He performed his “historic achievement”, as The Blaze called it, in the middle of the National mall, in front of the Washington Monument, before an audience of at least 10,000 people, plus various tourists passing by with their families.
The Reason Rally, held in the shadow of the Washington Monument this weekend, has been heralded as historic for many reasons. But the “largest gathering of the secular movement in world history” might have just hit the record books again: for dropping the most f-bombs through loudspeakers on the National Mall.
His “Pope Song”, of course, offended the Catholics passing by with their children, as they toured the Nation’s capital Saturday afternoon.
The major offense came from Minchin’s performance of the ‘Pope Song’, which includes lyrics about Catholics:
“As that motherf–king, power-hungry
In the stupid f–king hat.”
WARNING! VIDEO CONTAINS STRONG LANGUAGE! (In case you do not already realize that by now)
This not only caused the Catholics offense, but it also caused debate among atheists. Some atheist parents recalled that the Reason Rally was billed as “family friendly”. Others blogged, with what appears as a play on words, that if Minchin’s song passes for reason, then atheists are f****d.
However, the blogger rants about Minchin’s song.
Well, wasn’t that delightful? How much of that did you actually watch before you turned it off? All reasonable people of faith, or without it, ought to be offended by this. This is not how secularists act, nor is it in any way becoming of secularism. It is, however, how liberals act, whether they be religious or not – but especially if they are not. Richard Dawkins ought to be made to answer whether he found Minchin’s performance worthy of atheism, if the vulgarity (literally every other word) is a prime example of how real secularists act (it is not), and just how much “reason” went into that little “ditty” about the Pope.
The blogger ends their rant by saying, “Secularism needs Tim Minchin as much as Christianity needs the Westboro Baptist Church or David Koresh.” Maybe he missed the humour in Minchin’s song or something, but this seems almost like what happened concerning Brother Sam at Skepticon, minus the sign by a Christian. Such things could make one wonder why one would go to an atheist event, if they are going to complain about one performer, whose show has foul language. There is at least one at every atheist event, despite not appealing to everyone in attendance or eavesdropping.
William Hamby of the Atlanta Atheist Examiner said that blasphemy was exactly the point of the Reason Rally. Blasphemy and humour was exactly Minchin's intent, during his performance, just as it is for Brother Sam.
However, there are also some good arguments that it was a three minute microcosm of everything the Reason Rally stands for. The first, and most powerful argument is the (ahem) explicit message in the song itself. The edited version goes like this: "If you are more offended by all the profanity in this song than the fact that the Catholic Church facilitates and covers up priests raping children, then there is something very wrong with you."
I must agree with Hamby, because Minchin’s was just one performance, out of several, and even he pointed out that the words “family friendly” are Christian terms and that cursing is a part of life. The fact is, you cannot shelter children from the real world of words. They will hear these words eventually and if a parent wishes to limit their child’s vocabulary, then they need to talk to the child and tell them why certain words are not acceptable.
Another offensive word, to many people, is the N-word, which both my sons’ father, who is Black, and I both told our sons over the years why this word is not acceptable to us. It did not matter that we are divorced. We could both still talked to our sons about why we do not appreciate that word. The same goes for the F-word, so “family friendly” or not, I think it is the parents’ duty to tell their children why they do not like certain words.
Even Hamby singled out Christian parents in his remarks about “naughty words”, that it is the parents’ responsibility to remove their child from what they object to and some did.
Christian moral judgment against some words as naughty are within their rights to take their children away from Tim's performance. (Some did. And that's fine.) But calls for either censorship or adherence to Christian definitions of "Family Friendly" defeat the whole purpose of the rally, which is to put an end to superstition as a measure of what we allow in society.
However, Hamby was not encouraging anyone to use foul language all the time and neither am I, but these are just two debates triggered by Minchin’s song. I do think the song is funny and helps some people vent their anger.