You would think that perhaps conservative Christian groups would have something better to worry about. Apparently not.
Focus on the Family and the American Family Association are all bent out of shape because of a supposed “pro-homosexual video” being mailed to elementary schools which includes SpongeBob, Barney and Jimmy Neutron promoting a “tolerance pledge.” The unholy alliance between cartoons and gays is finally revealed!
The video's creator, Nile Rodgers, says that the groups are getting riled up over a misunderstanding:
Mr. Rodgers said he founded the We Are Family Foundation after the Sept. 11 attacks to create a music video to teach children about multiculturalism. The video has appeared on television networks, and nothing in it or its accompanying materials refers to sexual identity. The pledge, borrowed from the Southern Poverty Law Center, is not mentioned on the video and is available only on the group's Web site.
But Paul Batura from Focus on the Family is sticking to his story: “We see the video as an insidious means by which the organization is manipulating and potentially brainwashing kids.”
Yeah, ok. But teaching your kids to be hateful bigots is cool. Assholes.
Via NY Times and apparently every other blog in the world.














"Yeah, ok. But teaching your kids to be hateful bigots is cool. Assholes."
You crack me up, Jessica -- was the above statement meant to be as hypocritical as it sounds?
And by the way, are you suggesting that if someone does not approve of homosexuality they are automatically teaching their kids to be hateful bigots?
“We see the video as an insidious means by which the organization is manipulating and potentially brainwashing kids.”
That quote would be the difference between disapproving of homosexuality and being a hateful bigot.
As for calling them assholes...well, that's just calling them as they come, not being a bigot, in my opinion.
Couldn't the quote also be simply "calling them as they come"? Or are only certain people allowed to call things as they see it without risking being branded as intolerant or bigots?
they are bigots, and i'm not going to mince words about that.
you teach your kids that homosexuality is wrong, you're a bigot and you're teaching your kid to be a bigot. period.
Example:
My boss is an asshole.
versus
My boss is an evil, twisted person intent on sucking all goodness out of the world, and must be stopped by any means necessary, including but not limited to marginalization and violence, because I DON'T AGREE WITH HIM.
If you can't see the difference in those two attitudes, then you have zero depth perception.
I laughed so hard I wet my SpongeBob SquarePants. (not my coinage, but too good not to pass around).
"Asshole" is too serious a term for the FOTF and AFA guys, who are managing to be way more funny than the original shows.
Jessica has spoken, let all bow down before her and acknowledge her superior intellect and goodness. Henceforth, she, and she alone, will determine who qualifies as a bigot.
She will also determine what is right and wrong for the entire world, and heaven forbid if you disagree. She is now God. Period.
Of course, there's the scene on my nephew's Spongebob paraphenalia where SB and Patrick are sticking out their tongues and arguing about whose is bigger...I don't know if that's homosexual or not, but it's pretty funny.
Aside from the obvious point that this whole thing is just more hate-mongering, I just think it's telling that these people are so insecure about their belief system that they are threatened by a cartoon character. Really, didn't they instill their ignorance in their children a little more firmly?
bigot
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=bigot
Jessica, that definition sounds very familiar to me -- given your comments above, you might even come within its terms (although I am far too polite to point it out).
so i'm a bigot against bigotry? interesting...
if i was intolerant of other people's views than i would erase all of the misogynist comments that we get. or i wouldn't let people comment at all.
You want to pretend that you are so tolerant, but the second someone disagrees with your worldview, they are criticized and called names. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but somehow it escapes you that others are, too. Hence you are in tolerant, and by the definition you cited, a bigot. You members of the tolerance police kill me -- we tolerate everyone and everything (so long as they agree with us). Either you are tolerant of other views or you are not. If you're not I don't care, but don't act as if you are. And I read your blog a lot, and I don't remember seeing any misogynist comments.
"Jessica has spoken, let all bow down before her and acknowledge her superior intellect and goodness. Henceforth, she, and she alone, will determine who qualifies as a bigot. She will also determine what is right and wrong for the entire world, and heaven forbid if you disagree. She is now God. Period."
uh... just wanted to point out that this is jessica's blog, and the point of it is for her to share her opinions about what's right or wrong.
as for your "tolerance" post, you're still missing the point. hating (or as you might prefer to say, "disapproving of") an entire group of people because of certain characteristics -- skin color, gender, sexual orientation, physical ability, etc -- is bigotted. teaching your children to hate them is even worse. on the other hand, disapproving of an individual or individuals because their words and actions are harmful and discriminatory against others with less power isn't bigotted.
for example, a white person teaching their children that blacks are less intelligent, and calling them the n-word, is clearly racist, bigotted, and intolerant. but if i say that people who hate blacks and use the n-word are assholes -- which, for the record, is what i think -- am i being intolerant too? sure, i'm not tolerating racism and bigotry, but you can't exactly compare the two. intolerance in the form of bigotry is a lot different than speaking out against that bigotry. i'm not discriminating against an entire group because they possess a particular quality. i'm calling out particular individuals not for their membership in a group, but for their words and actions.
Being gay is not an opinion. It's what you are. Hating gay people is an opinion. Being belligerent and paraniod about it is being an asshole. Quit pretending that "tolerance" means pretending that bigots are a bunch of retarded children that need coddling.
Plus, I love the chutzpah. Mark alone gets to decide what "liberal" means and then holds the rest of us up to his standard chosen only because of how ridiculous it is.
Amanda-
I know it's Jessica's blog, so what? That doesn't make her right, any more than it makes me right on my blog. Big deal.
Your proof for homosexuality as an innate characteristic is what? Plenty of people have left the homoseuxal lifestyle, plenty have joined it. And what if there were a racist gene, would you allow someone to argue "I'm racist, I was born this way, get over it?" I wouldn't.
And when did I decide what the word "liberal" means? Go re-read my post, I never even used the word, much less declared what it means.
Did I say it was an innate characteristic? No, I did not. That's because it's irrelevant whether it is or is not. I said it was not an opinion. I would also take a stand against a bigot who thinks that a video teaching kids to be tolerant of people of other faiths Being gay doesn't make you an asshole who spreads hate in the world. Being a bigot does. Being intolerant of bigotry is like being intolerant of war-mongering. What next? You're gonna argue that I need to be tolerant of bin Laden's belief that all Americans need to die?
Plus, we're not being "intolerant" of your assholery like you are being intolerant of homosexuality. Calling you an asshole is not intolerance in the sense that voting against the right of assholes to marry is.
Amanda:
You're kidding, right? If homosexuality is just "what you are" (your words) then I think that is an innate characteristic. Unless you are going to change the definition of innate characteristic.
And again, I ask you -- what if a racist or (eek!) a homophobe simply declared "being a racist or homophobe is 'what I am' so I don't have to conform to your view of what I should be." OK with you, Amanda?
You simply assert your opinion as fact -- i.e., "I'm not being intolerant, but you are because I am the definer of intolerance."
Maybe if you redefine the word "win" you can convince yourself that you won this debate.
When did "tolerance" mean "not allowed to criticize"? Awful PC of you there, Mark.
Mythago-
Ask Amanda, she's the definer of tolerance around here.
I always thought tolerant meant that you respect someone else's right to have an opinion that differs from yours. I respect anyone's right to disagree with me -- I just expect the same in return. But when homosexuality is at stake, there is no respect. Unless you bow down before homosexuality, you are a bigot. People can't even respond to the merits -- instead, your opinion is simply written off, because you are a bigot. Now that's PC. No thought, just reaction.
Of course SpongeBob SquarePants isn't gay-- just look at his outfit!