I was all set to see “Ghost Rider” at the last-minute, let’s-hide-this-from-the-critics screening last night … and then I arrived (on time, i.e., 30 minutes early) to find that there were no seats left in the theater, because they had a) let the crowd in earlier than they’re supposed to, and b) not saved enough seats for press. So no “Ghost Rider” for me (not that Columbia really wanted any critics to see it anyway). I’ll try to go watch Nicolas Cage run around with his head on fire sometime this weekend.

Of the films I did see this week, “Breach” is quite good, and “Music and Lyrics” is more than sufficiently entertaining, too.

Check out the e-zine version of “In the Dark” for more, and listen to the podcast here.

One of my favorite sketches back in the Garrens Comedy Troupe days was “Dinner at Denny’s,” in which a man exhausted from making decisions all day at work goes to dinner and finds even more decisions to be made. We performed it several times back in 1996 (HOLY CRAP, that was a long time ago), and it appeared on the now-out-of-print Garrens CD.

Recently, a British university student by the name of Rob Shiels performed the sketch with his own comedy group and filmed it for posterity. The audio quality isn’t great, and the British accents might give you a run for your money (you can follow along with the script here), but it’s a fun little artifact that can now be viewed on YouTube or right here:

Back in the summer of 1998, the Baptists held a convention in Utah. There was much local discussion beforehand about what would happen when the Baptists came to town, would they try to convert the Mormons, would the Mormons try to convert them, and so forth. So I wrote a column called “Immersed in Baptists” in which I gave “tips” on how to deal with the Baptists when they arrived. I patterned it after the anti-Mormon literature I’d encountered when I was a missionary (all missionaries encounter it), which is usually based on nit-picking and ax-grinding. It proved to be a ticklish, satiric little column.

I present it to you as this week’s “Snide Remarks” Classic. It’s column #40, and it was published in The Daily Universe on May 27, 1998. Do enjoy, won’t you?

Looks like I stepped in it just a little bit in my last blog entry. On the subject of gays vs. straights, I said this:

Religious people, meanwhile, often want the gay community to understand that they (they religious people) have every right to consider gay conduct sinful. And they do have that right. But when those beliefs are being used to champion secular laws restricting gays’ rights, then a line has been crossed. Preach what you want in your churches, but leave the laws out of it. [Emphasis added.]

This led some people, knowing my LDS background, to wonder: Am I saying I think the LDS Church is wrong when it urges its members to vote against legislation that would legalize gay marriage?

My thoughts can be summed up thus: Doh!

The line originally read, “But when those beliefs are being used to champion secular laws restricting gays’ rights, then maybe a line has been crossed.” Note the word “maybe.” I was covering both sides of the argument in that post, and this paragraph was addressing the gay community’s point of view. I didn’t necessarily mean for it to be a statement of my own feelings, but simply a summary of one argument: that maybe, in some people’s view, a line has been crossed.

Late in the writing process, I took out the “maybe.” It’s an old journalism-school habit, where weasel words like “maybe” and “I think” and “in my opinion” should be used sparingly, and only when necessary. I removed this “maybe” carelessly, though, without stopping to consider how it changed the tone of the sentence.

My own opinions on this topic are evolving, not to mention irrelevant to what this Web site is all about. It’s a complicated, thorny issue. Even if one opposes gay marriage, should one campaign for legislation against it? Even if one supports the church leadership generally, must one agree with every single point? If one believes gay marriage should be banned, does that mean one is anti-homosexual or bigoted? Where is the line, discussed in that Larry Miller blog entry, between “understanding” and “tolerance”?

Finally: Gay marriage is a controversial subject, with good arguments on both sides. Unfortunately, the same good arguments (as well as the stupid ones) keep getting repeated back and forth, to where you could make a template of what Every Gay-Marriage Discussion sounds like. It’s always rancorous and headache-inducing, and I don’t like it. And thus, since this is my blog and I can do whatever I want, I’m not going to allow this or any other thread to turn into a debate on the pros and cons of gay marriage. Any comments submitted that do address the pros or cons of the issue will be deleted. Trust me, this is a necessary preemptive measure. If I let it, these threads would become overloaded with posts debating gay marriage, and it would make me irritable.

In lieu of that, please read these previous message board discussions. Whatever your feeling is, I can almost guarantee someone expressed it in one of these threads, and hence there is no need to reiterate it here. If you’re reading along, and you think of a great rebuttal, keep reading: I promise, somebody else made the same rebuttal.

