Brad Pitt Gets Sanctimonious

Rate this post

sanc·ti·mo·ni·ous

Adjective: Making a show of being morally superior to other people. Feigning piety or righteousness
Brad Pitt has a new movie out and he’s been running around promoting it like mad.
RadarOnline.com reports that on today’s edition of the Ellen Degeneres TV talk show, Pitt was asked why he hasn’t married Angelina Jolie, despite having sired three kids and adopted others with her.
This is what Pitt gave as his lame excuse:
“I’ve said that we would not be getting married until everyone in this county had the right to get married. We live in this great country that is about freedom. It is defined by our freedom and equality and yet we allow this discrimination to go on everyday and that’s not what we’re about — that’s not what makes us great. Until that is reversed, I just don’t get it.”
Degeneres, who is a lesbian, asked, “So that means if like, next week if it’s legal for everyone to get married that you would then be getting married the very next day?”
“It seems,” Pitt said, before he crumbled, confessing that “The kids are putting on the heat. They really are. They are putting on the heat.”
“You’ll still hold out?” Degeneres said.
“Somebody help me,” Pitt panicked. “I don’t know what the future holds!”
[Source]
Those who believe that’s Brad’s reason for not marrying, please raise your hand!
Stop using gays as your crutch. Listen to your kids, Brad. They have better sense — and a God-given knowledge of right and wrong — than you.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

0 responses to “Brad Pitt Gets Sanctimonious

  1. Ugh… The self-righteous and sanctimonious attitude is in and of itself, a contradiction…the norm for Hollywood. Marriage means cheating w/others, and living w/someone is completely acceptable! Moral ‘fabric’ is shredded ‘rags’.The acceptance level of it’s decay in this country is reeking to high heaven…literally.

     
  2. Or he’s conflicted between show solidarity to people and a community he cares about, and being involved in a cultural event that would mean a lot to him, Angelina and their family.

     
    • Oh, puleeze. Do you even understand the inane politically-correct psychobabble you just uttered? Either the reason Pitt gave for not marrying is true or it’s not true. The latter is called LYING.

       
      • It’s clear he’s conflicted because his kids want him to get married. That doesn’t make his reason for not getting married a lie. He gave his reason, he’s currently not married, and he’s conflicted over it. No idea how that’s a lie.
        It’s not political correctness. It’s trying to understand someone without assuming they have horrible motives.

         
        • Did I say Pitt have “horrible motives”? Do you always choose to read what’s not there?
          And it you actually had read the exchange between Pitt and Degeneres, you’d have realized that Degeneres doesn’t believe him either. She explicitly asked him if he would marry if gay marriage is legalized tomorrow — but still he hedged, saying he’s “confused”.
          You seem to have a problem with logical reasoning (not a surprise given your alias “NotAScientist”), so allow me to make clear the train of logic:
          1. A man says the reason why he hasn’t done X is because of Y, in other words: If Y, then no X. (Y=no gay marriage; X=Pitt-Jolie marriage)
          2. He is asked if the obstacle is removed — if there’s no Y — would he then do X?
          3. He won’t or can’t say Yes.
          4. Conclusion: The ostensible reason Y the man gave for not doing X is not really the reason.

           
          • The date seems to be a factor as well.
            Would you get married tomorrow? With a day notice?
            Not that it particularly matters. Pitt should either get married or not get married, and gays should be allowed to get married. And that’s it.

             
  3. we are very close to a communist takeover,do gay’s,lesbians ect… realize they kill their kind????

     
  4. why does it seem that so many actors and actresses seem maybe a bit out of touch with reality and have viewpoints that border on the stupid..

     
    • If the viewpoint you mean is being in favor of gay marriage, then according to recent polls, his viewpoint is the same as more than half the country. That seems just as in touch with reality as anything else.

       
      • Just because the majority viewpoint approves of it doesn’t make it morally correct.
        The reality is that thegays/liberals shove their agenda down everyone’s throats, trying to convince you that what they believe/practice is correct, all in the name of “equality”. They start early with indoctrination of children in the public schools. Those who don’t believe practicing homosexuality is correct shouldn’t have to give up our morals in order to satisfy a minority of the population.

         
        • “They start early with indoctrination of children in the public schools.”
          In what way?
          They teach, in schools, that homosexual couples exist, and that they aren’t monsters. Are you really terrified that your children will be taught that?
          “Those who don’t believe practicing homosexuality is correct shouldn’t have to give up our morals in order to satisfy a minority of the population.”
          And yet, it isn’t the minority of the population.

           
          • In what way? Instead of focusing on actual academics, you know – the three Rs – they purposely focus on a social agenda (i.e., CA and their books focusing on gays). Also, they don’t allow a different view on the matter: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/high-school-school-punishes-student-for-saying-homosexuality-is-wrong/
            Where did I say that homosexuals were monsters? No where. And if I had children, what I teach them is NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. The schools have no place to override what values/beliefs parents want to teach their children.
            Homosexuals aren’t a minority of the population (that was my intented statement)? Like I said, I don’t give a rats arse what the majority of the general population thinks. Doesn’t make it morally correct.

             
          • NotAScientist,
            You are either uninformed or disingenuous. On July 14, 2011, California’s governor Jerry Brown (D) signed SB48 into law. SB48 amends Section 51204.5 of California’s Education Code to read:
            “Instruction in social sciences shall include…a study of the role and contributions of…lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender [LGBT] Americans…to the economic, political, and social development of California and the United States of America…. A teacher shall not give instruction…and a school district shall not sponsor any activity that…reflects adversely upon persons on the basis of…sexual orientation…. The state board…or any governing board shall not adopt any textbook or other instructional materials for use in the public schools…that contains any matter reflecting adversely upon persons…on the basis of…sexual orientation….”
            No other group has that sort of protection. Certainly, there is no law in California or anywhere else in America that prohibits public schools from instruction or adopting textbook that “reflects adversely” on Christians. Why are GLBT accorded that special privilege? What happened to academic freedom or Americans’ Constitutional free speech rights?

             
  5. Coward and wife cheater. His wife is a cheater as well. Betcha if they did get married it wouldn’t last.

     
  6. Clearly, old Brad set up his answer to Ellen as a smokescreen, so that he appears noble and that his intentions of course, are bigger than life! I was paid a very good salary to determine who was telling the truth and who was not. I can tell you that his response is a lie – he does not want to get married probably for purely financial reasons! He is not confused – he knows exactly what he is doing!
    This has got nothing to do with homosexual marriage approval. This is Brad’s attempt to effect what is called a “material fallacy.” A material fallacy will take away the merits of the real issue to sublimate it to something else. Actually, Brad’s answer to Ellen is idiotic!

     
    • Thank you, Joan, for giving a name for Pitt’s dissembling — Material Fallacy, aka throwing a smoke screen, all in an effort to curry favor with Ellen Degeneres, an out lesbian.

       
  7. My pleasure Dr. Eowyn. After awhile, material fallacies become so transparent that they are actually funny! People used to fake crying in front of me and I would tell them to turn off the faucet, and they would! Attorneys and Counsels would point out what a nice lady this person is, or how active they are in their church and community. And I would ask them, “What is your point and what does this have to do with the final incident that caused the employment termination?” And they would say, “Nothing.” As part of our battle for Helms Deep, we must be able to point out these fallacies. The devil winds around and uses these techniques to lull people from the truth. We must be aware that they exist so we can fight them!

     

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *