July 27, 2010 | In: Truth, Worldviews
Mel Gibson vs. Roman Polanski What’s the Difference?
Mel Gibson has made the news – in the form of a media feeding frenzy – yet again. This time he is accused of making racial slurs and of possibly physically abusing his girlfriend (the mother of his nine month old baby). There is little doubt that the accusations are true. Mel Gibson has slid once again in his lifelong struggle with alcoholism. However, especially as far as celebrities go, this news is “nothing new under the sun.” I say especially as far as celebrities go mainly because their domestic woes are typically public knowledge. Alcoholism, extra-marital sex and even (sadly) abuse of all kinds are all-too-common occurrences. In fact, one has to wonder why such a media feeding frenzy (including an audio clip that went viral on the Internet) exists at all.
Meanwhile, another celebrity has made the news as well, though much further down the media page. Switzerland refused to extradite movie director Roman Polanski, who was accused of drugging and raping a 13 year old girl. Unlike Gibson, Polanski was even defended by many in Hollywood. The ruling of the courts of Switzerland is considered a great victory for some people who claim that Polanski was just misunderstood, that the sex with the 13 year old was consensual, and that it all happened so long ago that we shouldn’t even bother.
So what’s the difference between Mel Gibson and Roman Polanski? Frankly, both cases of sin outrage and sadden me. Rape and abuse are both gross desecration of human dignity. At the same time, I am aware enough of my own sinfulness to be driven to prayer for both of these men. But I notice the difference in the way they are treated publicly, and I have to wonder.
To me, this is just another sign of the rampant presence of modernism in our society. As I have said before, modernists consider hypocrisy one of their few major sins. To the modernist-influenced media, Roman Polanski was just following his nature, and even though the girl was only 13, she did choose to be with him and to take drugs. However, Mel Gibson created the movie Passion of the Christ and claimed to be a faithful (and traditional) Catholic. Because he followed a religion that dares tell the world what is right and wrong, Gibson’s sinfulness is hypocritical.
The irony is that those who criticize Gibson and defend Polanski are themselves hypocritical. Abusive sexuality is apparently OK for some people but not for others. Unless, of course, the crime is not the abuse but instead the moral standards held by Gibson. Modernists aren’t really saying that abuse is evil, but that moral standards are.
Related Links:
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
