Posted on 01/20/2005 7:25:31 AM PST by E Rocc
SpongeBob in crosshairs
The New York Times
WASHINGTON — On the heels of electoral victories to bar same-sex marriage, some influential conservative Christian groups are turning their attention to a new target: the cartoon character SpongeBob SquarePants.
James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, said that SpongeBob's creators have enlisted SpongeBob in a “pro-homosexual video,” in which he appeared with other children's television characters.
The makers of the video, Dobson said, plan to mail it to thousands of elementary schools this spring to promote a “tolerance pledge” that includes tolerance for differences of “sexual identity.”
(Excerpt) Read more at kansascity.com ...
"...want the government to enforce "decency". ;;;"Boycotting is a legal tactic, albeit a sleazy one. Has Wildmon ever added to this tactic by campaigning to close or ban "adult" bookstores? Knowing his history, it's hard to believe he never has...and that's crossing the line. Combined, they become advocacy of censorship.But the victory over Penthouse had nothing to do with the government. It was consumer lobbying of convience store chains.
The government gets involved when Larry Flynt's cartoonist who draws Chester the Molester actually molests children. He was arrested and rightly so.Umm, the key word there is "actually molests children". The government will arrest someone who does that regardless of whether or not they are a cartoonist or a minister. That's an action that has victims. It's not "cultural" at all.
I believe there is a Freeper side to the Culture War especially in respect to the National Endowment for the Arts.That's a special case. It's certainly logical to oppose government subsidies to "art" while supporting the right of the artist to do what they want. As I said many years ago, "Anyone has the right to be an "artist". They don't have a right to make a living at it.".
But beyond that, there's nothing close to unanimity. This thread, and most of the other threads involving "cultural issues", South Park, Howard Stern, Kid Rock, et al prove it.
-Eric
Dobson is not saying to boycott spongebob. Dobson is pointing out that this group is using spongebob and other popular characters in a program of videos to be presented in public schools as teaching materials for a "We are family" promotion which includes advocacay of the homosexual lifestyle.
BINGO. What about this concept is so difficult for all these posters to understand???
Do you feel it is the job of the government to "oppose the forces that are morally degrading our culture"? Even if said "forces" include freedom of expression?
I'm sure Wildmon does. I'm becoming convinced that Dobson does. It's quite certain that Jefferson, Franklin, and Madison would not. Ronald Reagan abjectly refused to.
It's not too tough to choose sides.
-Eric
How many times are the networks and cable companies going to put perverts in charge of children's programming?
This is really getting ridiculous!!! We need a way of making the programming companies pay dearly for targeting our kids.
Easy to answer. But please answer mine first. That's "dialogue." Otherwise, you fold.
Dan
Stop the exploitation of SpongeBob !!!
It's not. Some people are being deliberately obtuse. Confuse the issue with nonsense.
Of course. The dude lives in a pineapple.
And what about the Sandy character. That chick is very, um, athletic, if you know what I mean.
I (personally) classify Dobson as one of the "good guys" who can be trusted to be on the right side. I submit that like-minded secularists, conservatives and thoughtful, principled Libertarians would be able to find significant common ground when it comes to vital issues pertaining to establishing a healthy marriage and family.
Smithers is all out homosexual; Homer encountered him a gay neighborhood in one episode. He lives a largely closeted life at work.
Lenny and Carl are now being made out to be homosexual lovers as well. I think that this is akin to Groening's Life In Hell comic strip series where he says that Akbar and Jeff are gay lovers, brothers, or both - "whichever irritates readers most".
Easy to answer. But please answer mine first. That's "dialogue." Otherwise, you fold.Not when your question is illegitimate on its very face.
-Eric
I (personally) classify Dobson as one of the "good guys" who can be trusted to be on the right side. I submit that like-minded secularists, conservatives and thoughtful, principled Libertarians would be able to find significant common ground when it comes to vital issues pertaining to establishing a healthy marriage and family.Governmental attempts to supress cultural items that emerged through free expression (and free and uncoerced economic transactions) are rarely going to gain support from the friends of liberty.
-Eric
Then you fold. Or you'll deny it and fold, or fold and deny, some final show of bravado.
But if truth every becomes a concern for you, remember this: usually, where you find yourself unwilling to answer a simple question — that's right about where you went wrong.
No charge.
Dan
But if truth every becomes a concern for you, remember this: usually, where you find yourself unwilling to answer a simple question — that's right about where you went wrong.Refusal to answer an ad hominem is hardly going wrong. Starting with one is typically a sign of going badly wrong.
But where you really went wrong was by stipulating the point in question. You claim that Dobson's actions represent "accomplishments for the American family". I would reject that premise. He is instead promoting a particular cultural agenda.
The value of that agenda is the point under debate here. I would say that free expression has far more value. I doubt Dobson would agree, and I am certain that Wildmon would not.
-Eric
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.