Less reasons to watch ABC all the time

[Gipper]

you ever notice how most Gays...are Discriminated against? so would it not be a bit odd to not have that part of the show? And Sorry but guess what, younger people don't have the same hate of gays people like you do...in fact many have gay friends and could care less about if they are or not. And "positive light" as appose to they should be shown in a poor light? Why because your a ignorant little man who thinks gays getting married will destroy marriage, but not people like Newt who just cheat on there wifes and call others who do it Immoral?

Damn Pockets you really jump to a lot of conclusions there. All of which are wrong.

My kid brother is gay and he has experienced no discrimination in his life. He does very well financially as an interior designer. I have nothing against gay people. Unlike you, I believe in live and let live as long as you do not hurt anyone else.

The positive light reference I made was only to show the bias present in Hollywood. Not all gays are wonderful people. Just as not all non-gays are wonderful people.

And, I could not care less about the gay marriage issue. We Americans have so many bigger problems to deal with, such as the economic disaster your beloved BO has generated.

 

[Gipper]

Apparently the list is so long it needed to be separated into several different web pages:

* List of animated television programs with LGBT characters
* List of comedy and variety television programs with LGBT cast members
* List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters
* List of made for television films with LGBT characters
* List of news and information television programs featuring LGBT subjects
* List of situation comedies with LGBT characters
* List of soap operas with LGBT characters
* List of reality television programs with LGBT cast members

From wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_television_programs_with_LGBT_characters

Using Wiki's internal search engine the page for list of television programs with Christian characters is apparently non-existent.

Well done.

Catholic priests are regularly depicted in a negative light. But, p-school teachers never are. And yet, p-school teachers molest far more children than do priests.

I am sure we could go on and on with this topic of left wing bias and their hatred of Christians.

Teachers Vs. Priests
Unequal Treatment In the Media?

Share BY WAYNE LAUGESEN, REGISTER CORRESPONDENT Tuesday, Nov 27, 2007 3:03 PM Comment
" />
NEW YORK — When the Associated Press set out to investigate an apparent problem with sexual assault of children in public schools, the organization spared no expense.

A congressionally mandated study by Hofstra University had already found school-based sexual abuse to be a big problem.

“It was one of our priorities for the year,” said John Affleck, editor of the AP’s national reporting team.

The result was a three-part series, available to editors throughout the country beginning Oct. 20, that revealed widespread and routine sexual assault of public school students throughout the country.

The first story summarized: “Students in America’s schools are groped. They’re raped. They’re pursued, seduced and think they’re in love.”

The series told of an entrenched resistance to stopping abusers on the part of teachers, administrators and the National Education Association, a teacher’s union.
http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/7391

 

[Dr.Who]

you ever notice how most Gays...are Discriminated against? so would it not be a bit odd to not have that part of the show? And Sorry but guess what, younger people don't have the same hate of gays people like you do...in fact many have gay friends and could care less about if they are or not. And "positive light" as appose to they should be shown in a poor light? Why because your a ignorant little man who thinks gays getting married will destroy marriage, but not people like Newt who just cheat on there wifes and call others who do it Immoral?

You did not read any hate coming from me. Must be in your imagination.

You obviously have never read my view on gay marriage. Nor my views on Newt.

Calling me an ignorant little man crosses the line from commenting on what I say and becomes a personal attack.

Mods, please take whatever action is appropriate.

 

[Dr.Who]

Come to think of it, I don't think I've met too many liberals, or anyone else who believes that Bush blew up the twin towers. There are a few nutcases out there to be sure. I've been arguing with one on another forum, as a matter of fact, who objects to my term "WCT" for "wacky conspiracy theory."

He also thinks the moon landing was faked, among other things.

There are, however, quite a few fundamentalist Christians who stand reason on its head trying to promote the young Earth nonsense over evolution.

If Neddie is a fundamentalist, is Homer a liberal? Quite the positive portrayal of liberals, don't you think?

Fully 35 percent of Democrats believe George W. Bush had advance knowledge of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/08/03/each_party_has_its_fanatics_97748.html

Last year 16% of democrats thought that Bush actually had the bombs planted.

I was going to find a stat showing that a tiny percent of Christians believe in a young earth however what I found shocked me. It turns out that a minority but still a higher than it should be percentage do believe it. Perhaps if we could pull out the Jehovas witnesses and the Mormons the percent might fall.

But I guess what it shows more than anything is that there are a lot of wackos out there OF ALL SORTS.

The truth is still that television tends to pick a stereotype it wants to portay and then it does just that. Christians are rarely portrayed as normal and tv goes out of its way to promote homosexuality.

 

[Dr.Who]

If Neddie is a fundamentalist, is Homer a liberal? Quite the positive portrayal of liberals, don't you think?

I think homer is not even on the same page with liberals or conservatives. He is JUST an idiot.

(I apologize to any who would object to my occasional use of caps but i see no way to use italics. Opps there it is.)

 

[PLC1]

Fully 35 percent of Democrats believe George W. Bush had advance knowledge of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/08/03/each_party_has_its_fanatics_97748.html

Last year 16% of democrats thought that Bush actually had the bombs planted.

I was going to find a stat showing that a tiny percent of Christians believe in a young earth however what I found shocked me. It turns out that a minority but still a higher than it should be percentage do believe it. Perhaps if we could pull out the Jehovas witnesses and the Mormons the percent might fall.

But I guess what it shows more than anything is that there are a lot of wackos out there OF ALL SORTS.

The truth is still that television tends to pick a stereotype it wants to portay and then it does just that. Christians are rarely portrayed as normal and tv goes out of its way to promote homosexuality.

Agreed. There are a lot of wackos of all sorts. That 35% figure is astounding, as well as the number of young earthers and "birthers".

Mormons are not young Earthers, but JWs are. Many of the fundamentalists are, too. Try bringing up evolution in any one of these forums and see how much total nonsense gets posted (it is just a theory, you know).

I'm not sure that TV is so much "promoting homosexuality" as it is promoting tolerance. Unless you believe that homosexuality is a choice, promoting it would be much like promoting blue eyes. It's not going to create any more blue eyed people. There are, on the other hand, some chilling examples of violence against gays.

Here is an interesting list of WCT. If people believe #2 and #3, why not the rest of them?

 

[Dr.Who]

Agreed. There are a lot of wackos of all sorts. That 35% figure is astounding, as well as the number of young earthers and "birthers".

Mormons are not young Earthers, but JWs are. Many of the fundamentalists are, too. Try bringing up evolution in any one of these forums and see how much total nonsense gets posted (it is just a theory, you know).

I'm not sure that TV is so much "promoting homosexuality" as it is promoting tolerance. Unless you believe that homosexuality is a choice, promoting it would be much like promoting blue eyes. It's not going to create any more blue eyed people. There are, on the other hand, some chilling examples of violence against gays.

Here is an interesting list of WCT. If people believe #2 and #3, why not the rest of them?

TV writers, who are artists and not sociologists, don't know enough about the difference between tolerance and promoting homosexuality to do an adequate job. They may think they are promoting tolerance but they are in fact promoting the homosexual agenda. For example one could be very tolerant and loving toward gays and yet oppose gay marriage but you would not know that by watching tv.

I also think that it being a choice or not is irrelevant. One could made arguments for or against it whether or not it is choice or determined. For example one could say since it is not a choice we must be tolerant like we are with hair color which is not a choice. OR one could say since it is not a choice it must represent a sick aberration which is to be treated aggressively. Nasty people will take whatever side they want to be against whatever they want to be against regardless. Another example, there are gay people who are certain that they themselves have made a choice to be gay, that they are happy and that being gay is a good enough option that they want to make that choice, but they are blasted by the gay community and told that they are sooo sick they do not even understand their own mind.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Damn Pockets you really jump to a lot of conclusions there. All of which are wrong.

My kid brother is gay and he has experienced no discrimination in his life. He does very well financially as an interior designer. I have nothing against gay people. Unlike you, I believe in live and let live as long as you do not hurt anyone else.

The positive light reference I made was only to show the bias present in Hollywood. Not all gays are wonderful people. Just as not all non-gays are wonderful people.

And, I could not care less about the gay marriage issue. We Americans have so many bigger problems to deal with, such as the economic disaster your beloved BO has generated.

SO your brother can get married? he could have joined the army untill a few months ago? He could get on his partners insurance? he could adopt a kid just as easily?

I find it pretty hard to belive that he has never been discriminated against...And if he not he be be lucky and happy that "liberal hollywood" has made being gay more acceptable...and that he did not end up like Sam Shepard.

 

[Dr.Who]

SO your brother can get married? he could have joined the army untill a few months ago? He could get on his partners insurance? he could adopt a kid just as easily?

I find it pretty hard to belive that he has never been discriminated against...And if he not he be be lucky and happy that "liberal hollywood" has made being gay more acceptable...and that he did not end up like Sam Shepard.

If he does not have a partner whose insurance he wants to be on, if he never wanted to get married, if he did not want to join the army or adopt then he would have never experienced that discrimination which would be real for other people.

I have a gay friend who m I have known since I was 14 and he has experienced discrimination which he claims has ade his life very hard. But he is also not on board with the whole gay agenda either - he just wants to live his life.

 

[PLC1]

If he does not have a partner whose insurance he wants to be on, if he never wanted to get married, if he did not want to join the army or adopt then he would have never experienced that discrimination which would be real for other people.

I have a gay friend who m I have known since I was 14 and he has experienced discrimination which he claims has ade his life very hard. But he is also not on board with the whole gay agenda either - he just wants to live his life.

