|
|
||||||||
|
Vatican newspaper analyzes successful TV series 'House'
![]() Dr. House
Related articles:
.- In an article titled “What if the Cynical Dr. House was Good?” L'Osservatore Romano reviews the book “Dr. House: Madness and Fascination of a Cult Series,” which examines the popular TV program “House” and how its “evil” protagonist conveys positive but often politically incorrect messages in support of life. “Here lies the genius of the creators of the series House: not taking it for granted but actually putting forth a decent ethical itinerary using words, pictures and even the human weaknesses that normally convey another kind of message,” the authors wrote. “Nevertheless, it must be noted: House is ‘evil’ and cynical. Thus we are asked to make an effort to overcome the impact of this negative conduct in order to understand the main message of the fictional story and not limit ourselves to just what we see, but rather to focus on the decisive point: change and the amazement of a cynical mind.” “House” was watched by 82 million people in 66 countries in 2008. Subscriber comments:
Published by: Maria Rrugg
Woodland Hills/CA/U.S.A 07/16/2009 07:16 PM EST
I watched this program once and never again. The reason being that it dealt with a young woman who was a drug user and had become pregnant. The entire episode was spent on "the doctor" persuading her not to burden herself by continuing her pregnancy and birthing her "meth baby", I believe he called it. It was the most openly anti-life fiction I have witnessed. I am really shocked by this review of the show.
Published by: Michael
Bridgwater, UK 07/15/2009 01:08 AM EST
The "House" programme is fascinating. I particularly remember one episode where a woman was beingh slowly killed by the child she was carrying.Naturally, House suggested an abortion, but the woman refused. Eventually, House operated on the child in the womb, which resolved the position. The key 'shot' being that of the hand of the child, reaching out of the womb, to grasp the finger of House.
Published by: Canadian
Canada 07/14/2009 01:09 PM EST
"They demonstrate the restrictive use of reason: they are no longer capable of calling a ‘child’ a child (only because it has not yet been born)"
1. who are 'they'? 2. A fetus isnt a child (not an abortion debate, but a clarification of language) - re: a butterfly is only a butterfly after it becomes one, not before. 3. House = Evil? why must everything that isnt exactly Christian always be evil, is there nothing inbetween? Just some things to consider ADD A COMMENT (Your e-mail will NOT be published):
* Thanks for your comments. The number of messages that can be online is limited. Length should not exceed 1500 characters. CNA reserves the right to edit messages for content and tone. Comments and opinions expressed by users do not necessarily reflect the opinions or beliefs of CNA. CNA will not publish comments with abusive language, insults or links to other pages. ADVERTISING |
Latest news:
09:07 pm | CNN poll finds 61% of Americans oppose government-funded abortions 08:02 pm | USCCB: Senate health care bill 'morally unacceptable' 05:54 pm | Mexican expert: Don’t believe false 'end of world' Mayan prophecies 02:36 pm | Expert explains upcoming battle over pro-abortion Senate health care bill 01:22 pm | Fourteenth Fort Hood victim forgotten Related news :
Supreme Court upholds tough fines for broadcasts of ‘fleeting’ expletives Media effort draws faithful back to Church Romanian Orthodox leader says television ‘poisons souls’ After Church complaints, German court calls MTV’s ‘Popetown’ ‘too dumb to be insulting’ Get CNA News on your email:
Resources
|
ADVERTISING
Place your ad here |
||||||
|
||||||||

