XPost: rec.arts.drwho 
 From: not@home.com 
  
 "The Doctor"  wrote in message 
 news:d9acmd$hv3$10@gallifrey.nk.ca... 
 > In article , 
 > Ian Salsbury  wrote: 
 > > 
 > >"FairPlay"  wrote in message 
 > >news:42b844da$0$290$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com... 
 > >> 
 > >> "The Doctor"  wrote in message 
 > >> news:d99cv9$ppi$4@gallifrey.nk.ca... 
 > >>> In article <42b80cf8$0$304$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com>, 
 > >>> FairPlay  wrote: 
 > >>> > 
 > >>> >"The Doctor"  wrote in message 
 > >>> >news:d98vnj$g4a$16@gallifrey.nk.ca... 
 > >>> >> In article , 
 > >>> >> Ian Salsbury  wrote: 
 > >>> >> >>>> Still, do you rate RTD's participation in DW as good as 
 > >>> >> >>>> a producer's stint in the BBC Jerry Springer opera? 
 > >>> >> >>>> 
 > >>> >> >>> 
 > >>> >> >>>Eh? 
 > >>> >> >>> 
 > >>> >> >>> 
 > >>> >> >>> 
 > >>> >> >>> 
 > >>> >> >> 
 > >>> >> >> Repeat, do you think RTD's participation is as good as the 
 producer 
 > >>> >> >> who made the Jerry Springer Opera the BBC was about to air? 
 > >>> >> > 
 > >>> >> >I can`t see what your`re on about here still. The Jerry Springer 
 > >>> >> >Opera 
 > >>> >was 
 > >>> >> >aired in the BBC, got about 3 or 4 million viewers, generally very 
 > >>> >positive 
 > >>> >> >reviews ( it had been a hugely successful west end production ) 
 and a 
 > >> few 
 > >>> >> >hundred religious nutters threw their toys out of the pram. The 
 vast 
 > >>> >> >majority of people saw no reason to be offended by it whatsoever. 
 > >> Exactly 
 > >>> >> >what this has to do with RTD`s involvement in Dr Who is beyond me. 
 > >>> >> >The 
 > >>> >> >public reaction to Dr Who has been overwhelmingly positive, a few 
 > >> people 
 > >>> >> >have complained it was too scary for the timeslot ( just like the 
 > >>> >> >good 
 > >>> >old 
 > >>> >> >days! ) but that was about it. 
 > >>> >> > 
 > >>> >> > 
 > >>> >> > 
 > >>> >> 
 > >>> >> Still let us help FP.  The Christians were rotesting 
 > >>> >> against  the defamation of religion, namely 
 > >>> >> Chritstianity. 
 > >>> >> 
 > >>> >> I wonder if FP would equate RTD to such a producer. 
 > >>> > 
 > >>> > 
 > >>> >No. 
 > >>> > 
 > >>> > 
 > >>> 
 > >>> Why?  AFAIK, the vility in JS is as bad as the innuendo in this 
 season's 
 > >> DW. 
 > >> 
 > >> I think you have missed one of the fundamental reasons for my 
 objections. 
 > >> Even though I have repeatedly laboured it. 
 > >> 
 > >> The queer/adult stuff bothers me not at all in and of itself. 
 > >> 
 > >> It is the fact that he has hijacked a childrens programme to promote 
 his 
 > >> propaganda. 
 > >> 
 > >> Geddit? 
 > >> 
 > >> Do I care how many times !@#$ is said in an production exclusively 
 aimed 
 > >> at 
 > >> adults? 
 > >> No. 
 > > 
 > >Well, I would agree with you if I thought that Dr Who HAD been hijacked 
 to 
 > >promote homosexuality. If there were scenes or character`s that were 
 > >actively preaching to the audience that they should become gay than I 
 would 
 > >understand your point. But to have a character that was clearly gay but 
 > >otherwise perfectly "normal" - what`s the problem? At the end of the day 
 > >someone is either gay or they`re not. Someone could blabber on all day 
 about 
 > >the joys and wonder`s of sleeping with another man but at the end of it 
 all 
 > >I still wouldn`t fancy another man`s naked arse. This "promote his 
 > >propaganda" line you keep using is laughable. 
 > > 
 > > 
 > > 
 > 
 > And FP is inconsistent. 
  
  
 No I'm not. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)