Shut up, American Family Association. Just shut up, Religious Right. I am so tired of hearing about the "controversy" surrounding any new movie or TV show that dares to even touch a religious theme. I'm sick of people starting boycotts over shows they've never even seen. I watched this thing last night. Both hours of it. Trust me, the "controversy" is just so much horse crap. If you read some of the articles about it online (1, 2, 3, 4, 5), you would think that The Book of Daniel stopped just shy of openly gay porn, drug advocacy and outright blasphemy. It's not nearly that bad. In fact, it has a lot of positive things going for it. To put those articles into context: Aidan Quinn plays an Episcopal priest with a very human, dysfunctional family. If anything's "controversial", it's perhaps that the show introduces more family crises and relationship problems in two hours than most real families confront in a decade. They include: a talented daughter who's financing her budding computer animation career by selling drugs; a gay son who hasn't come out yet to his grandfather (who happens to be a bishop); an adopted Chinese son who's having sex with his dad's best friend's daughter; a mother who deep enough into Alzheimer's that her behavior is bizarre and inappropriate; a brother-in-law who disappeared with three million in church funds; a Roman Catholic priest with friends in low places who will try to recover the money...for a price. And that's not all of it. Taken as a whole, the plot borders on the cartoonish. There's just so much going on. Taken as individual points, the various subplots are sometimes poignant and sometimes humorous. Aidan Quinn as Fr. Webster is quite fallible. He's got his own problem, what with a painkiller addiction that he's not yet ready to admit to himself. I thought it was all handled in relatively good taste...but then you know what an unrepentant liberal I am, so what do I know? Even the scenes with Jesus. During the course of the show, Jesus pops up whenever Fr. Webster feels lost and needs to talk. Nobody sees Jesus except for Webster. Now, it probably never occurred to some of the simple minds that like to mount boycotts that these scenes could easily be interpreted to be metaphorical. People talk to Jesus every day, and believe they receive his guidance in return. To me, having Jesus appear in person is nothing more than a plot device which allows us into Webster's mind whenever he's in prayer. Perhaps what they have a problem with is that this Jesus is understanding. B.S. aside, this Jesus does not say that he approves of anything that's going on, only that he loves his children anyway. And we all know that a loving, forgiving Jesus is the machination of those evil, liberal-Commie Hollywood writers. Now, a Jesus that breathes fire and brimstone and smites his enemies...that's entertainment!