Cee Lo Green Alters IMAGINE Lyric, Outrages Pacifists Everywhere

I am amused that atheists, agnostics and pacifists are up and arms over Green's new lyrics. John Lennon's Lyrics were motivated by his Krishna religious agenda, which considers other beliefs as 'religions' and Krishna as the one true ancient belief for all time. He had no motivation for a secular view of the world. He also bad mouthed 'evolution; in his 1980 interview.

Go Cee Lo Green!!!!!!!!!

go with the flow the river knows . . .

I don't think you should mess with an artists' words.

All I'm going to say is, I like the line "Imagine no possessions" and you see his big blingin' watch. Hmmm...Btw, thought it was odd that they also did Carlos Santana and Bieber/Beaver covering "Let It Be". They were just trying to mellow out the Occupy Wall Stree Protesters. Problem is, those rich people singing songs about peace, harmony and equal distribution of rights is nothing more than a sham.

True Peace on Earth to all in 2012.

Wah, Wah, Wah, you messed with Lennon's lyrics. I think John would have thought what Cee Lo did was expressing his Artistic freedom. Lennon was an Artist and believed in artistic expression. But hey we'll never know because he's dead and we can't ask him. People need to stop being so damn ready to be offended by stupid things. Instead of going off on Cee Lo for what he did why don't you Honor John's memory by being Tolerant of others and less easy to offend. Cause that's how John would have wanted it.

Major Beatles fan and cry every year when Imagine gets sung. This year I cried for a different reason, the words were changed. I am a fan of Cee Lo but my loyalties definitely lie more with John, Paul, George and Ringo! Hated the rendition he did on New Years :(

Wow. I think Cee Lo didn't think that through. Messing with lyrics by John Lennon? To do that to the cultural icon that is John Lennon either takes guts or stupidity. Not cool either way.

Oh geez, singers do this sort of thing all of the time. I don't know why it is such a big deal. I adore John Lennon and actually have only the vaguest idea who Cee Lo Green is, but I don't think being a dead icon means a singer can't change the lyrics.

I think there's a difference between a cover and what Cee Lo did. A cover may change the sound of a song but not the lyrics. That's called a rewrite.

I am a huge Beatles fan but, I also look at this front the POV of a writer/reader. IMAGINE doesn't makes sense if you say "all religion's true." The song speaks of "living for today" and imagining "there's no heaven." The song isn't anti-religion, but makes the point that religious superiority leads to conflict and always has.

I'm not offended by the change, but I think it shows that Cee Lo doesn't actually understand what the song is saying. .

I am not a huge Beatles fan but I respect their music. I have noticed in the last few years that when people cover songs it’s met with harsh responses. I am a fan of someone taking someone else’s art and giving us a different interpretation.

I am also not a fan of Cee Lo but i think his cover of the song did it justice. No one said anything about A Perfect Circle covering the same song but when you hear their version it’s dark, eerie and paints a picture of complete sadness. Completely opposite of what I think Lennon had invisioned his song to be. But when you change the lyric or “no religion too” to “all religion is true” everyone gets their underpants in a knot.

Give the guy a break. He sang a song that is about everyone being one with each other and trying to make a point that maybe all religions are right and no religion is wrong or right. He is making a point that we all need to respect each other’s opinions and beliefs. I think the Lennon supporters are going overboard on this one and are missing the point. I think they should get mad about something that really matters.

I'm a non-believer myself, but I gotta say, I'm kind of with Graylin on this one. Cee Lo showed very poor judgment in messing with such a sensitive subject in such an iconic song -- and he definitely wasn't thinking about nonbelievers when he rewrote the lyrics. But I also think, from his own, limited perspective on life, he was trying to make the same point (differently) about an end to religious conflict. It was stupid, yes, and I'm glad it didn't go unnoticed. But I just can't bring myself to be personally offended by it. Now, his singing, on the other hand...

I wrote about the same situation here http://www.wordphiliac.com/?p=517 . I don't see what the big deal is really. The sentiment of the song remains the same. Lennon didn't say and 'no religions too" because he hates religion for religion's sake.

It was more about the conflict and ironically the hate people have for other people because of religion. So if we could imagine a world like Cee Lo's where all religions were in fact true, wouldn't the world still live in peace, which is ultimately what John Lennon wanted?