Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Thursday, September 11, 2008 | Reason : In the News | print version Print | Comments |

Document Comedian Sabina Guzzanti 'insulted Pope' in poofter devils gag

by Times Online

Thanks to EJ Ashcraft for the link.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4732048.ece

Comedian Sabina Guzzanti 'insulted Pope' in poofter devils gag

An Italian comedienne who said that Pope Benedict XVI would go to Hell and be tormented by homosexual demons is facing a prison term of up to five years.

Addressing a Rome rally in July, Sabrina Guzzanti warmed up with a few gags about Silvio Berlusconi — her favourite target for her biting impressions — before moving on to some unrepeatable jokes about Mara Carfagna, the Equal Opportunities Minister and one-time topless model.

But then she got religion, and after warning everyone that within 20 years Italian teachers would be vetted and chosen by the Vatican, she got to the punchline: "But then, within 20 years the Pope will be where he ought to be — in Hell, tormented by great big poofter devils, and very active ones, not passive ones."

The joke may have gone done well with her crowd on the Piazza Navona in Rome, but not with Italian prosecutors. She is facing prosecution for "offending the honour of the sacred and inviolable person" of Benedict XVI.

The Christian world may have been dismayed, even outraged, at the Muslim reaction in 2005 to Danish cartoons satirising the Prophet Muhammed, but Italian law enforcement appears to have had its own sense of humour failure. Giovanni Ferrara, the Rome prosecutor, is invoking the 1929 Lateran Treaty between Italy and the Vatican, which stipulates that an insult to the Pope carries the same penalty as an insult to the Italian President. Prosecution requires authorisation from the Ministry of Justice, for which Mr Ferrara has applied.

The incident has strong political overtones as Mr Berlusconi has been at pains to court the Vatican — and the Catholic vote — since returning to power for the third time in May. Last weekend he accompanied Benedict to Cagliari in Sardinia and attended mass there.

The July rally was called to protest against alleged interference by the Vatican and the Catholic Church in Italian affairs, from abortion to gay rights, but also to attack the Prime Minister for passing "ad personam" laws to protect his own interests and avoid prosecution on corruption allegations.

Mr Berlusconi, who owns Italy's three main commercial television channels and as Prime Minister also wields influence over RAI, the state broadcaster, has been accused by the Left of using his media power to muzzle critics and satirists.

Three years ago Ms Guzzanti released a widely praised film, Viva Zapatero!, about the suppression in 2003 of her late night show RAIot in which she had satirised the Italian Prime Minister. At the 2005 Venice International Film Festival Viva Zapatero! was given an ovation.

The move to prosecute her over her anti-papal remarks was praised by some on the centre Right, including Luca Volonte, a Christian Democrat, who said that "gratuitous insults must be punished".

However, many people were strongly critical. Paolo Guzzanti, Ms Guzzanti's father and a centre Right MP, said the move was "a return to the Middle Ages".

"Perhaps my daughter should be submitted to the judgement of God by being made to walk on hot coals," he added.

Antonio Di Pietro, a senator and former anti-corruption magistrate, who organised the rally, said that Ms Guzzanti had only "exercised her constitutional right to freedom of thought.

"You can agree or not agree with what she said — and personally I didn't — but to put people in prison for what they think is reminiscent of a time when those who thought differently had castor oil poured down their throats" — a reference to the Fascist era, when the Laterna Treaty was enacted.

Dario Fo, the Nobel prize-winning playwright, said that applying the treaty more widely would even have led to the prosecution of Dante, since "he put a Pope in the Inferno as well, namely Boniface VIII". Marco Travaglio, a left-wing writer who also addressed the July rally, said: "At this rate Aristophanes and Rabelais would have ended up in prison for being satirists."

Even certain sections of the Church are unimpressed. Father Bartolomeo Sorge, a Jesuit scholar, told La Repubblica the move to prosecute Ms Guzzanzi was incomprehensible. "We Christians put up with many insults, it is part of being a Christian, as is forgiveness. I feel sure the Pope has already forgiven those who insulted him on Piazza Navona."

