse was common, and drunk men beating the crap outta wives and children was also. Also, beer halls were common meeting places for evil union organizers.

The Chicago Beer Riots which shows what happens when you tried to take radical Germans beer away.

[Drysnyaty]

Sorry....Methodists were around in the colonial days, saying no whiskey you sinners. I think it had something to do with fun being sinful.

[Sttim]

Spiritus contra Spiritum

==Edit:
Latin always win!

[FLOMOUSLY]

See?

[Khcyhshq]

Lesse, with Catholics, you have the Italians and the Irish. No explanation needed why the argument for "why do christains condemn alcohol" isn't a good blanket term.

[VastDrura]

Very well thought out response, Dry.

[CealialactBek]

I'm Orthodox, and we like booze too.

[Lotyqnag]

funny, I acredit the existance of alcohol to christian monks.

[D6Ri5u13]

Why do polytubbies continually tar all christians with the brush of christian fundy theologies?

[dosyrotsbop]

"strong drink is a mocker" and other passages suggest the truth, which is that alcohol can facilitate bad behavior

anyone who disagrees with the above statement is a moron

JM

[drugstore]

Funny you mention that. Moderate view chucrches don't seem to get the air time that whack job ones do. I wonder why?

[genna]

CBS, NBC refuse to air church's television advertisement

United Church of Christ ad highlighting Jesus' extravagant welcome called 'too controversial'

By J. Bennett Guess
United Church News

Nov. 30, 2004

CLEVELAND -- The CBS and NBC television networks are refusing to run a 30-second television ad from the United Church of Christ because its all-inclusive welcome has been deemed "too controversial."

The ad, part of the denomination's new, broad identity campaign set to begin airing nationwide on Dec. 1, states that -- like Jesus -- the United Church of Christ seeks to welcome all people, regardless of ability, age, race, economic circumstance or sexual orientation.

According to a written explanation from CBS, the United Church of Christ is being denied network access because its ad implies acceptance of gay and lesbian couples -- among other minority constituencies -- and is, therefore, too "controversial."

"Because this commercial touches on the exclusion of gay couples and other minority groups by other individuals and organizations," reads an explanation from CBS, "and the fact the Executive Branch has recently proposed a Constitutional Amendment to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, this spot is unacceptable for broadcast on the [CBS and UPN] networks."

Similarly, a rejection by NBC declared the spot "too controversial."

"It's ironic that after a political season awash in commercials based on fear and deception by both parties seen on all the major networks, an ad with a message of welcome and inclusion would be deemed too controversial," says the Rev. John H. Thomas, the UCC's general minister and president. "What's going on here?"

Negotiations between network officials and the church's representatives broke down today (Nov. 30), on the day before the ad campaign was set to begin airing nationwide on a combination of broadcast and cable networks. The ad has been accepted and will air on a number of networks, including ABC Family, AMC, BET, Discovery, Fox, Hallmark, History, Nick@Nite, TBS, TNT, Travel and TV Land, among others.

The debut 30-second commercial features two muscle-bound "bouncers" standing guard outside a symbolic, picturesque church and selecting which persons are permitted to attend Sunday services. Written text interrupts the scene, announcing, "Jesus didn't turn people away. Neither do we." A narrator then proclaims the United Church of Christ's commitment to Jesus' extravagant welcome: "No matter who you are, or where you are on life's journey, you are welcome here." (The ad can be viewed online at www.stillspeaking.com.)

In focus groups and test market research conducted before the campaign's national rollout, the UCC found that many people throughout the country feel alienated by churches. The television ad is geared toward those persons who, for whatever reason, have not felt welcomed or comfortable in a church.


"We find it disturbing that the networks in question seem to have no problem exploiting gay persons through mindless comedies or titillating dramas, but when it comes to a church's loving welcome of committed gay couples, that's where they draw the line," says the Rev. Robert Chase, director of the UCC's communication ministry.

CBS and NBC's refusal to air the ad "recalls the censorship of the 1950s and 1960s, when television station WLBT in Jackson, Miss., refused to show people of color on TV," says Ron Buford, coordinator for the United Church of Christ identity campaign. Buford, of African-American heritage, says, "In the 1960s, the issue was the mixing of the races. Today, the issue appears to be sexual orientation. In both cases, it's about exclusion."

In 1959, the Rev. Everett C. Parker organized United Church of Christ members to monitor the racist practices of WLBT. Like many southern television stations at the time, WLBT had imposed a news blackout on the growing civil rights movement, pulling the plug on then-attorney Thurgood Marshall. The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. implored the UCC to get involved in the media civil rights issues. Parker, founding director of the Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ, organized churches and won in federal court a ruling that the airwaves are public, not private property. That decision ultimately led to an increase in the number of persons of color in television studios and newsrooms. The suit clearly established that television and radio stations, as keepers of the public airwaves, must broadcast in the public interest.

"The consolidation of TV network ownership into the hands of a few executives today puts freedom of speech and freedom of religious expression in jeopardy," says former FCC Commissioner Gloria Tristani, currently managing director of the UCC's Office of Communication. "By refusing to air the United Church of Christ's paid commercial, CBS and NBC are stifling religious expression. They are denying the communities they serve a suitable access to differing ideas and expressions."

Adds Andrew Schwartzman, president and CEO of the not-for-profit Media Access Project in Washington, D.C., "This is an abuse of the broadcasters' duty to inform their viewers on issues of importance to the community. After all, these stations don't mind carrying shocking, attention-getting programming, because they do that every night."

