EVEN NOBEL-PRIZE WINNERS CAN BE STUPID
In a news account of the gay marches in Rome and Milan yesterday in support of a law
to recognize de-facto unions (including that of homosexual partners), Italian playwright
Dario Fo, who won the Nobel Prize in Literature many years ago (an ideological choice that prefigured
English playwright Harold Pinter's Nobel Prize in 2005) was quoted as saying:
"We thought the Church had stopped interfering in Italian politics...but on the contrary,
there is a terrible resurgence. These are bad signs for freedom of expression."
Number One: How is the Church - by restating its bimillenial views on marriage and the family
and respect for all human life - "interfering" in Italian politics? If that is interference,
then anyone who speaks out about any political issue is "interfering" in Italian politics.
Then, so are Mr. Fo and the thousands of gays and lesbians who demonstrated with him.
The Church is an interest group, too, like they are, only much bigger, but then it has a
2000-year head start on the gay movements! Theyre venting their frustration because they
know they can't match up to such an adversary.
Number Two: That the Church speaks out its stand constitutes "bad signs for
freedom of expression"??? It is
freedom of expression. Doesn't
Mr. Fo realize it is he and all ideologically blinded anti-Church elements like him
who want to muzzle the Church from expressing itself in the public arena,
who demand freedom of expression for everybody else but would deny it to the Church?
Oviously, even a Nobel Prize winner can be so ideologically overwrought
he does not even realize when he is spouting stupidities!
This morning, I commented in another thread on a remark Christopher at RFC had posted
about Paul Elie:
"Although Christopher says Elie 'is a serious writer and will make a sincere effort', so are
Noah Chomsky and other ideology-driven writers 'serious' but their agenda does get in the
way of 'sincere effort'.
And I might add, in the way of plain old common sense, as Mr. Fo makes ludicrously obvious.
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 16/01/2006 9.09]