panelarrow

Unthinkable! A Charlie Brown Christmas almost didn’t happen!

| 29 Comments

For almost 50 years the world has enjoyed “A Charlie Brown Christmas.” But did you know that it was almost stifled by network execs (atheists?) at its inception? Read this very interesting story by Lee Habeeb of the National Review.

The famous show was an instant classic when it was created by Charles Schulz on a shoestring budget back in 1965…. What people don’t know is that the Christmas special almost didn’t happen, because some not-so-smart television executives almost didn’t let it air. You see, Charles Schulz had some ideas that challenged the way of thinking of those executives 46 years ago, and one of them had to do with the inclusion in his Christmas cartoon of a reading from the King James Bible’s version of the Gospel of Luke. Read the rest by clicking here.

Save

29 Comments

  1. Truly one of the greatest moments in television history! I remember a couple of years ago Hallmark selling an ornament that was Linus standing on the stage and when you pushed the button he recited Luke 2. I was never able to get one because the were completely sold out. Maybe Hallmark will bring it back again some CHRISTmas!

    • you should check out

      hallmarkornaments.com

      then look under “Peanuts”

      • Sock-puppeteer, I’m a bit offended at your sock-puppet name here, especially since ExPatMatt doesn’t post here anymore.

        You get what you give, sock-puppeteer.

  2. From what I had read (and will have to look up), the network people were afraid the sponsors wouldn’t like have GOD mentioned.

    Schulz caught some static when Franklin came into the strip, too. Some didn’t like the idea of a black child included.

  3. Im sure some of the blog’s Atheist posters will now complain how oppressed and excluded they felt when they watched this episode as a child/youth/adult.

    • Oh, I never felt oppressed by the Charlie Brown Christmas. I was bored by Linus’s speech, but that was about it. And the Charlie Brown Christmas just could never hold a candle to other great holiday classics like Rudolph or George C. Scott’s A Christmas Carol or the He-Man and She-Ra Christmas Special.

      A cursory search reveals that there were several things deemed “problematic” about the special, including the fact that they were using children to voice the children’s voices, instead of adults. See, for example:

      http://entertainment.time.com/2011/12/23/qa-charlie-brown-christmas-producer-lee-mendelson/

      No matter the causes, Christians sure must be desperate for anti-atheist complaints if they’re reduced to things that could have happened.

      ‘Tis the season (to complain about eeevil atheists).

      • George C. Scott’s A Christmas Carol pales in comparison to the 1951 version starring Alastair Sim.

    • I have come to the conclusion that the majority of atheists are unhappy. The happiest atheists are the ones that have something to point to that makes them unhappy. Does that make sense?

      • Not really. I’d like to see the raw data you compiled in order to reach your “conclusion.”

        In this case, since the post is complaining about atheists, I’m not seeing where the atheists are either the unhappy ones or the ones pointing fingers.

      • That makes a lot of sense to me. I have wondered why atheists are so angry. Atheism mustn’t be a very satisfying religion.

      • Atheism isn’t a religion, and atheists aren’t angry.

        The sock-puppeteer posting as “BathSoap” is simply trying to cause problems.

      • BathSoap wrote: “Does that make sense?

        No, it does not.

        Try talking about individuals instead of tarring an entire “group” with one broad brush, please.

        (Oh, and using sock-puppets is lame.)

    • Really Steve? My post is not allowed but some troll mocking me is allowed? RyanShirts is allowed to be as incivil as he likes (which you approve of) but we can’t respond. What happened to your agreeing with Nohm and applying the rules equally? You threw that out pretty fast.

    • Atheists targeting Charlie Brown doesn’t surprise me at all. If it is offensive to Christians most atheists will support it. If there is something that Christians might like then atheists will rally to have it censored.

      Does anyone remember the song “I’m Only Happy When It Rains” by the group Garbage?

      I think the lyrics perfectly describe the mindset of most atheists.

      If the atheists had a hymnal, that should be the first song in the book.

      • I remember a lot of atheists and anti-christians supporting the artwork of Chris Ofili. He created a painting of the Virgin Mary that many Christians found offensive including former Mayor Rudy Guiliani.

  4. Still not seeing what part of my two comments broke the rules.

    • I didn’t want to allow any atheist negativity on Christmas. I even banned one of you guys…

      …until he apologizes to me and the commenter he insulted.

      • 1. It’s not Christmas anymore.
        2. Mentioning that Schulz became a secular humanist is not negative. I am offering perspective.
        3. You seem to be allowing plenty of Christian negativity.
        4. You never once say anything about this being a rule. Why even have rules if you’re just going to make up new rules to bar comments?

      • Garrett I have been reading the comments. I don’t think anyone is being negative towards atheists. They are just describing what lots of atheists do. I find the comments helpful because I have notice similar things.

      • Garrett

        Chat with any of the atheists at wearesmrt and you will change your mind.

      • How about me, sock-puppeteer-currently-going-by-“Wagon”?

        And again I say to you, “Wagon”:

        You get what you give.

        If you’re a jerk to others, don’t be shocked when people treat you like a jerk.

      • I agree with Wagon. I’m not going to call anyone names or insult anyone from wearesmrt chat but “Guests” aren’t treated very kindly. If anyone doesn’t believe me they can go chat for themselves.

        This is how a typical chat session goes:

        Guest: Hello.

        wearesmrtian: we have another @#$% gusty *(#($&!

        wearesmrtian: are you a Christian?

        Guest: Yes I am!

        wearesmrtian: well &*$%6 you then. Why do you believe in &$%*& and **$#&?

        Guest: 🙁

        wearesmrtian: register or get the $%@#$ and you are a @#$%^ and $%^$ and your God is #$%^$%.

        Guest: 🙁

      • Hi “sad Guest”,

        Here’s an idea… instead of tarring with a broad brush, why don’t you ask the particular individuals who you feel treat the guests badly?

        Point to one thing that I’ve said badly about a guest.

        Just like any other place on the internet, you have a wide variety of people there and some people are nice and some are not.

        I also notice that, instead of using an actual quote (i.e., something that actually happened), you made up a discussion. I also note that you avoided mentioning why certain individuals get so annoyed by “guests”.

        In other words, tell the whole story, please.

        I mention all of this because with your broad brush you’re implicating numerous people for the actions of a few. It would be like me saying, “all the Christians on stonethepreacher.com make stuff up about atheists!”, which is not true.

      • Rubber Sock-Puppet Ducky wrote: “They are just describing what lots of atheists do.

        Then, in my opinion, they should direct their statements to specific individuals. If you acknowledge that not all atheists do these things (and I would greatly question your use of the word “lots”, but I’m guessing you’re just engaging in hyperbole), then please take it up with the specific individuals, or else you’re tarring with a broad brush.

        And yes, I’d feel the same if someone said something like “all Christians want to kill abortion clinic workers” or “lots of Christians use sock-puppets”.

      • @Nohm

        I am offended that you have implied that I am a sockpuppet. I will have you know sir that I am a huge Convoy fan.

      • Wagon,

        I post regularly on WeAreSmrt.

  5. So that’s a yes that sock puppet trolls are ok? Can you answer rather than just delete, it saves time.

    • Remember folks, nasty uncivil comments like ‘why do you think this is good’ must be deleted, but sock puppet trolling is a-ok.

  6. @Nohm

    I’m not really offended… or am I? 😐

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *.