By now most have undoubtedly heard of the two events referenced in the above title. Three attributes of these events link them together: 1) they both involve men whose views of life would be considered liberal; 2) they both involve immoral actions; and 3) they both have elicited pleas for tolerance toward the guilty. The one huge difference is that what Polanski did was not only immoral; it violated laws of decency and of society.
Letterman
David Letterman has hosted the Late Night Talk Show for CBS for more than fifteen years. His humor sometimes crosses the line from “all in good fun” to vicious, but he has millions of fans and has popularized the Top Ten List. On Thursday, October 1, he announced on his show that he had over the years engaged in sexual relationships with women staffers much younger than he is. Why would he announce such a thing?
A producer of 48 Hours attempted to blackmail Letterman for two million dollars. This producer’s live-in girlfriend was formerly a staffer for Letterman, and she had kept a secret diary of what had occurred. The producer had threatened to write a screenplay of the entire affair, including e-mails of a prurient nature that were exchanged. Letterman went to law enforcement authorities, and the producer was arrested in the act of felony extortion.
What the producer had learned (and which others must have known) was that Letterman had a special room, nicknamed “the bunker” at the studio in the Ed Sullivan Theater where he “entertained” these younger women. Letterman’s wife is tremendously upset, even though they have only been married since March; they lived together for several years prior to their marriage and have a 5-year-old son. What a moral mess this entire thing is to figure out.
It is difficult to find any nobility anywhere in this situation. First of all, blackmail is ugly, and no one should allow another to have that kind of power over him. Letterman did the right thing in stopping it before it began. Surely, he could afford the two million, which is probably less than 10% of his annual salary, but money is not the issue. Would it be a one-time demand? Would others follow suit? It is better to admit what one has done wrong than to constantly wonder when the next demand is coming or from whom.
However, the immorality that led to the blackmail is disgusting. There was a time in this nation that a man keeping such a room in a studio probably would have been fired immediately and lost most of his fans. On Monday evening (October 5, 2009), however, Dave came out to a standing ovation with a couple of rounds of cheers for support. It shows something about the decline of this nation when a person who has disgraced himself continues to have his job and popular support
The young women were, apparently, willing accomplices in these trysts; the woman who kept the diary went on to become someone else’s “live-in,” and the wounded wife—well, how many years did she live in fornication with Dave before they married? Has no one heard that it is dangerous to participate in carnal pleasures outside of marriage (Heb. 13:4)? Their child is too young to comprehend all of what has been occurring, but he will know when he is of age. What kind of example does this sordid situation set for him?
This exposure of wrongdoing proved not to be ruinous for Letterman as he came out to face a crowd that enthusiastically greeted him. His jokes were actually funny, considering his dismal circumstance; for a change they were made at his own expense. He commented, “Right now I would give anything to be hiking on the Appalachian Trail” (did he mean that he wanted to be in Peru and have an aide alibi for him)?
“I got into the car this morning, and the navigation lady wasn’t speaking to me.”
“It’s fall here in New York City, and I spent the whole weekend raking my hate mail.”
“It’s cold, too—chilly outside and chilly inside my house.”
“Normally, when I’m shaken down for money, it’s my relatives.”
Despite the humor, there was an undercurrent of sorrow. Letterman acted as if he had some news about Bill Clinton, but then he stopped. Of course, the audience knew how many times he had targeted the former president’s escapades. Then he acted is if he were about to say something about South Carolina Governor, Mark Sanford (who was not hiking on the Appalachian Trail) and paused again. To complete the trilogy, he mentioned the name of former New York governor, Elliott Spitzer (who used government funds to pay for a high-priced prostitute).
Having made a living at other people’s expense, now is it his turn to become a byword with respect to his problems? Will people henceforth refer to Letterman and his bunker? On a serious note, he later mentioned how hurt his wife was and that it was going to take a lot of work to regain her trust.
Many people sympathize with the one who must endure such torment, but at the same time justifiable anger also surfaces. People always agonize—when they get caught—when evil actions become public knowledge. Did they never realize that it was always a possibility that their sins would find them out? Anyone thinking about echoing this kind of behavior should first think of the effects of their actions.
“How will people react when they discover what I’ve been doing? Will someone feel betrayed? Will others be disappointed? Will it forever alter certain people’s views of me? How will I explain my actions? Do I expect everyone to approve? Would I approve if my wife had done what I’m doing? How would it affect how I look at my best friend?” No one has to wonder what view God takes of the matter; He has been explicit on both adultery and fornication.
What Dave (and others like him) is guilty of is selfishness. What else is it when someone puts aside the feelings and reactions of everyone else (especially those close to him) in order to engage in sensual pleasures with various women of his choosing? And why is the person in this position usually only penitent once his actions are known? Could disclosure not be foreseen? Evidently, the prospect of gratification in the present is worth the enormous risk of being discovered later. If Letterman is very fortunate, his wife may forgive him, but it is doubtful that their marriage would stand a recurrence; so he had better be serious concerning the termination of his philandering. Others should take fair warning: All that is held dear is the risk taken for selfish sexual satisfaction.
Roman Polanski
Although Letterman’s actions were immoral, at least they involved consenting adults. Roman Polanski perpetrated his immorality on a 13-year-old girl. His actions were not only despicably immoral, they were also illegal. Polanski has never taken responsibility for his actions (although he did bestow upon his victim a cash settlement), and he has never paid for his crime civilly because he fled the country.
Prior to the date of this attack on a minor, Polanski was a sympathetic figure. He was a survivor of the Holocaust, which would scar most people. In 1969 his pregnant wife, Sharon Tate, was brutally murdered by Charles Manson and his cult. Both of these engender great compassion for one who had endured such tragedies. But they cannot excuse his assault upon a girl barely in her teens; in fact, they make the matter worse, since he, of all people, should have avoided harming a fellow human being in any way.
He has had great success as a filmmaker, known for Rosemary’s Baby (1966) and Chinatown (1974). The Pianist (2002) won three Academy Awards, including Best Director. However in 1977, at the age of 44, he plied a 13-year-old girl with champagne mixed with part of a Quaalude tablet and abused her sexually. He fled the country before sentencing, and now, three decades later, he has been arrested in Switzerland to see if the United States desires to extradite him.
It has been interesting to see how Hollywood celebrities have fallen all over themselves to defend Polanski. Some think that since it was so long ago that we should forget about it. Does the passage of time absolve him from what he did? However long it might be until the Day of Judgment, God will not forget his deeds. Like everyone else, Polanski will stand before the judgment seat of Christ, give an account of himself, and receive the things done in his body (Rom. 14:12; 2 Cor. 5:10). Time is good for many things, but it does not change guilt into innocence. Genuine repentance, however, would be of great value.
Being a celebrity cannot excuse unlawful, immoral behavior, but most of the Hollywood crowd has leaped to Polanski’s defense. In fact, 100 Hollywood supporters signed a statement, saying that the whole matter should be dropped. Among them were Woody Allen, Harvey Weinstein, who referred to the event as a “so-called crime,” Whoopi Goldberg, who said on The View, “It wasn’t rape rape,” and Martin Scorsese, who produced the blasphemous movie, The Last Temptation of Christ. According to Roger Hedgecock’s October 5, 2009 column, a”high-powered Washington lawyer (and friend of Attorney General Eric Holder) has been retained to fight Polanski’s extradition.” Holder lost all credibility when he refused to prosecute two Black Panthers, one of which was armed with a club, who were intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place. He did choose, however, to investigate CIA agents who prevented terrorist attacks on America.
Not everyone, fortunately, feels like defending Polanski. Kirstie Alley stated the fact plainly: “There is NO SUCH THING AS CONSENSUAL SEX with a 13- year-old girl.’
Comedian Dennis Miller said on The O’Reilly Factor, Wednesday, September 30, 2009 that initially he had thought that the state of California should just accept a couple million dollars from Polanski in fines and call it even. Then he read the transcript of the trial and concluded that, if the state of California needs to use its last cent to extradite and incarcerate him, it would be worth it. He encouraged all who are interested in the case to read the transcript of the trial and then make a decision regarding what ought to be done.
On October 1, 2009, comedian Chris Rock, on the Jay Leno Show, said:
People are defending Roman Polanski because he made some good movies? Are you kiddin’ me? He made good movies 30 years ago. C’mon. Even Johnnie Cochran don’t have the nerve to go: “Well, did you see O.J. play against New England?”
Although made humorously, this is an excellent argument. Just because someone has a talent in a certain area does not absolve him from crimes he may commit. A man may be a community leader and an entrepreneur. If he has brought 100 jobs to the community and revitalized the town, will those good deeds exonerate him if he kills his business partner? Of course not. While everyone can rejoice in the productive actions of others, those kindnesses cannot be viewed as a license to kill—or to commit other horrible acts against one’s fellow human beings.
John Gacy was a businessman and a political activist; he had his picture taken with Rosalynn Carter in 1978—shortly before being arrested for the murders of 33 boys. One wonders if, had he been able to flee the country along with Roman Polanski, how many today would be saying that what he did was such a long time ago. While he was on “death row” for fourteen years, he managed to paint a number of pictures. Could his painting redeem him from being one of the worst mass murderers in American history? We will never know because, when they were auctioned off, 25 of them were burned—destroyed. Some, including family members of the victims, did not want him to be famous for anything else.
Of course, the good film work that Polanski did is already in the public eye, but he is not worthy of being remembered for anything but his crime—so heinous was its nature. Nadab and Abihu may have accomplished outstanding things for God, but they are remembered for their transgression. Achan may have been a valiant warrior, but he is remembered for his theft. Who knows how many miracles Judas worked or how many he might have baptized? He is remembered for betraying Jesus.
So let it be with Polanski. It was not as though he made a tiny error—committing adultery on the spur of the moment with a consenting adult and regretting it immediately afterward. No, he actually said that he did not think he had hurt anyone by his actions. He deserves what little earthly punishment his crime merits—and to be remembered for his perversion.
“The memory of the righteous is blessed,
but the name of the wicked will rot” (Pr. 10:7).
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
HOW TO BE PERFECTLY MISERABLE
1. Think about yourself.
2. Talk about yourself.
3. Use “I” as often as possible.
4. Mirror yourself continually in the opinion of others.
5. Listen greedily to what people say about you.
6. Expect to be appreciated.
7. Be suspicious.
8. Be jealous and envious.
9. Be sensitive to slights.
10. Never forgive a criticism.
11. Trust nobody but yourself.
12. Insist on consideration and respect.
13. Demand agreement with your own views on everything.
14. Sulk when people are not grateful to you for favors shown.
15. Never forget a service you may have rendered.
16. Be on the lookout for a good time for yourself.
17. Shirk your duties if you can.
18. Do as little as possible for others.
19. Love yourself supremely.
20. Be selfish.