About the LDS Church’s official statement on gay marriage (SPOILER ALERT: They were against it)
About the LDS Church’s subsequent, more specific statement, about gay marriage legislation
About a BYU professor being fired for speaking out against the LDS Church’s position
About the Larry Miller/”Brokeback” thing

Many readers, especially in Utah, will remember the uproar when local businessman Larry Miller pulled “Brokeback Mountain” from one of his movie theaters in January 2006. The problem wasn’t that he wouldn’t show the movie (it’s his theater; he can do whatever he wants), but that he pulled it at the last minute because of its content, yet failed to pull movies like “Hostel” and “Grandma’s Boy” that were much, much more vulgar, violent, and sexual.

Last week, Miller did a very big thing: He publicly admitted that canceling “Brokeback Mountain” was a mistake.

“Not because I got beaten up over it, but because it was a knee-jerk reaction,” he said in last Thursday’s Salt Lake Tribune. “You have to choose your spots to draw your lines and I didn’t choose a very good one.”

The reason the subject came up now is that Miller owns the Utah Jazz, and a former Jazz player, John Amaechi, has recently come out of the closet, making him the first NBA player, active or retired, to publicly acknowledge being gay. Miller was being interviewed to get his reaction to Amaechi’s announcement, and naturally the “Brokeback Mountain” controversy was addressed.

I think this is remarkable. The incident is a year old and could be considered a moot point now, yet Miller takes the opportunity in the Amaechi interview to admit that he made a mistake. That shows real class and character, I think.

Miller is a devout Mormon and was praised by some in the LDS community for rejecting “Brokeback Mountain,” but I don’t think anyone sensible would turn against him now for admitting his error. He does an excellent job in the Salt Lake Tribune interview at maintaining his religious convictions while expressing understanding:

“It was good for me in a couple of ways,” he said [in regards to a meeting he had last April with a gay and lesbian group at the University of Utah]. “I learned a lot about them with some open and honest dialogue. It didn’t change my way of thinking or theirs, but we all realized after talking with each other we have a better understanding of each other.

“I’m still outspoken on issues, but I know I have to look at people’s feelings and lives. I’d like to say I’m more understanding now. To say I’m tolerant would be less accurate, but I am more understanding.”

The fight between the gay community and religion is ongoing, and I think Miller’s sentiments are the closest anyone’s going to get to a truce.

The gay community wants religious people to be “tolerant,” but to them “tolerant” often means “not considering homosexual conduct sinful.” And most religious people simply aren’t going to reach that level of “tolerance” (if that’s even a legitimate definition of that word).

The gay community often sees this as a slap in the face: Anything short of embracing, encouraging, and welcoming homosexuality is considered “intolerant.” But it’s arrogant to try to tell any religion what they ought to believe, especially if you’re not even a member of that religion. (And if you ARE a member, wouldn’t you rather your church’s leadership base its core doctrines on what they believe is God’s will, not on member voting? If my church suddenly started changing policies based solely on what I wanted, I’d have to conclude that that church was not divinely inspired, and leave it.)

Religious people, meanwhile, often want the gay community to understand that they (they religious people) have every right to consider gay conduct sinful. And they do have that right. But when those beliefs are being used to champion secular laws restricting gays’ rights, then a line has been crossed. Preach what you want in your churches, but leave the laws out of it.

So I think Miller’s statement is excellent, and it’s what religious people should strive for. “Tolerant”? Not in the sense of having changed his mind about homosexuality, no. He still believes homosexual conduct is sinful. But “understanding”? Yes. Understanding someone means you can relate to him in some ways, you have common ground, you can see his point of view — whether you agree with it or not. You can be understanding of someone’s circumstances, proclivities, and personal affairs without having to believe that what that person does is right in the sight of God.

And NO, believing that someone is sinning is NOT the same thing as judging him, or believing yourself to be better than him, or looking down at him. Some people act that way, but they shouldn’t: Haughtiness and judgmentalism are sins, too. True Christians remain humbled by the fact that they, too, have sinned, and realize that rather than scorning or condemning homosexuals, they should be grateful that they haven’t had to face a struggle like that. If Miller’s statements accurately reflect his beliefs, then he strikes me as a good man and a true Christian.

The podcast for this week’s “Snide Remarks” column can be found here. [Link was broken; now it is fixed.] I need to stop writing such long columns; 12 minutes of reading is hard on the voice.

Also, if you missed the announcement about the upcoming scarcity of Eric D. Snider-related merchandise, here it is.

Finally, it’s worth noting that on Friday, Portland’s airwaves briefly featured my voice. I was invited by movie-critic pal Mike Russell to join him on KUFO’s Cort & Fatboy program. Mike is there every Friday to review movies, but he hadn’t seen “Hannibal Rising,” so I was brought in to fulfill those duties.

You can listen to a recording of the show here. Since the commercials and Stone Temple Pilots songs have been removed, Mike and I actually appear very early in the program.

