The question of whether or not homosexuality is moral does seem to be relevant to whether or not tv producers should portray it in children’s shows. If it is morally equivalent to heterosexual marriage than portraying it cannot be called “conditioning” any more than the inclusion of heterosexual relationships.
It would be the better part of valor recognize that, even if you approved of same sex relationships, it’s a controversial enough issue to leave out of kids programming. Like how some people approve of sex but you don’t show it in kids programming.
I do not think that argument will be accepted by social justice advocates because it relies on too many subjectives. People said that civil rights law was controversial in the 60s etc. These tv producers are simply staking their claim on “the right side of history”. If you want to push back against it you will have to be more axiomatic about it.
I don't think the argument will be accepted by social justice activists. I think it takes a much better than average to accept such an argument in this environment, and they are generally worse than average.
If people stop watching that's probably the best way to achieve long term. We don't consume any media after the early 2010s (paw patrol is one exception), and I screen all content they watch to make sure it's not subversive. We don't pay to go to the movies, we don't go to disneyworld, we don't buy merchandise, etc.
That is amazing what you can do with a computer! I am 77 years old and lucky if I can turn my computer on.
However I have seen with my eyes that for as long as I can remember our television, movies, and yes even some of our churches and religious leaders have been trying to normalize homosexuality to our children and teenagers.
So sad. It used to be very subtle, now it seems to be the norm.
Basically all media made after 2015 or so is hopelessly tainted. Maybe paw patrol is the only exception I can think of. We don’t show any of it to our kids.
Well, this is what he said: "If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea."
I don't really want to engage on the question of canonicity and the textual criticism of ancient manuscripts. Suffice to say that the Jefferson bible is an unscholarly, fanciful exercise in self-flattery. There are many scholarly books on the manuscript evidence for the text of the New Testament. You may find this surprising, but none of them really suggests that scholarship in that field involves subordinating the manuscript evidence to Thomas Jefferson's feelings.
BTW - Individuals who undergo gender-affirming surgeries have a 12X increase in attempted suicide. Transitioning kids actually amplifies their suicide risk, it doesn't help it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11063965/
Perhaps you ought to reconsider your inclination to serve as an apologist for state actors who abuse children by affirming and facilitating their gender transitions, while hiding their actions from the child's parents.
The question of whether or not homosexuality is moral does seem to be relevant to whether or not tv producers should portray it in children’s shows. If it is morally equivalent to heterosexual marriage than portraying it cannot be called “conditioning” any more than the inclusion of heterosexual relationships.
It would be the better part of valor recognize that, even if you approved of same sex relationships, it’s a controversial enough issue to leave out of kids programming. Like how some people approve of sex but you don’t show it in kids programming.
I do not think that argument will be accepted by social justice advocates because it relies on too many subjectives. People said that civil rights law was controversial in the 60s etc. These tv producers are simply staking their claim on “the right side of history”. If you want to push back against it you will have to be more axiomatic about it.
I don't think the argument will be accepted by social justice activists. I think it takes a much better than average to accept such an argument in this environment, and they are generally worse than average.
If people stop watching that's probably the best way to achieve long term. We don't consume any media after the early 2010s (paw patrol is one exception), and I screen all content they watch to make sure it's not subversive. We don't pay to go to the movies, we don't go to disneyworld, we don't buy merchandise, etc.
That is amazing what you can do with a computer! I am 77 years old and lucky if I can turn my computer on.
However I have seen with my eyes that for as long as I can remember our television, movies, and yes even some of our churches and religious leaders have been trying to normalize homosexuality to our children and teenagers.
So sad. It used to be very subtle, now it seems to be the norm.
Keith- I always appreciate a reference to CS Lewis. Hope you're well this week. Cheers, -Thalia
Basically all media made after 2015 or so is hopelessly tainted. Maybe paw patrol is the only exception I can think of. We don’t show any of it to our kids.
If you had read the post, you would know the answer to this question. Hard to miss.
Well, this is what he said: "If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea."
I don't really want to engage on the question of canonicity and the textual criticism of ancient manuscripts. Suffice to say that the Jefferson bible is an unscholarly, fanciful exercise in self-flattery. There are many scholarly books on the manuscript evidence for the text of the New Testament. You may find this surprising, but none of them really suggests that scholarship in that field involves subordinating the manuscript evidence to Thomas Jefferson's feelings.
Deleted comment because I reminded myself: never get into an argument on the internet. Nothing constructive will result.
BTW - Individuals who undergo gender-affirming surgeries have a 12X increase in attempted suicide. Transitioning kids actually amplifies their suicide risk, it doesn't help it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11063965/
Perhaps you ought to reconsider your inclination to serve as an apologist for state actors who abuse children by affirming and facilitating their gender transitions, while hiding their actions from the child's parents.