True my mistake, misread that and you would think that would be the stat given. It’s actually 4.8%, so still 50% higher than real life. (Assuming all other scripted rolls are shown to be sexually involved as straight, otherwise this portion would be higher)
Catholics are called to be witnesses to the truth no matter what happens. There is still time to turn away from the falsehoods. To act as we should.
New International Version
"Do not follow the crowd in doing wrong. When you give testimony in a lawsuit, do not pervert justice by siding with the crowd,
King James Bible
Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment :
Darby Bible Translation
Thou shalt not follow the multitude for evil; neither shalt thou answer in a cause, to go after the multitude to pervert [judgment].
Not to mention, people in the last 50 years fought to kill their children, divorce their wife and have casual sex with whoever they want. The biggest problem in the 40s was complacency, they didn’t let civil rights change how they would vote. Only the people who brought slavery to our societies or were involved in it would be on par with our generation.
Matthew 24: 21-22: “For there shall be then great tribulation, such as hath not been from the beginning of the world until now, neither shall be. And unless those days had been shortened, no flesh should be saved: but for the sake of the elect those days shall be shortened.”
Revelation 14: 14-16: “And I saw, and behold a white cloud; and upon the cloud one sitting like to the Son of man, having on his head a crown of gold, and in his hand a sharp sickle. And another angel came out from the temple crying with a loud voice to him that sat upon the cloud: Thrust in thy sickle, and reap, because the hour is come to reap: for the harvest of the earth is ripe. And he that sat on the cloud thrust his sickle into the earth, and the earth was reaped.”
Not yet. Other things must also be fulfilled.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Can you give an example of this?
Sure, Carly Fiorina. Feminists made fun of her throughout her run for presidency.
Michelle Bachman. Sarah Palin. Nikki Haley.
Feminists do not want to support these women because they do not stand by the feminist agenda - mainly abortion but other issues also.
Feminists used to do comic routines of pulling out Megyn Kelly’s hair and beating her up until she moved to the other side.
Laura Ingraham is another who is constantly attacked by feminists.
Other Fox conservative female reporters are disliked by feminists.
There are more but this is just a few I can think of.
Feminists women do not support women who do not support the feminist agenda no matter what job or career the non-femnist woman has.
Actually, I think it speaks to the integrity of feminists not to support some of these women just because they’re women.
better to support the feminist left who support abortion??
I think you missed the point. The feminist claim they are all about women in the workforce, equal rights, equal pay but that is where they deceive.
Feminists are supposed to be about equal rights but only equal rights if you agree with them.
I don’t think I missed the point. But I do think further discussion is pointless. God bless.
You say “people in the 1950s weren’t as tightly wound as they are today”
I point out that a lot of people in the 1950s lost their minds about desegregation, and your response is to totally change the subject and freak out a little bit about gay marriage and abortion.
And this is happening in a thread complaining about a gay character in a TV show.
‘Freak out’? That isn’t accurate. I don’t know what you mean by ‘lost their minds’. I do think people weren’t as tightly wound. People didn’t take offense at anything and everything.
The last time I checked, showing kissing, hugging, hand holding, and weddings in shows is not considered too mature for children. Granted, there was a time when kid’s shows had references to alcohol and smoking, so maybe I’m just out of the loop, but given that kissing while waiting in line at Cold Stone is not taboo while cutting off someone’s head is, I’m guessing things haven’t changed too much.
The issue is one of purely moral consideration, not age appropriateness. Frankly, I’d imagine children will accept what their parents say on the matter. There might be a question or two, but children don’t tend to really rebel against their parents’ morals until they become teenagers, at which point you’d probably have to be more convincing than “because God said so” on pretty much everything.
I doubt the existence of an agenda is a problem If that were the case, people would also be complaining about anti-bullying, anti-drug, and pro-family agendas. They’d also be yelling at VeggieTales for having a clear Christian agenda. Basically, trying to frame the issue as screenwriters having an agenda is disingenuous. It’s that what was shown/taught wasn’t to the person’s liking.