Comments 51 - 68 of 68 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

51. Comment #246247 by Telic on September 12, 2008 at 2:52 am

 avatarAs usual I'm sure I'm missing something, but shouldn't the Pope step forward and 'publicly' say he forgives her ?

Other Comments by Telic

52. Comment #246250 by MrPickwick on September 12, 2008 at 3:12 am

 avatarLink of the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aduN2oo8xJg
A speech against fascism, theocracy, christian censorship, control of the media and schools by the religious, etc... (Very offensive stuff indeed)

Other Comments by MrPickwick

53. Comment #246254 by God fearing Atheist on September 12, 2008 at 3:30 am

 avatar
#245795 by Ivan The Not So Bad

Christian Voice (the UK's answer to Westboro) tried to pursue a private prosecution against the BBC over Jerry Springer: the Opera. Result: repeal of the UK blasphemy laws.

We can only hope the same happens here.


Get out the collection box for the defence. Make it so!

BTW Get real, it was insulting. However, insulting statire should be tolerated in a democracy.

Other Comments by God fearing Atheist

54. Comment #246257 by hungarianelephant on September 12, 2008 at 3:44 am

 avatar50. Comment #246244 by Quetzalcoatl on September 12, 2008 at 2:41 am
If the Pope's person is so inviolable, why does he drive around in an armoured car? Ha!

That's not an armoured car. It's an ice cream van with a sunroof.

Berlusconi has the Italian TV stations dub fake crowd noise over the pictures, like Setanta, so that you can't hear it playing "Nellie The Elephant".

Other Comments by hungarianelephant

55. Comment #246260 by Jivlain on September 12, 2008 at 3:51 am

So much for turning the other cheek.

Other Comments by Jivlain

56. Comment #246268 by bilge242 on September 12, 2008 at 4:09 am

The whining and boo-hooing is a bit childish

you offended me! I'll prosecute you for your irreverance!

Other Comments by bilge242

57. Comment #246271 by Vaal on September 12, 2008 at 4:14 am

 avatarAnother own goal by the religiously credulous. They are doing a fantastic job for us.

When will Ratty be returning to his death star? Has he got a Sith apprentice? Emperor Donohue, or how about Emperor Ted?

Other Comments by Vaal

58. Comment #246272 by jaytee_555 on September 12, 2008 at 4:14 am

If the Pope was unfortunate enough to be kidnapped and raped by a homosexual stalker with AIDS, (now don't get upset, all you Catholics - it's only an ethical thought experiment), I wonder if Ratzinger would suddenly discover it had been revealed to him that the 'No Condom' rule was a mistake, and should be revoked.

Other Comments by jaytee_555

59. Comment #246304 by ridelo on September 12, 2008 at 6:27 am

 avatarMethinks: Berlusconi wanted very much to punish the lady but that would make him rather unpopular. So he becomes the pope's champion. Gets him two flies in one slap.

Other Comments by ridelo

60. Comment #246311 by Colwyn Abernathy on September 12, 2008 at 6:44 am

 avatar
Comedian Sabina Guzzanti 'insulted Pope' in poofter devils gag


And? Was it funneh?

Quetz:

If the Pope's person is so inviolable, why does he drive around in an armoured car? Ha!


"And the POPE driving around in his little POPEMOBILE with three feet of bulletproof plexiglass...boy, THERE'S faith in action. 'Cause only god's spokesman would need three feet of bulletproof plexiglass."
-Bill Hicks

Other Comments by Colwyn Abernathy

61. Comment #246332 by notsobad on September 12, 2008 at 7:34 am

 avatar
"Inviolable"? Says who? Let's put it to the test in a country where free speech is sacred.

There is such a country?

Other Comments by notsobad

62. Comment #246340 by Logicel on September 12, 2008 at 7:51 am

 avatar20. Comment #245935 by Robert Maynard on September 11, 2008 at 2:44 pm
avataryikes, tough crowd.

No idea if you are referring to the fact that the moldy, mumbling minions of the pathetic papal prune don't get the joke or you are referring to the less than sympathetic comments on this thread. If the later, we do get the joke only too well, if the former, then you are right on the mark.

godspot #40, Thanks for the interesting info about the miller/murder linguistic sleight of hand.

Last but not least, prettygoodformonkeys, damg, if I was drinking something my LCD screen finally would have gotten a good wash. Your comment IMPELLED me to read others by you and my, you do write well and with attitude.

Other Comments by Logicel

63. Comment #246342 by liberalartist on September 12, 2008 at 7:57 am

 avatarIs Italy a part of Europe or the Middle East? I have begun to wonder.

Other Comments by liberalartist

64. Comment #246366 by Philster61 on September 12, 2008 at 8:29 am

Also noted the Cathoilc Church is maintaining its tradition of persecuting women.One wonders what the punishment wouldbe if it was a man that had said the offending comedic statement.

Other Comments by Philster61

65. Comment #246390 by Cartomancer on September 12, 2008 at 9:06 am

 avatarBrian English, Comment #31,

A.C. Grayling does tend to get a little carried away with the rhetoric when it comes to drawing parallels between early modern and current religious prohibitions, but that blog entry does treat him a little unfairly. It points out, quite correctly, that the attitude of the early modern church toward scientific research was more nuanced than traditionally assumed, and far from monolithic. But that doesn't alter the fact that Cardinal Bellarmine did, in point of fact, pursue Gallileo and Leonardo Bruni on heresy charges. He also corresponded with James I of England about the latter's theological errors, but obviously couldn't bring the full power of the inquisition to bear in that case (he just stuck to ridiculing James's poor grasp of Latin grammar). Copernicus' De orbis and Gallileo's Dialogus were placed on the index librorum prohibitorum in 1616 (and didn't come off until 1835!), which admittedly was eight years later than the discovery of the moons of Jupiter, but that only makes things worse! It wasn't a blatant refusal to even look at the scientific findings that led to the papal prohibitions, but a careful assessment of the evidence and a rejection of the conclusions it led to.

The issue, as Grayling intimates, was heliocentricity, not the existence of the Galilean moons. Those could have existed in a geocentric universe quite happily. Admittedly I fail to see quite how papal prohibitions against heliocentricity would drastically affect one's perception of the moons of Jupiter, but I can just about concieve that it might make people consider what they're for in the divine plan, whereas a heliocentrist would be more drawn to investigate how they got there.

Other Comments by Cartomancer

66. Comment #246482 by Quine on September 12, 2008 at 11:06 am

 avatarComment #246390 by Cartomancer:
Those could have existed in a geocentric universe quite happily.


Not if only the Earth has the magic pixie dust that keeps everything going around. That moons could go around something else indicates that the magic exists elsewhere as well. Not so good when the purpose of the entire universe is the little passion play going on down here.

Other Comments by Quine

67. Comment #246591 by Cartomancer on September 12, 2008 at 2:16 pm

 avatarActually, medieval thinking was quite at home with stuff orbiting around things that were not the earth. Martianus Capella posited that Mercury and Venus at least went round the sun, and the Ptolemaic system had all kinds of epicycles and equants for planets to circle around - centred on points in empty space rather than any specific celestial body.

Other Comments by Cartomancer

68. Comment #246841 by Quine on September 13, 2008 at 11:33 am

 avatarCarto, I do not stand in a position to argue with your evaluation of the zeitgeist of that time, however, on the astronomical part, the "points in empty space" you mention were called "Deferents" and were orbiting the Earth based on the central dogma of an unmoving Earth (could put in the Bible ref for unmoving Earth, here, if I wanted to bother to look it up).

The common perception in day to day life is that the Earth is flat and stationary, and that the Sun, Moon and stars go around it, and that the planets "wander" for "whatever" reason. In the past there has been no selection pressure to evolve a more realistic cosmic view (would have helped the dinosaurs if they had also had spacecraft), and I contend that the religious view that developed would have been disturbed, at least somewhat, by erosion of geocentricity due to moons orbiting other bodies. Of course, that is minor against the BIG impact of helocentricity, but people can't directly see the Earth go around the sun, whereas the telescope meant that you could just look, for yourself, at the moons of Jupiter. It is true that I can't give you evidence, but suggest you think about it from that viewpoint.

Other Comments by Quine
Reload Comments | Back to Top

More Comments: First | Previous | 1 2

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: