Discrepancies between CBS's "Rudolph" and the Bible's

[underpants]

Rudolph airs NEXT TUESDAY at 8 PM

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/underpants/10

As you know last night was the annual airing of the 1964 claymation treatment of the gospel's Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer story.

You may receive the normal e-mails protesting the liberal interpretation by directors Kizo Nagashima and Larry Roemer (produced by Jules Bass and Arthur Rankin Jr.) Just a heads up.

The depiction of the Abominable Snowman as "against Christmas" is an attack on patriarchal Christian societal teachings. Likewise his carnivorous tendencies serve to paint a negative light on meat ending particularly baby reindeer eating. Notice that he prefers "pork"-see producer credits

According to the scriptures Hermey was not THAT gay.

Okay Yukon Cornelius was but he was Canadian probably French Canadian.

The scriptures in no way promoted the pre-marital flirting (which leads to you know what) between Clarice and Rudolph.

The idea that a secular figure such as Santa Claus could "cancel Christmas" is a direct affront to God on his son's birthday. It is important to note that this whole "non conformity" interpretation was initiated the same year that the Beatles first appeared on TV in the United States...a coincidence?

The following appears in no way or no where in the Bible:
Yukon Cornelius: Whoa. Whoa. Unmush, will ya?

It is commonly accepted knowledge that the "great snowstorm" was a warning from God to all of the sinful behaviour displayed in this story and to imply that a genetic freak could over ride God's will is blasphemous.



If you can offer any talking points to refute this artificial turf letter please do.

[Parche]

1. Didnt Rudolph have a red...............

You fill in the blank :rofl: :hi:

[regularguy]

2. They need to read the Bible in the original Icelandic.

It's all in there.