When I was a kid, many of my favorite shows and movies had some romantic elements in them. Sure, not all of them did, but I’d say that a good chunk did. I always liked it, even if I obviously never wrote the producers and asked for them to keep up.
At least where I live, filtering out LGBT content would mean not leaving the house. If I were a parent, I’d rather not have the discussion with a gay couple there or in the middle of Mass. A TV show makes it easier to do that.
Edit: To clarify, my church isn’t “accepting”. The priests are all pretty conservative but would probably bring the topic up during the homily sooner or later.
“That’s not true. Countries throughout the world still censor. In fact I don’t know of a country that doesn’t censor some content. Some countries censor very heavily. The idea that we have a liberal culture that allows all ideas is a lie told specifically to keep Christians from trying to censor what is morally offensive in Christianity.”> Blockquote
In my comment i was stating major censorship (widespread censorship of all things immoral) and not censorship altogether.
All countries have some censorship but the censorship is usually based on what the “status quo” finds offensive and not based off Christian values.
I’m not suggesting this is right,but just that how it is factually.
For example in Australia only pornographic films with violence or child abuse etc are banned but most Christians I hope would agree that all pornography altogether is immoral.
So,it is the government of the day and the majority that make the decision on what will be censored or not.
Australia does good in that it bans video games that depict gratuitous violence and sexual violence but at the same time there is only partial censorship as kids (teens) can access the Internet and see stuff like singers twerking on YouTube,bums in g-string bikinis on Instagram etc…
What I was saying to Ryan was that it was unrealistic to think that a fully Christian government would be elected and that widespread censorship would be put in place censoring all things that would be classed immoral in Christianity including many many music clips.
I am referring to the social climate in Australia.I don’t know about America/how much political influence Christians have there but here it is a pretty ‘liberal’ society and ‘gay marriage and adoption’ etc is ‘in’ and religion is ‘out’ (of popularity) if that makes sense.
Even though now the Prime Minister here is a Christian even he is limited in what he can do in respect to Christian values as there are others in his and opposing parties that supported gay marriage and pro abortion etc…
I agree that lust is wrong.
What was it that gave you the impression I was suggesting otherwise please?
If it’s a social environment where the child is already exposed to these things then maybe your right that its better to talk to them about these issues at that stage.
If however they aren’t already exposed to this (through seeing gay moms at school pickup etc) then I don’t see why scriptwriters have to throw it in to kids films.
It seems self serving.
I’ve never heard of Veggitales so I looked it up online and I guess in fairness you could say that Veggitales also has an agenda because it has obvious Christian themes.
We don’t have that show in Australia and I doubt that any children film with clear Christian themes like that would ever be played on the mainstream commercial channels here.
The only Christian films that are ever shown on the mainstream channels are at Easter and occasionally at Christmas-if that.
Anti bullying and anti drug themes are something that is usually seen as positive by majority of ‘religious’ and non religious parents alike.
Even so,those themes are often usually in “older kids” shows (age 11 up).
For small kids here it is things like bananas in pyjamas,The Wiggles,Peppa the pig,pet superstars etc,adventure shows etc…all age appropriate.
As an aside,older kids (teens) here have become so used to adult things that the commercial networks are no longer wanting to use their money to make ‘older kids shows’ because they know kids simply don’t watch them and instead are watching shows like The Bachelor,Masterchef etc…
I don’t think that VeggieTales is on mainstream TV here in the US either. It’s either on a Christian broadcast cable channel, or DVD (or I suppose streaming).
Well, parents and kids have to seek out VeggieTales. I’m pretty sure that it is not on regular broadcast (mainstream) TV, the way that all kinds of immoral content is on regular broadcast / mainstream TV.
If we feel that we can’t leave our houses without being confronted without immoral sexual content,then the extreme LGBT lobby has won.
So really, you would prefer to bring the immoral content into your domestic church (your home), and you would prefer not to have it brought up at Mass? I guess I’m not sure why anyone would want that.
These programs were not targeted at kids though. I do get concerned about what is promoted to kids these days. I worry about the implications.