Originally Posted By JeffG >> "If the people got to vote on what is more offensive: Veggie Tales or Desperate Housewives Desperate Housewives would get 80% of the vote." << That is probably true, but I also can't even begin to imagine that you are so naive as to be confused about which of those shows the majority of those people would actually choose to watch. -Jeff
Originally Posted By Beaumandy I like the show Desperate Housewives myself. But I know one show is offensive and not appropriate for kids and another is family friendly. To watch the left try and argue a childrens show that has religion in it is offensive is just more proof that these leftists are totally out of touch with mainstream America. Then... they will blame the voting machines for losing elections and not their own perverted and twisted values.
Originally Posted By JeffG >> "To watch the left try and argue a childrens show that has religion in it is offensive is just more proof that these leftists are totally out of touch with mainstream America." << Who is arguing that? The whole issue here was that NBC made the business decision to remove a few blatantly religious references from an otherwise more neutral show in order to enlarge the audience. It sounds like some were offended by the cuts, but I have yet to see anyone say that the show itself was offensive either in its original or current form. -Jeff
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<Who is arguing that? The whole issue here was that NBC made the business decision to remove a few blatantly religious references from an otherwise more neutral show in order to enlarge the audience>> Why did NBC want to cut anything out of this show?? Answer. Because they thought some religious content might be offensive. It just shows how out of touch these people in Hollywood are.
Originally Posted By JeffG >> "Why did NBC want to cut anything out of this show?? Answer." << Again, that was already answered. From the best I can tell, NBC cut out a few bits of blatant religious dialog in order to make the show more neutral, and thus likely to appeal to a wider audience. That doesn't necessarily mean that they found it "offensive" and it certainly doesn't equate to the issues that people have with a show like "Desperate Housewives". For the record, I think NBC's editing of this show is silly, but I also think it is clearly an example of overzealous business and not an example of some massive conspiracy against religion. -Jeff
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA If 'VeggieTales' broccoli character can't evangelize on a kid's TV show, the terrorists have won.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<Again, that was already answered. From the best I can tell, NBC cut out a few bits of blatant religious dialog in order to make the show more neutral, and thus likely to appeal to a wider audience.>> I suppose this could be correct, but it still shows how out of touch Hollywood is with the general public. If you took a poll asking how many people were offended by what NBC decided they needed to edit, you are going to get a very small percentage of people who were offended by the shows content. What is offensive is NBC thinking they needed to shield people from the message of Jesus. Let the culture war continue. The Seahawks are going to make me $750 today as they are up by 21 in the 2nd quarter. That is not offensive.
Originally Posted By mele Well, there are delays for nearly *all* live programs now so that there are no more Janet Jackson booby moments. Those add up to more minutes than a few seconds shaved off of Veggie Tales. True, most tv programs and movies try to get in as much sex and violence as possible. It's not too surprising that they'd cut out a reference to God. I don't mind if my kids hear things about God but there are some overtly religious things I *might* not want them to hear. I don't think Veggie Tales went too far in this case.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 what I find amazing is that is seems if you think that the content shouldn't have been sensored, someohow you get moved to the far right ! If that was happening broad brushed the other way we'd be seeing the neo-con comments.... news flash, not all people offended by this are watching Pat Robertson or follow Rush.
Originally Posted By HyperTyper >>> The problem with the argument, though, is that a pretty large percentage of R-rated films are extremely low-budget movies (mostly action, horror, or soft-core erotic) made primarily for foreign release, home video, or cable distribution. When you take-out those low-budget R-rated films, you're still left with a preponderance of R-rated and PG-13-rated films. When you look at individual film income, the more general an audience a film can accomodate with its content, the more successful the film. Look at all the mega-blockbusters that have been fit for family viewing: The Disney golden age films of the early 90s. The Star Wars films. Harry Potter. (Arguably) Lord of the Rings. Look at the unbelievable success of High School Musical, which isn't even in theaters, but would have been a huge success on the big screen. When has an R-rated sex comedy or gore fest EVER met with that kind of success? Yet some sort of excessive language or imagery finds its way into well over half of the films released. And PG-films are now carrying their own brand of excess, from profane language to excessive bathroom humor. Here's the other thing that angers me, and shows grossly irresponsible judgement on the part of the media: More and more, vulgar content is being intentionally spoon-fed to youngsters. I couldn't believe it one day when I saw a whole rack of Austin Powers merchandise at the local Super Target. I won't even see those movies myself, and I'm a grown adult without kids. I've seen enough clips on TV to know they are as vulgar and sexualized as can be. And they're peddling it to kids in the same aisle as the Blue's Clues stuff. What's going on here???? Also, can we lay-off the "right wing Christian" gripes? Yes, Christians get upset and annoyed at things (we all do) but we are talking about at EXTREME behavior in the media. I don't hear Bozell, or Pat Robertson, or anyone protesting Desparate Housewives, or your everyday run-of-the-mill nonsense and garbage. Someone says the B-word on Law and Order at 9:00, and the world (including the Christian one) goes on its way. But when Janet "Miss Jackson if you're nasty" flashes her bosoms during a SuperBowl halftime show, when a movie or music star drops the F-bomb on an awards show in the early evening, or when a children's cartoon has a simple declaration of faith obliterated for no good reason ... we're going to hear about it. It's a clear crossing of the line ... Dangling extreme content that is entirely age-inappropriate in once case, or 'sanitizing' programs from any religious themes or ideas. On one side, you have leftists crying foul at something so simple as a pious vegetable, or a girl expressing gratitude to God at a graduation speech, or a boy merely carrying a Bible with him to school. On the other side, you generally have conservative disappointment and disgust with liberal expression, but real protest only when someone goes way over the edge, typically when it crosses the line of age-appropriateness. And this line is not just a product of religious views. It is scientific fact that children who are sexualized or exposed to violent media at early ages become recklessly violent and sexual more often, and face more difficulty in their teen and adult years. Do Christians go extreme? Do Christian teachers subject students to forced sermonizing? Are Christian messages glorifying dangerous or reckless behavior among children? Do Christian performers and programs find enjoyment in offending other people? Generally not, and when some Christian nutcase goes off the deep end, the rest of the Christian world joins in condeming such behavior. So why, then, when the media does these things AGAINST people of faith and/or values, is it seen as something we should just shut-up and tolerate? There is nothing wrong with voicing an objection. People objected to the 9/11 miniseries critical of Clinton, and I had no problem with that. >>> Ergo, why should the far right's viewpoint always win out, as they seem to think? Look at what's on TV, and explain to me how the far right's point of view is 'always' winning out, or even coming close. There is definitely a prevailing viewpoint programming the TV schedules ... and it certainly isn't a far-right one. Try the other end of the spectrum, and then you'll see who rules the airwaves. >>> For the record, I think NBC's editing of this show is silly, but I also think it is clearly an example of overzealous business and not an example of some massive conspiracy against religion. I am undecided on this point. I know the network news divisions definitely have an agenda against Christian churches. Look at how the Pope's speech was handled. The pope used a quote alluding to violence in Islam's history. Right or wrong, look at how many Muslims responded: With violence and violent rhetoric ... thus validating the quote, at least in part. And yet the networks placed all blame squarely on the Pope, and yet none probed what the resulting violence meant said about Islam's difficulty in quelling violent behavior among its own. The question is: How far does the agenda reach inside a network's organization? Does it spill over into the entertainment divisions? Looking at how often religion is mocked and criticized in programs, I'd say it's possible. Look, I understand why some people view Christians as annoying. They encounter overbearing Christians, and it drives them nuts. Me too. But the paranoia against the "extreme right wing" is really quite manufactured. Show me how the right wing Christians have stopped or even slowed down liberals from being liberal or spreading liberal views, and I'll eat my hat.
Originally Posted By ecdc "On one side, you have leftists crying foul at something so simple as a pious vegetable, or a girl expressing gratitude to God at a graduation speech, or a boy merely carrying a Bible with him to school." Still more strawmen, eh? I thought we'd given up on those. So go ahead and point out ONE liberal on these boards - just one - that has decried any of these things. Talk about your bait and switch. You take these simple expressions of faith which no reasonable person would object to, then you substitute them for what the real problem is - mandatory prayer in school, abstinence only education in school, Christians demanding that a documentary on 9/11 be pulled because of what they deem as inappropriate language. "I am undecided on this point." Which only serves to prove you, like other Christians, like to embrace the persecution complex. It isn't simple business: it's that they're out to get us. "But the paranoia against the "extreme right wing" is really quite manufactured. Show me how the right wing Christians have stopped or even slowed down liberals from being liberal or spreading liberal views, and I'll eat my hat." They sure slowed it in Kansas when creationism-lite, intelligent design was passed. They've stopped it in other schools that only allow abstinence education. The reality is, most liberals have no beef at all with Christians. What they have is a problem with the "God said it so I believe it" attitude (even though plenty of different groups claim to know what god said and none of them as yet have provided any proof) that spills over into government. It isn't enough to practice our faith in our home and worship in our churches and live our lives according to our beliefs. Nope - we've got to import it in schools in the form of prayer and to our courthouses in the form of the Ten Commandments. And when Christians don't get their way on these issues, they cite it as evidence of society's evil ways and use it to reinforce their persecution complex. No one is persecuting them or forcing anything on them; but they didn't get their own way so we all get to hear about the liberal media and how liberals are destroying America, just because we don't always agree with them. For example, the government had zero business intervening in the Terri Schiavo matter, as court after court ruled. But the governor, members of congress, and the President got involved in something that was none of their business. "Also, can we lay-off the "right wing Christian" gripes? Yes, Christians get upset and annoyed at things (we all do) but we are talking about at EXTREME behavior in the media." First, you continue to say these things as if they were facts and that everyone agrees with your definition of "extreme." Secondly, if a 9/11 documentary is "extreme" we've got a problem. Did I think Janetgate was stupid? Sure - what were she and Justin and their handlers thinking? I do have children, and I'm not exactly thrilled with the thought of them seeing that. But based on the reaction to the Janet Jackson incident, you'd have thought she and Justin stripped naked, had sex on the stage, and then he beat her to death with his bare hands. I'm not kidding; the reaction was so far beyond the reality it bordered on scary. It frankly made me embarrassed to be an American that her .003 second boob could generate that kind of outrage while failure in Iraq and failure in New Orleans cannot. Again it comes down to what we actually "value" and what our priorities are.
Originally Posted By ecdc I will take a moment to clarify: I've used the word Christian and the phrase "right-wing Christians" as if they're interchangeable. That's not fair and I want to be clear about who I'm referring to. I believe many, probably most Christians have a variety of political views. Most are probably conservative, but plenty are also liberal. Most probably get irritated at Janet's boob or increasing amounts of violence and sex on television, but they simply change the channel. I happily acknowledge that. But to pretend that there's not an extremely powerful, vocal, influential right-wing political movement out there that stems its beliefs from Christianity is naive at best, disingenuous at worse. They certainly don't represent all Christians. But they command remarkable attention from our government and our media (again, see Terri Schiavo). Certainly Rove and Co. recognize their influence because they shamelessly pander to them. It's why we so desperately needed a gay marriage amendment in 2004 and 2006, but curiously enough, not in 2005. It's why Congressional debates were held over whether or not to police pay cable stations. It's why their ridiculous flavor of the day issues get so much press (happy holidays vs. merry christmas, anyone?) It's why issues that deeply affect individual Americans - jobs, war, education, homeland security, taxes, health insurance, etc., get brushed aside for issues that, while people may be passionate about, don't at all affect the quality of life one might have. Try as you might to make gay marriage, profanity on television, the phrase "under God", the 10 commandments in government buildings, and school prayer key issues, they have (or should have) zero impact on one's quality of life. Pray at home. Change the channel. Hang the 10 commandments in your office. I'll happily defend your right to do so. But don't make my neighbor's Jewish kid pray to Jesus in school, don't make my Atheist friend's taxes support a nativity on government property, and so on. As I've said before, I don't want those things anymore than I want Tom Cruise taking my tax dollars and spending it on a galactic cruiser to battle the evil Lord Zenu. Whether Christian or not, they're religious beliefs that have no place in a government that supposedly represents a multi-cultural society.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd <<<If 'VeggieTales' broccoli character can't evangelize on a kid's TV show, the terrorists have won.>>> Okay the broccoli can stay. But i don't have to eat it!
Originally Posted By YourPalEd <<<What is offensive is NBC thinking they needed to shield people from the message of Jesus. Let the culture war continue. The Seahawks are going to make me $750 today as they are up by 21 in the 2nd quarter. That is not offensive.>>> I believe jesus was against gambling, and gambling is considered a sin, by almost all churchs. But i could be wrong.
Originally Posted By MissCandice I am pretty much in agreement with P-Nut in post #44. I am atheist but shows with religious themes don't offend me. If it is good quality TV I will watch it, if not I won't. As far as this show goes, I won't watch it because I think it is trying to force a pro-onion view on its audience, and onions are gross.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd <<<Ergo, why should the far right's viewpoint always win out, as they seem to think?>>> You and i are happy, they are not. We sit around enjoying our lives, while these sad souls feel they must do this or that. Because if they don't do this or that all the nonsense they believe in will come crashing down on them.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd <<<>> "Why did NBC want to cut anything out of this show?? Answer." << Again, that was already answered. From the best I can tell, >>> So you don't know. Does anyone have the transcript? Someone told me the section was cut out because it was a message against war, against facists like bush, without mentioning bush. Something about praying instead of fighting. Something about, "i wish vegetables would go to church more often, instead of going overseas to kill our enemy legumes."
Originally Posted By wahooskipper If NBC is ok with Fear Factor then I don't think they have the right to criticize anything. Crap is crap. At least Veggie Tales is wholesome crap.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <I've used the word Christian and the phrase "right-wing Christians" as if they're interchangeable. That's not fair and I want to be clear about who I'm referring to. I believe many, probably most Christians have a variety of political views. Most are probably conservative, but plenty are also liberal.< thank you <Most probably get irritated at Janet's boob or increasing amounts of violence and sex on television, but they simply change the channel. I happily acknowledge that. < although I did not like this, waaaay too much was made of it as in not for the constant replays on the news- 90% of the people + would have have missed this pathetic attempt to draw attention to a stagnant career, working with Mr boy band. <<But to pretend that there's not an extremely powerful, vocal, influential right-wing political movement out there that stems its beliefs from Christianity is naive at best, disingenuous at worse.<< never pretend they don't exist as I do not like them any more than you do... they certainly do not represent all Christians.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>I will take a moment to clarify: I've used the word Christian and the phrase "right-wing Christians" as if they're interchangeable. That's not fair and I want to be clear about who I'm referring to.<< Fair enough. But I really don't think of the Veggies as a Fundy proselytizing tool. They steer clear of today's controversial issues. They never ask the kids if they have accepted Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior (I don't think that ever even mention his name). Most of their stories are Old Testament based, or have nothing to do with religion at all (like Larry's Silly Songs). If anything, I have found their vidoes to be very ecumenical.
