Can NPH just be in, I don't know, EVERYTHING? John C. Reilly, too. This made my day!

There's a possibility it will change a mind or two. Probably the bigger reason to do this is to strengthen the people who support gay marriage or lean toward acceptance, and make it less socially acceptable to be a bigot.

That was soooooooo funny.

*my two cents, I think calling "gay marriage" "marriage" is where the problem lies, marriage is a religious term, they should just use a secular term "civil union" with FULL rights as hetero married couples. The issue of religion would be taken out and people and the argument would be about equal rights.

I feel the same way about Neil Patrick Harris! I tell my boyfriend he's my "safe crush"-- not only will I never, ever meet him (unless by chance I get on a game show and he's my celebrity team mate...one can dream) but since he's gay it is utterly pointless. But fun.

Oh God that was good stuff. It won't change the minds of anyone who is anti-gay marriage, but it will keep our spirits up. Laughter heals all and knowing there are people out there that support you.

Neil Patrick Harris is adorable, though his voice at the beginning gave me odd Mr. Rogers flashbacks ...

Okay that's funny. And yeah, I got the Mr. Rogers flashback too jessie... don't feel bad.

I think this would be funny, but I only see it polarizing the people, and not changing anyones mind. Does anyone really believe that making fun of the way people came to their decision is going to help them change their mind?

I am thinking ahead to New Year's and I've almost certainly decided that my resolution will be to avoid all politcal commentary by actors/Hollywood-types.

Yeah, I may agree with it or not, but IMO when Hollywood gets involved they either trivialize or misstate the issue, or completely turn off the opposing side to any kind of helpful dialogue.

I'm not in favor of either of those things, so sorry NPH. (Though my husband did make me suffer though Harold and Kumar last weekend, and he was the ONLY good thing about the movie - HILARIOUS.)

I love Neil Patrick Harris!

hilarious! i love rashida jones and jack black.

I dunno, I like Mister Rogers too...so as far as I'm concerned it's win-win.

kranky, I actually think Hollywood has made a huge difference in the lives of gay people and especially gay teenagers. Most of the time when someone faces discrimination they can turn to their families, for gay youth it isn't always the case. Seeing people publically accepting who they are and supporting something important to you can provide much needed emotional support. It may seem silly or trivial, but it does help. I imagine that it might work for general political messages as well, if your someone who is surrounded by people who feel differently then you do. These videos, I think, were never meant to present the issues as a whole, but rally support them by getting people who already believe those ways to become active.

Jessie-

You have a point about giving gay teenagers a sense of community. However, I do not think that Hollywood has be at all helpful about changing the attitudes of people who are truly, truly homophobic.

But at the end of the day, I am really tired of hearing Hollywood espouse about political things. I know my stances, and it will take facts and research to change my opinion - not a funny gimic. In these uncertain economic times, I just want Hollywood to entertain me.

As another example - how do you feel about Mel Gibson after he went off on his anti-Jew tangent? Personally, he's ruined Lethal Weapon for me.

I guess I was never a Mel Gibson fan. I think he's bonkers, but I guess I don't associate celebrities with the characters the play in movies. I love Prince's work even though he's said some things recently I don't like. Making movies and singing is their work. I can appreciate the work without liking the person who made it. I mean if they slaughtered babies I wouldn't financially support their work, but other then that I'm cool. Yeah I see the entertainer and the person as two separate things. Maybe thats just from growing up in LA. Also comedians don't count, they've always blurred the lines.

Yeah - I could not believe what Prince said, but then he did rename himself and tatoo his face. We could probably put him in the bonkers category as well unfortunately.

I guess my main problem is that I don't really want to know about the person playing the person in the movie. Let is all be fantasy and entertainment, but then I've never been to LA.

Another example - Harrison Ford when he got his chest hair waxed to show how the earth feels about deforestation. Yeah.

I guess I think its unfair to ask that someone stop being a person with opinions just because of their job. If I get involved publicly no one knows or cares who I am. I don't think that anonymity gives me more of a right then a celebrity. I mean really its our psychotic culture and us as a whole, that gives entertainers so much weight and attention here, not the individual entertainer them self.

I guess living in LA, especially off of Sunset, I had a friend in the business and "saw" celebrities. I guess I've always seen them as people . Not idols to live my life by or figures to tear down in blogs.

Ah well, agree to disagree then!

It is not going to change anyone's mind, it is making fun of people who made that decision, that is not going to make them see or understand the other side of things.
Mocking Jesus and the Bible is in no way shape or form going to change someone's mind, just strengthen what they think already.

Larelm, I don't think they're mocking Jesus and the Bible, just presenting inconvenient truths. A lot of people get mad and hate to be wrong, but that isn't the same as mocking.

@ gay marriages will save the economy!!!

I don't know whether it will change anyone's mind or not. But I find it offensive, Jack Black portraying Christ in a ridiculous manner.

I think this is funny but people aren't going to change their minds. If you think this way, you find many reasons to rationalize why you are right- no matter how wrong it may be. Unless that person is directly affected by this and realizes how ridiculous and sad Prop 8 is, they are not going to change their mind.

Having Jack Black as Jesus? Yes, that is mocking. Let's depict our Lord and Savior, as a fat, funny man, who is mocking lines in the Bible?
LOL, also it is not inconvenient truths either, Christians know that.

This is not going to change anyone's mind, it is just for enjoyment purposes.

This video is phenomenal!!!

I dont know how it can change peoples mind but it was f*cking hilarious!