The United Church of Christ's national offices -- located in Cleveland -- speak to, but not for, its nearly 6,000 congregations and 1.3 million members. In the spirit of the denomination's rich tradition, UCC congregations remain autonomous, but also strongly in covenant with each other and with the denomination's regional and national bodies.


###
Too controversial, ABC, CBS, ohhh please. So what could be the motivation?

[sobre]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
So if you see Baptists referenced, why do you expand to all Christians. A good Christian might go moderately.

Walk into a bar.
Mormons own the bar, but are seemingly disgusted by the patrons.
Those running out the back door trying not to be seen are Baptists.
Those with their head on the bar snoring are Catholics.
The moderate Methodist buys you a round.

[thighikergove]

Purim: To Drink or Not To Drink?
from Rabbi Professor David Golinkin

by Rabbi Professor David Golinkin
The Jewish people throughout history has always opposed drunkenness. That is the message of the stories of Noah and Lot (Genesis 9 and 19) as well as of the book of Proverbs (23:30-35). According to our Sages, Nadav and Avihu were killed because they were drunk (Leviticus Rabbah 20:9 and parallels), drunkenness leads to forbidden sexual relations (Ketubot 65a and Numbers Rabbah 10:3) and "there is nothing that causes a person greater lamentation than wine" (Sanhedrin 70b).

As a result, it is difficult to fathom the primary Talmudic source related to drinking on Purim (Megillah 7b): "Rava said: a person must get drunk on Purim until he cannot distinguish between 'cursed be Haman' and 'blessed be Mordechai'. Rabbah and R. Zeira made a Purim feast together. They got drunk.

Rabbah stood up and killed R. Zeira. On the morrow, Rabbah prayed for him and revived him. The following year, Rabbah said to him: ‘Come, let us celebrate the Purim feast together!’ R. Zeira replied: ‘Miracles don't happen every day!’ "

Rava's statement begs an explanation. R. David Abudraham explained that the Sages required drinking on Purim since all of the miracles in the days of Ahashverosh occurred at drinking parties (Sefer Abudraham, pp. 209-210). On the other hand, Rava was a vintner (Berakhot 56a and Bava Metzia 73a) and clearly liked to drink wine (Pesahim 107b). As for the strange story, Rabbi H. Z. Reines suggests that the entire episode is a Purim joke (Hadoar 5737, p. 266)!

Whatever the simple meaning is, it is clear that the poskim (halakhic authorities) throughout the generations felt very uncomfortable with Rava's demand to get drunk on Purim, and therefore each posek tried to circumvent the requirement. Here is a sampling of their rulings:
R. Ephraim (North Africa, 11th cent.) claimed that the story comes to cancel out Rava's statement and therefore one should not get drunk on Purim.
R. Alexander Zusslin Hacohen (Germany, 14th cent.) explained that "cursed be Haman" equals "blessed be Mordechai" in gematria - they both add up to 502! - and it requires less wine to become that intoxicated.
R. Yosef Haviva (Spain, 15th cent.) wrote that one should say funny things so that the beholders will think that one cannot distinguish between "cursed be Haman" and "blessed be Mordechai".
Maimonides (Egypt, 12th cent.) rules that "he drinks wine until he gets drunk and falls asleep...", and this ruling was adopted by Rabbi Moshe Isserles in the Shulhan Arukh (Poland, 16th cent.).
R. Natanel Weil (Germany, 18th cent.) explained: " ‘until’ - up to and not including, because otherwise he would reach the drunkenness of Lot".
R. Aaron of Lunel (Provence, 14th cent.) commented "that he should drink more than his normal custom in order to rejoice greatly and to make the poor rejoice and he shall comfort them...and that is true joy." This is the most original interpretation: that the purpose of drinking on Purim is to help us fulfill the mitzvah of mattanot la’evyonim (alms to the poor) and not simply to get drunk.
Finally, R. Menahem Hameiri (Provence, 14th cent.) said: "In any case, we are not commanded to get drunk ...for we were not commanded to engage in debauchery and foolishness but to have heartfelt joy which will lead us to the love of God and to gratitude for the miracles which he performed for us".
In recent years, we have witnessed a marked increase in the use of wine, alcohol and drugs by Israeli youth due to the dual influence of Western and Russian cultures. This increase has led, in turn, to an increase in traffic accidents and injuries. These are the ways of Noah, Lot and Ahashverosh, not of the Jewish people throughout its history. The poskim understood this significant difference. That is why they ruled: "heartfelt joy" - yes, "debauchery and foolishness - no. May we remember this crucial difference both on Purim and throughout the year. Conservative Judaism
About Conservative Judaism

Conservative Judaism FAQ

Rabbi Prof. David Golinkin
More Articles by Rabbi Prof. David Golinkin

Schechter Institute of Jewish Studies in Jerusalem



LOTM - I like the opinion of Rabbi Aaron of Lunel the best - get drunk enough that you start handing out money to the poor.

[Dogxzysl]

Some, like many SDAs, think that alcohol is a sin period. I find myself more in the having a little drink isn't a problem, but that alcohol often leads to problems and it is safer to abstain.

JM
(was drunk often for a few years...)

[chuecafresss]

Puhlease. Your inital point was fine and I agree with it. The selected quote I drew out was to show that you are pulling a Mr. Fun wherein his world everything is about teh gays and in yours everything is about exploitation of the workers.

It aint always so.