He just wants to live his life? That is the gay agenda, isn't it? It seems to me that is most everyone's agenda.

And if he did have a partner whose insurance he wanted to be on, if he wanted to get married, if he wanted to join the army or adopt, then he did face discrimination, and wasn't allowed to live his life.

I could say that I'm not gay, so what do I care? I'm not black, Hispanic, Jewish, or native American either, so why would I care about discrimination and silly stereotypes applied to those groups?

Yet, somehow, it is just better to live in a society that is fair to everyone, and everyone can be who they are.

We've come a long way in that direction since my own youth, half a century ago, but racism, sexism, and homophobia are still with us.

 

[GenSeneca]

For example one could say since [being gay] is not a choice we must be tolerant like we are with hair color which is not a choice.

Pedophiles are using this argument championed by the Gay community to claim persecution. According to pedophiles, they did not choose to be sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children and therefore believe they should be treated with the same acceptance and tolerance extended to the gay community.

How long before you see pedophilia rights groups clamoring for the same rights afforded to gays? The right to marry (children), the right to adopt (children), the right to join the military etc.

Just think... One day you could turn on the TV to find "Pedophile eye" (Queer eye), where pedophiles offer lifestyle advice to non-pedophiles.

I realize some people (pocket) will claim I'm simply gay bashing but I support equal rights for all people, gay, straight, trans, rich, poor, white, black, and everything in between.

The 14th amendment is the only law necessary to ensure equal rights. Writing a new law that specifies a particular group as having certain rights is conferring special rights on that group, not equal rights.

Gays already have equal rights, they don't need to have new laws created, they only need to have laws preventing the exercise of their equal rights ruled unconstitutional.

If my statements about pedophiles using the gay argument to further their agenda sounds ridiculous, remember that our grandparents thought homosexuality was an abomination. Two generations later, homosexuality has become almost mainstream with wide acceptance.

Who knows, perhaps our grandchildren will be as tolerant and accepting of pedophilia as the current generation is regarding homosexuality.

 

[PLC1]

Pedophiles are using this argument championed by the Gay community to claim persecution. According to pedophiles, they did not choose to be sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children and therefore believe they should be treated with the same acceptance and tolerance extended to the gay community.

How long before you see pedophilia rights groups clamoring for the same rights afforded to gays? The right to marry (children), the right to adopt (children), the right to join the military etc.

Just think... One day you could turn on the TV to find "Pedophile eye" (Queer eye), where pedophiles offer lifestyle advice to non-pedophiles.

I realize some people (pocket) will claim I'm simply gay bashing but I support equal rights for all people, gay, straight, trans, rich, poor, white, black, and everything in between.

The 14th amendment is the only law necessary to ensure equal rights. Writing a new law that specifies a particular group as having certain rights is conferring special rights on that group, not equal rights.

Gays already have equal rights, they don't need to have new laws created, they only need to have laws preventing the exercise of their equal rights ruled unconstitutional.

If my statements about pedophiles using the gay argument to further their agenda sounds ridiculous, remember that our grandparents thought homosexuality was an abomination. Two generations later, homosexuality has become almost mainstream with wide acceptance.

Who knows, perhaps our grandchildren will be as tolerant and accepting of pedophilia as the current generation is regarding homosexuality.

Except that gays don't harm anyone by living the gay lifestyle. No, pedophiles will never be accepted by decent human beings. We may accept that pedophilia is not a choice, but then, if it can't be cured, we'll have to keep the pedophiles locked up in order to protect children.

Oh, yes, and our grandparents tended to think that black people weren't the equal of white people, either. A lot of them thought blacks were not really human.

Attitudes do change, but do you seriously believe that parents will quit protecting children from sexual predators? Really?

 

[Dr.Who]

A lot of them thought blacks were not really human.

Yep, and we all know how well it goes when someone starts saying that some other living human being is not a person.

 

[PLC1]

Yep, and we all know how well it goes when someone starts saying that some other living human being is not a person.

It has happened in every war. There is always a dehumanizing word applied to the enemy.

 

[GenSeneca]

Except that gays don't harm anyone by living the gay lifestyle.

We used to have a poster here who argued there should be no legal age of consent, that such laws discriminate based on age and are therefore unconstitutional. Remember him? I'm sure he'd argue the pedophile lifestyle doesn't harm anyone.

No, pedophiles will never be accepted by decent human beings.

The same was once said about homosexuals and blacks... and the Irish... And the Jews etc., etc.

we'll have to keep the pedophiles locked up in order to protect children.

Please explain how you would do that.

Attitudes do change, but do you seriously believe that parents will quit protecting children from sexual predators?

Of course not, parents try to protect their children well into adulthood. As you said though, attitudes do change. I'm not claiming to be a psychic only musing on the subject.