Wow. Not only was that offensive, it used mockery to make a point with completely misleading details about the bible. Anyone who follows Christianity knows the difference between the Old Testament and New Testament. This is clearly marketed toward those who are ignorant about religion. Without opening a whole can of worms, the point of Jesus being crucified was so that we wouldn't have to "stone our wife" or whatever other nonsense he said. I'm all for love and acceptance, and completely agree that it's terrible to deny rights of others, but I didn't find this funny at all. Unfortunately, there are a lot of funny actors in that sketch that I will look at differently now. I wish they knew more about what they were making fun of before participating in that. It probably would have been much more tasteful (and intelligent)

Very well said tiger.

That was fantastic. What a group they got to do this!

My thoughts exactly, HF. Also makes me wish Andy Richter was still on Conan.

I love andy!

I can't wait to see this! it sounds hilarious!

I totally agree with tigerbelle.. this video mocks the exaggerated and twisted "marketing" of some Prop 8 proponents while doing the exact same thing itself. If the audience doesn't understand the basic gist of the Old/New Testaments, this certainly only helps to trivialize it. Lots of funny people in this video, I just don't think it promotes much understanding whatsoever. Surely there is another way to get this important point across.

Tigerbelle: Maybe I'm confused, but isn't the oft-quoted passage on homosexuality in Leviticus? I think the point of picking and choosing is well made.

I love it and it's completely true, well, my Repeal Prop 8 sign arrived in the mail today and it's in the front yard now, we can't change bigots, but we can fight for our rights.

Palesugar is it ok to pick and choose from the Old Testament silly, while publicly acknowledging the New Testament. There is no Creation without Genesis, so both are very much used. The Bible would be incomplete without both and any Christian worth their salt should have read both.

Either way they still think it is funny that they find it acceptable to make legal decisions based on personal faith. Frankly I love videos like these. They entertain me and keep me optimistic until equality does happen and it will. Civil right issues are inevitable, it's just a matter of whether I'll be alive when it happens or not.

"Anyone who follows Christianity knows the difference between the Old Testament and New Testament. This is clearly marketed toward those who are ignorant about religion. Without opening a whole can of worms, the point of Jesus being crucified was so that we wouldn't have to "stone our wife" or whatever other nonsense he said."

It is in the Old Testament
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
Leviticus, 18. 22

If Christians can quote the Old Testament, then why shouldn't anyone else be able to?
Though this doesn't say much about lesbians, so can I get married?

I may be off the wall here..but for some reason I keep asking myself this question.
If God sent Jesus because he didn't think the laws he made before (old T.) applied well into human society..how many centuries ago?...then I wonder who God is sending now?

No one is saying it's not okay to quote any part of the bible. It's simply implying that today's Christians are picking and choosing what to follow, when it is the understanding of a "Christian" that we no longer have to sacrifice things or abide by the severe rules that those did in the times of the Old Testament because of Jesus Christ. I just think the argument is misconstrued. The silly thing to me is that all Christians are being targeted in the Prop 8 situation, when I know plenty of Christians who believe in equality for all (regardless of sexual preference), including myself. I'm confident in my spirituality, so I don't expect you to understand, and it's totally fine with me that others are so excited about this skit. I'm entitled to my feelings about it, too, and frankly, it made me sad.

I thought it was funny. but not mind changing funny

Mommaof2," may be off the wall here..but for some reason I keep asking myself this question.
If God sent Jesus because he didn't think the laws he made before (old T.) applied well into human society..how many centuries ago?...then I wonder who God is sending now?"

I'll take a stab at that question:

God sent Christ not because the "law didn't apply" but because it did and does. Because we could never measure up and God promised to fulfill the law by providing a Savior. That Savior is Jesus. The law as detailed in the Old Testament shows us that we are not and can never be perfect. We cannot be God, no matter how much we think we know better. In the book of Romans the Apostle Paul talks a lot about the purpose of the Mosaic Law and how it points us to the ultimate fulfillment in Christ.
God sent Christ--who is God in human form to be the sacrifice for our sins. We see the example in the Old Testament of sacrifices of "pure" or "unblemished" animals to atone for sins. Christ was the only true sacrifice because He was the only pure, unblemished human. Through the sacrifice of One who is pure we have the opportunity to have a relationship with Him. That is why Christ was sent.
In Matthew 5:17 Jesus says, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

I hope that helps with your question.

Jessiebanana, you can marry a goat for all I care. It would be your decision and would not affect me in the least. As deeply personal as sexual preference is, so is religion and spirituality. In my personal opinion, it's not funny or hilarious or witty to make fun of either.

As for shellfish and stoning, Christians are not bound by Old Testament Law. Jesus retained certain laws and we are bound by them because He is God and has the authority of God. Jesus fulfilled the old law and became the New Covenant between God and people. He made it easier to have a relationship with Him through Jesus. The bible also warns of a time when God will be moked and people will be lovers of themselves. Christians do not pick and choose the laws to obey.

The New Testament states that homosexuality, along with other things, is indeed a sin. Sin seperates us from a relationship with God. That's all He's ever wanted. And people reject Him because they don't want anyone telling them what to do.

Romans 1:26-27, 1Corinthians 6:9-10 is in the New Testament about homosexuality. Also God does not hate sinners, that's why he sent Jesus. Jesus didn't pick riteous friends, he picked ungodly friends to redeem.

If you keep reading 1Cor.6:11 God gives hope to sinners. Only if they keep rejecting Him will he judge and punish them. God is patient. He also doesn't want Christians or anyone else to hate one another. But we are to hate the sin, just not the sinner; we are to pray for them and love them because we are all God's children and we ALL sin. He doesn't want any to perish. He's a patient God, but that patience will not last very long.

"I actually think Hollywood has made a huge difference in the lives of gay people and especially gay teenagers. Most of the time when someone faces discrimination they can turn to their families, for gay youth it isn't always the case."

Great point.

If gay marriage gets to the Supreme Court, it will be upheld. Precedent was set by the interracial marriage case of Loving v. Virginia. The Supreme Court said:

"Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State."

Funny