Bart Simpson, Scientologist
p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- Will Fox , owners of The Simpsons, sue Nancy Cartwright, aka Bart Simpson, and the Cult of Scientology?
For copyright violation?
Cartwright is a Scientologist and she, “recorded a message in the voice of the iconic animated character promoting the controversial quasi-religious organization,” says the live feed, going on:
“Cartwright recorded the pitch … for a robocall to boost turn-out for a Scientology event at the organization’s Hollywood center. Though she takes care to identify herself by her real name and not her character, she uses the Bart voice at a few points in the recording.
However, “This is not authorized by us,” the story has said “Simpsons” executive producer Al Jean declaring.
“The Simpsons’ does not, and never has, endorsed any religion, philosophy or system of beliefs any more profound than Butterfinger bars.”
(Thanks, Marc 
)
the live feed – ‘Bart Simpson’ records Scientology ad; producer responds, January 29, 2009
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It`s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
January 29th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Would you be surprised is the creators or Fox didn’t sue?
I wouldn’t be surprised.
January 29th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
I don’t think i want my kids watching “The Simpsons” anymore.
January 29th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
âI donât think i want my kids watching âThe Simpsonsâ anymore.â
Itâs not the producersâ fault, but I know what you mean. Bart is no longer Bart.
Cheers!
January 29th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Scientologists in my home? Oh really!! Not anymore…
My family is now vchipped against Bart Simpson, which is a real shame because my kids love the show. That being said, so are most of the television sets in my neighborhood as of noon today. We parents had a meeting over coffee and have decided that it would be best if we no longer watch The Simpsons until the show’s producers decide that it is time to clean up their own house.
We neither want nor will tolerate Scientology in our homes in ANY way. Not Bijou Phillips or Tom Cruise on “The View” trying to act normal while telling the world he knows medicine better than doctors do. Celebrity isn’t a license to push madness on children, and we’re going to protect ours. We’re on the agenda for the next PTA meeting, and will be discussing this matter and Scientology / Applied Scholastics / Narcanon / Volunteer Minsters who show up at disasters like 9/11, Katrina, and every other horrid thing you can think of to exploit tragedy.
We realize if something bad happened here, those horrible vultures might well show up. Our community is going to be prepared now, thanks to Ms. Cartwright. Bart Simpson crossing over to promote a group like Scientology was just too dangerous for us to do nothing. Protect yourself and your families; get the facts about why a rational parent would come on a website and say such strange things about something that seems so small and trivial.
These people want to absolutely DESTROY the psychiatry, psychology, and social work professions. They want an end to mental healthcare as we know it and to substitute their own special brand of insanity instead, justifying it in a way that translates to “if we’re all insane together, in the same way, then that’ll be great!”
Madness… sheer madness. Get informed.
http://www.whyaretheydead.net
January 29th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
simpsons has been going downhill for 10yrs and this kinda shit just proves it. how dare she use her status in such a away. i agree. i will not be watching the show until someone grows a pair and sues the cult
January 29th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
But does bart obey the DNCL, that is the question
*wonders off*
January 29th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
I wonder what butterfingers thinks about their advertising vehicle also promoting a cult whose members just act crazier by the day.
January 29th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
Well that just ruins the Simpsons for me. I don’t think I will be able to watch it any more….
January 29th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Since the creators and Fox allow his voice and image for a cult with no problems, maybe we can use Bart and his voice telling people how the MPAA is out to screw people?
January 29th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
now I think I will start a new religion called Butterfingertology.
we believe in avoiding Scientologists and laughing at them making asses of themselves on national tv…
January 29th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
Okay, I just have to wade into this one:
1. “Concerned”: You’re either faking (which I genuinely hope), or you’re exactly like those idiotic Southern Baptists who boycott Disney because the company dares not to completely ostracize same-sex couples. Actually, you’re WORSE, because not only are you being completely intolerant toward ANYTHING scientology-related (Cartwright), but you’re boycotting a TV show that had absolutely NOTHING TO DO WITH IT, simply because Cartwright works there.
This isn’t going to do shit about shit unless you happen to be a Neilsen family, anyway.
2. Contrary to what you might believe, childishly bandying about the word “cult” in regard to an organization you happen not to approve of is, quite simply, evil. “Cult” is nothing more than a smear-word used by the good folks at the “Cult Awareness Network” to demonize groups they don’t like. If the Church of scientology as an organization has done things you don’t approve, here’s a newsflash: that still says nothing about whether scientology DOCTRINE has anything valid to offer somebody.
So before we all gleefully descend to the level of blacklisting simply on the basis of “are you, or have you ever been a member” type bullshit, let’s all pull our collective heads out of our asses and THINK here, M’kay?
