Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Games Government Entertainment Politics

Texas Governor As E3 Keynote Speaker Causes Strife 272

Zonk pointed out a post on Joystiq highlighting a recent tantrum thrown by the ESA. Apparently the ESA didn't appreciate the framing GamePolitics chose to use for a story about E3's Keynote speaker and Texas Governor, Rick Perry. GamePolitics continues to call Perry into question as a choice for keynote speaker, saying: "While there are surely many Christians among E3 attendess, there are just as surely many who aren't. Aside from the fact that Perry was a bizarre keynote choice from the get-go, his divisive comments indicate that the ESA should rescind the offer. We have to ask again: why is E3 2008 being politicized? The answer, we suspect, has much to do with embattled ESA boss Michael Gallagher."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Texas Governor As E3 Keynote Speaker Causes Strife

Comments Filter:
  • Rick Perry? Bleeh (Score:5, Informative)

    by Dan667 ( 564390 ) on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @06:13PM (#23644647)
    If you need to have your drug or toll road rail-roaded through the state legislature at the expense of hard working tax payers for no community gain, then you call Rick Perry. I can only imagine what conservative or money pocket lining initiative Rick Perry is up to in speaking at E3
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @06:47PM (#23645019)
    Oddly enough, given how much whining there is from the Christian contingent on this one, it turns out that indeed, you are allowed to have a nativity scene in your privately owned store. If your customers don't like it, they're free to go elsewhere. Even the ACLU agrees with this, and has defended it in court.

    What you aren't allowed to do is put one in, for example, city hall. Because that's public space, intended to be used by and represent all people, even those who don't happen to share your religion.

    Amazing the not so subtle distinctions the "Christians are being persecuted" crowd likes to plaster over to try to come off as victims.
  • Re:So (Score:5, Informative)

    by tthomas48 ( 180798 ) on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @06:59PM (#23645133) Homepage
    No one is trying to exclude Perry from going to E3. They're simply point out that his endorsement of an extremist preacher make him a rather bizarre choice of E3 keynote speaker.

    The article is quite bizarre though, since they could point out one of the many things that have made him incredibly unpopular in his home state (and led him to almost be defeated by a ridiculously underfunded Democrat in a red state). He's a completely incompetent governor who's best known in his state for trying to push through mandatory vaccines for his drug company friends, toll roads for his transportation friends, or vetoing bills he'd pledged to support only after the legislature had adjourned and could do nothing about it.

    Which I suppose might make him a great E3 keynote speaker. Maybe they have a long history of incompetents.

  • by Charles Dodgeson ( 248492 ) * <> on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @07:10PM (#23645231) Homepage Journal

    My illustrious governor wants to be Vice President. Although he is a Christian Conservative, he was a backer of Guilliani when it looked like Guilliani would be the nominee and would need a southern conservative as a running mate. Of course he quickly swtiched to supporting McCain as soon as that became convenient. Within Texas, Perry's political ambitions are no secret.

    Right now, Perry is trying to raise his national profile among conservative Republicans. Giving a "controversial" speech where is pushes Christian values is exactly the kind of thing he wants to build up the reputation he needs.

    The best thing that could happen to Perry is if he got ridiculed by liberals for wearing his Christianity on his sleeve. We hare giving he exactly what he wants.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @07:15PM (#23645303)
    Actually, you can't necessarily put a nativity scene up in a workplace without risking a lawsuit.
    Not by your customers (who are free to just f*** off) but by your employees.

    You can be claimed to be forcing your religion on employees which is actionable. It isn't as cut and dry as the city hall example, since no one would have standing to sue if you were the only employee. But it could be claimed that the employee's right to a nonhostile workplace overrides your right to freedom of religous expression.

    (And speaking of rights - Captcha: tortures.)
  • by Charles Dodgeson ( 248492 ) * <> on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @07:19PM (#23645329) Homepage Journal

    Had it been a two way race between him and the Democratic candidate, Perry still would have won. So I don't think that that 39% really means that much. On the other hand, Perry is widely disliked. Although Christian conservatives have supported him in the past, it has become clear to them that Perry's political ambitions far outweigh any principles he might hold. After all, his initial support of requiring a cervical cancer vaccine [] showed to people like me that he can be bribed into doing the right thing even if it pisses off the Christian Right.

    Personally, I voted Kinky [].

  • by distilledprodigy ( 946341 ) on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @07:27PM (#23645413)
    Saying that "61% of Texas Voters don't want him either" is completely disingenuous. It would be more accurate to say that "61% of the Texas voters didn't vote for him.", which only means that 61% wouldn't choose him as their first pick.

    Using your logic, 71% of the Texas voters didn't want Bell, 86% didn't want Friedman and 85% didn't want Strayhorn. If you were completely honest, you'd mention tat Strayhorn was a Republican and decided to run as an Independant because she felt she couldn't defeat Perry in the primaries. So it is likely that a large % of the vote for Strayhorn would have gone to Perry. By the same token, Friedman was moderate, but more conservative than liberal-- so some of his 14% would have gone to Perry as well.

    The problem, as you mentioned, is that the election is a plurality... This is why we need to adopt a voting system that allows a voter to weigh candidates.
  • by Moridineas ( 213502 ) on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @07:40PM (#23645549) Journal

    After all, his initial support of requiring a cervical cancer vaccine [] showed to people like me that he can be bribed into doing the right thing even if it pisses off the Christian Right.
    Kinda scary when people consider forcing people to inject themselves with chemicals "the right thing." Whatever happened to freedom? Silly question..

    I'm serious--left or right--one wants to control your bedroom and read your email, and the other one wants to control your pocketbook take care of you (and if you don't like it, screw off). Meh. I would have voted Kinky too had I lived in Texas!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @08:07PM (#23645845)
    This stems from a headline in reference to Tex. Gov. Perry acknowledging the statement "Non-Christians will burn in Hell".

    Uh, that's one of the core principles of pretty much every variation of the Christian faith. How is that controversial? Yeah, it might be "inflammatory", but not controversial.

    Pretty much anyone that identifies themself as a strident Christian should have no problem with that statement.

    As a non-Christian Atheist, the proper response is "Well, since I don't believe in Hell, it doesn't really matter, now does it?"
  • by AaronW ( 33736 ) on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @08:10PM (#23645865) Homepage
    Actually according to the 1st commandment it is acceptable. It says basically "Thou shalt have no other gods before me.", meaning that you can worship other gods, but that he is the formost or main god and any others are lesser gods. Many people disregard the "before me." but it is there.
  • by Qzukk ( 229616 ) on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @08:26PM (#23645993) Journal

    GamePolitics attacked the TX governor on the basis of his religion.
    Well, that and the fact that he has absolutely no qualifications for the speech beyond "there are some game studios in Texas" and "he signed a bill someone else wrote that handed out tax money to studios and filmmakers []". This isn't some kind of high school graduation ceremony or motivational speech, this is the keynote for a technical exposition. I suppose the whole text of the article was easy to overlook in the face of the whole Christian thing, which I do have to agree was in bad taste and basically single-handedly destroyed any chance of having a serious discussion about why the hell a governor is speaking at a games conference.
  • by Culture20 ( 968837 ) on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @08:37PM (#23646089)

    Republicans have been shoving their Christianity down everyones [throats]
    Which political party advocates higher taxes for larger government-run social programs (usually with genuine references to Christian charity) again?
  • Re:So (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @09:16PM (#23646379)
    That's a tenant of the religion

    No, it isn't. The tenant would be the man that lives in the basement. I suspect you mean "tenet", in which case you would find the statement "non-Christians will go to hell" to not be exactly the truth. Christ said "I am the way, the truth and the life. No-one comes to the Father save through me" which isn't exactly the same statement.
  • Definitions (Score:3, Informative)

    by copponex ( 13876 ) on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @12:03AM (#23647465) Homepage
    I'm using the every day definitions - I understand those who adhere to the core of most religions would be peaceful.

    However, the evangelicals of America, whether gullible, willfully ignorant, or genuinely stupid, are responsible for voting in the current Administration twice in a row. They are motivated by the issues of abortion and gay marriage, and by virtue of it's mention in the bible, should be as troublesome as the consumption of shellfish.

    The abortion issue is more reasonable, as it involves the future liberty of two human beings, but is safe to say that "abortion is murder" and "war is heroic" are not compatible world views to any rational person.

    Personally, I don't see how anyone can reconcile the angry tribal desert Gods of the OT with the comparatively liberalized hippie God of the NT. Even if you can somehow accept the suppression and execution of non-dogmatic early Christians by the Roman authorities as a legitimate way to establish what ended up in "the" bible.

    You seem to be forgetting the instances where God stops the sun to allow the wholesale slaughter of men, women, children, babies, and animals. Or the same God who rejoices when you smash the children of enemies against rocks (Psalm 137:9) or allows his followers to be tortured in order to prove their obedience.

    There are numerous places in the Qu'ran where you are allowed to kill the infidel if he tries to interfere with your faith. They can easily justify killing a woman for not covering up sufficiently, which they view as preventing them for following their faith, and it even explicitly mentions killing the infidel until they stop their wars of aggression...

    Just tell a fundamentalist that you listen to God, and they'll believe you. Ask George Bush or bin Laden.
  • by _Sprocket_ ( 42527 ) on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @12:38AM (#23647631)

    Sorry, but like it or not, once you enter politics your religion, like the rest of your private life, falls under public scrutiny.

    The only way for Perry to get around it would be to flat out deny being a Christian, which is kinda forbidden by the religion itself (and not very good for getting elected).
    OK. Fair enough. People in the public eye have a hard time keeping private lives. But let's not pretend this is about Perry being hounded by the press while he's at church.

    Perry has signed bills on evangelical church property, ratifying laws that evangelical conservative religious groups have been desperately campaigning for. Which is no surprise. Perry has openly supported and courted these religious political groups.

    The issue here is not that the press has intruded on the Governor's private life and hounded him for being a good Christian. The issue is that Perry has intentionally mixed politics and religion. He has placed conservative Christian values on the political pulpit. He has made religion a political issue. Any political issue is open to scrutiny.

    If you believe such scrutiny is religious persecution, you should take a moment to consider the source of the issue. It is not the press. It is individuals such as Governor Perry, Rev. Lawrence White, and Rick Scarborough and the political entities they lead and support.
  • Re:So (Score:2, Informative)

    by chromatic ( 9471 ) on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @01:14AM (#23647837) Homepage

    The Spanish inquisition sucked and it is a logical outcome of letting religious bias permeate government.

    Are you talking about the same Spanish Inquisition set up by the Spanish monarchy, which lasted for over 150 years and ultimately led to around 2000 deaths? Please don't get me wrong -- I'm not in favor of inquisitions or torture, and it's tragic that some 13 or 14 people died per year (on very rough average) -- but if you're going to rail about injustice and such, keep in mind that malnutrition killed more people every year in Spain than the Inquisition did in its entirety.

  • Re:So (Score:3, Informative)

    by Guppy06 ( 410832 ) on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @02:14AM (#23648071)
    "Funny. Rick Perry's religion says he should pray for you, love you as he loves himself, and treat you the way he wants to be treated."

    Rick Perry's religion says I should and will be condemned to eternal damnation for not attending the same church he does as devoutly as he does. "If you live your life and don't confess your sins to God Almighty through the authority of Christ and His blood (...) you're going straight to hell with a nonstop ticket." Now, this leaves the door open for two alternatives that have seen themselves played out throughout history, repeatedly:
    1. In his "love" for me he will do everything in his power (including the political power granted to him by the people) to "correct" my thinking through coercion.
    2. Since his belief system has me being damned after death regardless, there's no real harm in allowing me or causing me to suffer while I still live (after all, I'd better get used to it).
    We need not get into a "Christian vs. non-Christian" debate like the article and most posters seem to be trying to invite, all you have to do is disagree with Governor Perry on where Christ's authority lies, on which church is the right church. Not all churches are in communion with each other.

    All in all, not someone I'd want speaking at a major industry gathering, unless I'm actively seeking to drive away potential customers.
  • Re:So (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @02:25AM (#23648127)
    Take a look what happened to Christine Comer and see if you still believe that Perry's religion has nothing to do with how he administers his state.

    He helped a lot of these Discovery Institute (a.k.a. Creationists) nuts get into political control of the text book decision processes in Texas.

    No real effect?
  • Re:So (Score:2, Informative)

    by EL_mal0 ( 777947 ) on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @06:54AM (#23649349)

    You're right, we do hold the New Testament higher. We're Christians. If you're not aware, the New Testament is the part with Jesus in it. We can safely place less emphasis the Mosaic Law found in the Old Testament because part of Jesus's job was to fulfil that law. I know you're just trolling, but I've seen your kind of comment get modded up in these religious flamewars disguised as news stories.

    And please, please, stop thinking that all Christians believe in a young Earth. That's just ignorant.

Perfection is acheived only on the point of collapse. - C. N. Parkinson