So I was over in the warehouse today, checking on the Laotian kids who work in my sweatshop, and I discovered a startling fact: Every bit of Eric D. Snider-related merchandise is nearly GONE!

And then I realized something else startling: Once these are gone, there won’t be any reprints.

In the case of the CDs, it’s not cost-effective. The place that does them for me is reasonably priced, but it’s not like I can have them dash of 10 copies here and there. The quantities need to be in the hundreds — and while you may have visions of my popularity resulting in hundreds of CDs being sold every week, sadly, those visions do not reflect reality.

Considering how long it’s taken to sell the huge number we got in the first place, and considering that most of those sales were shortly after the CDs were released, it would be YEARS before I turned a profit if I were to order another batch. So that’s not really an option.

Here’s the bottom line: If you’ve ever considered buying any of the crap I’m selling, NOW IS THE TIME. When these are gone, they will truly be gone. I’m not trying to get rid of them (you’ll notice I haven’t lowered the prices); I’m just sayin’, at the regular rate at which these things sell, it won’t be long before they’re sold out.

CD: “Will Make Jokes for Food” (2003) A fine assortment of musical comedy recorded in front of an audience. (12 6 COPIES LEFT) $10

CD: “Monkeys and Pirates Are Funny” (2006) A second fine assortment of musical comedy recorded in front of an audience, albeit a different one. (28 4 COPIES LEFT) $10

CD: “The Snide Remarks Collection Vol. 1″ (2004) In which I read 15 “Snide Remarks” columns. Like a book on tape, except it’s columns instead of a book, and it’s a CD. Really, there’s no reason for this CD to exist anymore, since I’m doing the exact same thing every week with the “Snide Remarks” podcast. So buy it as a curio, an artifact, a relic, a memento of days gone buy. (ONLY 2 COPIES LEFT!) SOLD OUT! $7

BOOK: “Songs” (2004) This is piano sheet music (with guitar chords) for 10 of my original songs. Now you can play just like me, wrong notes and all! (10 8 COPIES LEFT… I could print more at Kinko’s without too much trouble, but this was a pretty niche-market item to begin with….) $10

BOOK: “Snide Remarks II: Electric Boogaloo” (1999) Not to brag or anything, but this sold THOUSANDS of copies at Brigham Young University, back in the day. (Specifically, 1 1/2 thousands.) Now I’m left with about 50 copies. BUY THEM! $5

The merchandise-buying page.

(P.S.: Yes, I’ve thought of selling my songs on iTunes. Unfortunately, while it is easy to say, “I want to sell my songs on iTunes!,” actually doing so is much harder when you are not affiliated with a major record label. Apple has seen to that. Also, since a lot of my songs are parodies — i.e., someone else wrote the music — there are royalties issues that make it even more complicated.)

Oh, what poor tidings Hollywood has brought us this week! Of the two new wide releases, one is mediocre, while the other is abysmal.

“Hannibal Rising” is the former, a wan, pointless examination of the famous villain’s early days. It stars no one and was directed by no one.

Meanwhile, “Norbit,” starring Eddie Murphy, is probably the worst film of the year so far. I skipped January, but I don’t see anything on that list that looks like it could have been worse than this. Bleh.

This week’s “In the Dark” also has reviews of “Breaking and Entering” and “Miss Potter,” and if you have not already subscribed to this free weekly e-mailing (which also includes all manner of other groovy movie-related stuff), you should do so at once.

The “In the Dark” podcast can be found here, while the URL to subscribe to it through your iTunes or whatever is here.

And let me take a moment to pimp a couple of new paid advertisers here on EricDSnider.com!

Survey Monkey doesn’t want your money; they only want your opinion on a couple things. Click over there and give ‘em what they want, will you? Gosh!

Meanwhile, Karen Hardy’s PhotoMax does want your money — but in exchange for your money, you can have all manner of photo-related services done. They’ll help you convert old photos into digital, convert digital photos into photo albums, make DVDs out of old videotapes, and much more. So click over there and give them what they want, too.

If you would like to advertise on EricDSnider.com — it’s really cheap, I swear — check out this page.

To celebrate the 10th anniversary of “Snide Remarks,” we’re spotlighting a classic column every Wednesday throughout 2007. This week’s is #33, “Boy Scouting: Be Repaired,” published in The Daily Universe on March 30, 1998. It has some nostalgia for people my age, and then it goes on to make fun of Mormon culture’s attachment to Boy Scouting, which can sometimes reach ridiculous proportions. It has a couple lines that made me laugh all these years later, because I’d forgotten I’d written them. Enjoy!

This week’s “Snide Remarks” podcast is now available for you and your ears to enjoy. You will find it here in this link that you are reading right now. And if you want to subscribe through iTunes or some other podcast-listening device, use this URL right here.