What if Cartwright had done a pro-Christian thing?
Yeah, this one annoyed me. No, I’m not a scientologist. I just believe in religious freedom.
idiots.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:13 pm
Henry, good point.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
Hey Henry:
Hereâs how the Wikipedia defines âcultâ [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult ]:
A Cult always refers to a cohesive social group devoted to beliefs or practices that the surrounding population considers to be outside the mainstream. In common or popular usage, âcultâ has a positive connotation for groups of art, music, writing, fiction,] and fashion devotees (see Cult following), but a negative connotation for new religious, extreme political, questionable therapeutic, and pyramidal business groups.
Thatâs how I see it, and thatâs what I intend it to mean it when I say the Cult of Scientology.
Another (one of seven) definition [ http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cult ] expresses it like this: âa religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.â
Iâd say that sums it up nicely as well. Elron is long dead and buried, but â¦
Cheers!
January 29th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
piss off henry you nutjob. spade is a spade and a cults a cult by definition alone
January 29th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Christianity was a cult sect of judaism. Which leads me to believe that actually, every religion was at some point in time a cult. Though as far as I’m concerned, all religions are cults including islam and christianity.
January 29th, 2009 at 11:08 pm
I have to admit my daughter Emma and I just watched The Simpsons. I admit I’ve also watched movies starring John Travolta and Tom Cruise and enjoyed them.
No point in throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Cheers!
January 30th, 2009 at 12:46 am
Aargh!
Jon, WordPress just ate 3 of my attempts at posting!
I will try again with this one.
@ Henry: I believe Scientology is now the owner of the Cult Awareness Network, although this was not always the case.
January 30th, 2009 at 3:05 am
clash of the villains and bart becomes the victim.
I don’t think this completely ruins simpsons for me though. Hell, Fox has been an asshat-company for years.
And as for the religion… If the series itself starts promoting the religion (and not just one of its crank actors), then that would be grounds for switching channels. Until then, maybe in a year or two we can look forward to Matt Groening Chef-ing the little brat and sending him on a ride with the super adventure club.
On the other hand it does still leave a bad taste in my mouth. idk, this whole incident is filled with stupid.
January 30th, 2009 at 3:10 am
^ I didn’t mean to make it sound like I hate the character by any means. I just meant if this kind of stuff continues it could potentially be really damaging to the series.
January 30th, 2009 at 3:10 am
Henry, the Cult Awareness Network is owned by Scientology now. There is the new Scientology
CAN and the old CAN that was affiliated with the daughter of the US Congressman who was
killed at Jamestoen in Guyana. The old CAN was sued into oblivion by dozens of
lawsuits by Scientology lawyers, after that was accomplished , one of the members of the
Heavens Gate cult(those people who committed mass suicide) posted a letter thanking Scientology.
January 30th, 2009 at 6:20 am
“2. Contrary to what you might believe, childishly bandying about the word âcultâ in regard to an organization you happen not to approve of is, quite simply, evil. âCultâ is nothing more than a smear-word used by the good folks at the âCult Awareness Networkâ to demonize groups they donât like. If the Church of scientology as an organization has done things you donât approve, hereâs a newsflash: that still says nothing about whether scientology DOCTRINE has anything valid to offer somebody.”
Good folks at “Cult Awereness Network” eh? You mean the organisation that has been under ownership of CoS since the 90’s? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_Awareness_Network#.22New_CAN.22
January 30th, 2009 at 7:03 am
Sorry Henry, but if you believe that ‘freedom of religion’ is an absolute and unchallengeable principle, then it is in fact you who is the idiot here. I suppose you think that if someone started a religion in which one worshiped the gods by beating and robbing elderly ladies, then they should be immune from prosecution, given that they’re only practicing the tenets of their faith? Scientology is at heart a dangerous totalitarian organization, the core principles of which are completely at odds with those of any free, democratic society. Visit both pro-Scientology and anti-Scientology websites (i.e. consider the evidence from both sides), and you will realize very quickly that the reaction to this recruitment tactic is fully justified.
January 30th, 2009 at 8:03 am
@ Aargh!
“Jon, WordPress just ate 3 of my attempts at posting!”
Nope. I get a ton of stuff from Scientologists for posts like this, so the word is flagged for moderation,
Cheers!
January 30th, 2009 at 10:45 am
Nancy has found such success with the Church of Scientology. It’s nice to see something nice to be said about them for a change. I guess they are not all bad.
I am not a Scientology member btw.
January 30th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_Awareness_Network
I love how none of those mentioning CAN actually bothered to mention that the original organization was every bit as oppressive and violent toward those they “deprogrammed” as any of the so-called “cults” they disliked.
Also, the only person to have any valid points (other than me, of course) in this was the one who stated that Christianity began as a “cult group” of Judaism.
So now we’ve fallen to the level where it’s considered intelligent and moral to boycott something solely on the basis that it happens to involve somebody whose belief system we don’t like — NOT whether it’s a direct “mouthpiece” for an organization (like the programs put out by “Focus on the Family” for example), but merely if one of it’s employees happens to be affiliated with such an organization.
Great. We deserve what we get, politically, if we’ve gotten to this point.
So I guess due to some bad organizations and violent history, you’ll be “boycotting” everything which happens to employ Christians?
Have fun “boycotting” everything made in the last several centuries. I’m pretty sure somebody at the food-packing plant might have adherened to a religion you don’t approve.
Moreover, if this involved ANY other group (Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, whatever), I seriously doubt this would be considered newsworthy.
Instead, it would be viewed as a hate-screed.
Don’t you just love double-standards?
The Original CAN got smashed to bits because they violated some guy’s civil rights during their “deprogramming” bullshit, and the CHurch of Scientology took over the name. But hey, I guess the fact that they own the name means we shouldn’t inquire into what the original organization did, right?
Whatever you may think of Scientology as a religion, or the Church of Scientology as an organization, boycotting something simply because one of it’s members happens to be a scientologist is ridiculous to the point of outright evil.
I guess Jon should probably give us all advance warning of HIS religious beliefs, so those of us bigoted/closed-minded enough to do so, can know whether to “boycott” him or not.
idiots.
January 30th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
There’s at least three topics that are being combined here:
1. The doctrines of Scientology/dianetics
2. The Church of Scientology as an organization (how it enacts policy, etc.)
3. Cartwright using the Bart Simpson voice in a Scientology-related promo.
Now, some people here seem to believe that the CONTENT of scientology and dianetics is inextricably linked to what the CHurch of Scientology does organizationally. Therefore, since Scientology says wacky stuff about Xenu etc., and the Church of Scientology does bad things as an organization, one should boycott places that employ scientologists who are advocate for their beliefs.
Does this hold true for ANY OTHER religion or viewpoint?
Boycotts are usually used against organizations that are GENUINE propaganda-fronts, NOT simply on the basis that somebody adhering to an unpopular viewpoint happens to work there.
Somebody compile a list of every business that employs a scientologist. I mean, if you do this boycott shit, you wanna do it RIGHT — make it very clear that to even ASSOCIATE oneself with the dreaded, evil Scientologists means ostracism for you and your business.
Let’s make it even easier to “boycott” them: let’s have a law saying that Scientologists must wear an identifying symbol at all times. That way you know up front, so you can spit on them when they pass you in the street.
As I said, this is how it starts: a unpopular segment of the populace singled out for “special treatment” because somebody happens to disapprove of their beliefs. I guess “concerned” and the other good folks here wouldn’t let their children associate with Muslims, simply because there are Muslim organizations that engage in violence etc.
Brilliant.
January 30th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Funny how Bart Simpson can cause a ruckus. But isn’t that what he always does?
January 31st, 2009 at 4:21 am
Oh Concerned, you’re so funny. That made my day.
January 31st, 2009 at 4:43 am
“No, Iâm not a scientologist. I just believe in religious freedom”
Ya! Right! My Butt! What a pack of liers these scientologists!
If the parasites operating the cult of scientology did not have fair game, did not try to supress the freedom of speach on internet did not rip off people and victimize children, if they did not try to fuck up our governement and our justice system just like the recording industry is doing we would leve them alone.
So now if the parasites in charge of this cults want people to leave them alone they know what they have to do.
Otherwise MIscariage sorry I mean Miscaridge and his lieutnant will hand up in prison soon.
Mark my world scientologist!
By the way If I was you instead of paying a fortune to these worms or work like a slaves for them I would joint one of these free scientologists group! This one we leave them alone.
February 1st, 2009 at 8:52 am
As much as i would love to see midgetvidge (lolwut) get his cult sued again… (Seriously, they are like apple… a new lawsuit each week), im on the side of scilon this time. She merely used her voice, and as you said, she was careful NOT to use the name Bart.
Now, if youll excuse me, i feel dirty, and need to go get this “i-defended-scientology” filth off me
February 6th, 2009 at 9:19 am
I wondeer how many people use Scientology as a networking organization to get their next movie/job. If that’s where all the mover and shakers are at, why not? Nancy probably figures, “this Simpson thing won’t last forever…better get my face out there.” and joins up.
She probably never dreamed the show would last as long as it has.
BTW, sure she can get sued for using the voice. Contractual agreement.