Posted on 01/22/2005 10:37:46 AM PST by Pikamax
Because that's the way the NY Times twisted the story. Did you read the article at the top of the page?
Why would there be such an outcry against such IMAGES as JOE CAMEL (eliminated from advertisements after repeated accusations from antismoking advocates and government regulators that the company used Joe Camel, a cartoon character, to attract young smokers)
Why would there be yet another outcry against the MARLBORO MAN (for similar reasons)........
Why would there be SLOGANS like "JUST SAY NO,"
and "JUST DO IT"
Why would there be COMMERCIALS aimed at children for BREAKFAST CEREALS or TOYS (especially at Christmas time) on Saturday mornings?
Because IMAGES and SLOGANS are effective tools in "SELLING IDEAS" and the intended objective is vastly achieved.
Yes I did. But the AFA article posted on FR a few weeks ago only mentioned SpongeBob and the other cartoon characters in passing. It does seem clear to me that for some odd reason SBSP is being singled out for particular criticism. You can't turn this into a NYT conspiracy - that article from the AFA/worldnetdaily was posted a while ago. In fact, I suspect the NYT picked the story up from here because it wasn't being widely reported except in the fringe-right media.
lol, I know I was singing to the choir....just thought you'd enjoy me "chiming" in! : )
Okay, some Freepers owe Dr. Dobson an apology.
It's a friggin cartoon man..Geeeezz A cartoon ..It's funny , stupid funny as a cartoon should be .There are NO homo hidden messages in it and anyone who see's thatin Spong BoB has a REAL problem . The cartoon itself is innocent ..People are really nuts I swear to God they are.
there are no gay messages in Spong Bob stop acting like a nut case .
Yes, the Saturday cartoons of Spongebob and other characters are, IN AND OF THEMSELVES, innocent. This is not the point.
The point: the video being sent to 61,000 schools, which happen to have Spongebob (and other characters) IS NOT INNOCENT.
The video has a goal. Along with it specially prepared curriculum, it is USING Spongebob and other innocent characters) as a means to promote certain ideas to children. Those ideas include acceptance of homosexuality as "normal."
Most parents do not believe, and do not want their children being taught that homosexuality is normal.
The video that was specially made and being circulated to 61,000 schools is not the Saturday cartoon shows. The video is promoting homosexuality and it is USING Spongebob, other characters, and curriculum to promote that message.
Whether you agree with or against Dobson, the simple truth is that the homosexuals have made Spongebob and the others, players in this field. They have used these cartoons to promote their agenda.
I have seen all the SpongeBob shows. I have yet to see anything in it to promote religion of any kind, so why do we have to have the homosexuals add their agenda to it or anyone else's for that matter. What kind of media outcry do you think there would have been if God had been made part of the cartoon?
Once the door was opened (by the homosexuals) it became open for debate. No one would have heard a word from Dobson, if they had just left the cartoon where is was, on the television.
This attack has all the makings of demagoguery at its finest. It plays on the fears of rural conservatives of those "evil" gays in big blue cities.
In case you haven't noticed, homosexual activity (not the person) is "Evil" to most of those in the red cities. Why do you think there is a culture war between red and blue America?
It's a cartoon.
Perhaps you missed Hanity and Colmes last night - Dr Dobson was a guest on the show and adamantly reiterated his position, as was posted by Pikamax in reply 1:
From the outset, let's be clear that this issue is not about objections to any specific cartoon characters. Instead, Dr. Dobson is concerned that these popular animated personalities are being exploited by an organization that's determined to promote the acceptance of homosexuality among our nation's youth.
The complaint is NOT about the cartoon characters. If the video We Are Family were not being accompanied by extensive curricular supplements, there would be no complaints. However, all of the major homosexual organizations have signed on to support this video and assist with the development of the cirricular materials, as documented here, here and here. These organizations have no business being involved with programs in the public schools in any way.
I never saw anyone getting their knickers in a twist about a cross-dressing Bugs bunny.
Because a cross-dressing Bugs Bunny was an absuridty. It was outlandish and therefore funny. At that time, you didn't have organizations such as GLSEN, the NEA, and PFLAG in the public schools celebrating cross-dressing and promoting it as normal. It's a different story today. For example:
An excerpt from "Queering the Schools"
"... Two videos come particularly highly rated by gay activists and educators as tools for making primary school queer-friendly. Both films strive to present homosexuality in a favorable light, without saying what it actually is. It’s Elementary, intended for parents, educators, and policymakers, shows how classroom teachers can lead kindergartners through carefully circumscribed discussions of the evils of prejudice, portrayed as visited to an unusual degree on gays and lesbians. In That’s a Family, designed for classroom use, children speak directly into the camera, explaining to other kids how having gay and lesbian parents is no different from, for example, having parents of different national backgrounds.
GLSEN even provides lesson plans for the promotion of cross-dressing in elementary school classes. A school resource book containing such lesson plans, Cootie Shots: Theatrical Inoculations Against Bigotry for Kids, Parents, and Teachers, has already been used in second-grade classrooms in California. A children’s play in the book features a little boy singing of the exhilaration of striding about “In Mommy’s High Heels,” in angry defiance of the criticism of his intolerant peers:
They are the swine, I am the pearl. . . .
They’ll be beheaded when I’m queen!
When I rule the world! When I rule the world!
When I rule the world in my mommy’s high heels! ..."
An excerpt from "Targeting Children - Part two: How the homosexual movement uses public schools as instruments of change"
"GLSEN activist and New York kindergarten teacher Jaki Williams said starting in kindergarten is a must, since children at that age are still developing their ideas about the world around them. Even at that age, she said, “the saturation process needs to begin.”
Williams, in fact, is a model teacher when it comes to this “saturation” process. She regularly initiates conversations with her children by reading to them such controversial books as Heather Has Two Mommies, Daddy’s Roommate, and One Dad, Two Dads, Browns Dads, Blue Dads. She also hosts a viewing of the video Both of My Moms’ Names Are Judy: Children of Lesbians and Gays Speak Out, produced by a San Francisco pro-homosexual advocacy group.
According to one writer for The Lambda Report, who infiltrated a 1997 GLSEN workshop, one former teacher admitted that changing the mind of a child required more than a one-time effort. She said she had to expose her children to a constant stream of homosexual words and images, because "It’s really a conditioning process."
See also:
Human Rights Campaign Foundation invades saturday morning cartoons (My title)
Precisely! See reply 74.
I was replying more to some of the responses than the actual article. I saved criticism of Dobson for my subsequent post.
Nice posts Ed.
So you're going to punish SpongeBob because of gay activists? Um, how about going after the gay activists themselves. From what I've read, SpongeBob does not in any way advance their agenda. Even the elementary school film isn't doing that. So what gives?
profeesor, did I get what you were saying right?
You are correct that SpongeBob does not advance their agenda, so why even use him in the film? Why could they not just come up with their own cartoon character. Have you tried to explain sexual orientation to a 1st grader?
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.