Jumping The Shark In Children’s Television

Yesterday, WCYB Channel 5 reported that the writers of the children’s show “Arthur” have decided that this season Arthur is going to a wedding of his teacher Mr. Ratburn where Mr. Ratburn marries another man.

The article reports:

Following the scene that shows the teacher and his husband Patrick walking down the aisle, Arthur is shown at the reception saying he cannot believe that Mr. Ratburn is married.

“Yep. It’s a brand new world,” says Arthur’s friend Francine in the episode entitled “Mr. Ratburn and the Special Someone” which can be seen by clicking here.

The article continues:

The Public Broadcasting System issued a statement on the episode on Monday to the publication People:

PBS KIDS programs are designed to reflect the diversity of communities across the nation. We believe it is important to represent the wide array of adults in the lives of children who look to PBS KIDS every day

Why is PBS doing this? Parents will introduce their children to diversity when they feel the children are ready for it. Children do not need to be indoctrinated by Public Television. Keep in mind that our taxpayer dollars are paying for this garbage. Children should be taught respect and tolerance, but it is up to their parents to teach them the values the parents espouse. I would never want a child to be disrespectful of a person because they were gay, but I would also want my child to understand the Biblical view of homosexuality, despite the fact that it is in opposition to the current liberal view.

I Am Sure This Is Logical Somehow

Breitbart.com is reporting today that in Colorado a baker can refuse to bake a cake decorated with a Bible verse for Christians and face no consequences, but will face discrimination charges for refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding. Amazing.

The article reports:

Christian activist Bill Jack has denounced a decision by the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Regulatory Agencies, which found Azucar Bakery in Denver not guilty of discrimination for refusing to bake a cake adorned with Bible quotes condemning sodomy.

Last March, Jack went to Azucar Bakery and requested two cakes to be decorated with biblical messages.

“I requested two cakes, each in the shape of an open Bible. On the first cake I requested on one page, ‘God hates sin — Psalm 45:7,’ and on the facing page, ‘Homosexuality is a detestable sin — Leviticus 18:22,’” Jack said.

Jack also said:

On the second cake I requested on one page, “God loves sinners,” and on the facing page, “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us – Romans 5:8.” I also requested a decoration of two groomsmen holding hands with a cross in the background with a ghostbusters symbol over it to illustrate that such a union is unacceptable biblically.

On Good Friday, the Department of Regulatory Agencies handed down its decision that refusing such a request did not constitute discrimination.

I suppose we could debate that the Bible verse cake was offensive to the baker, but wasn’t the gay wedding cake offensive to the Christian baker? If the man requested to bake the Bible cake has the right to refuse to bake that cake, then the man who is requested to bake a cake for a gay wedding also has the right to refuse. The law either applies to everyone, or it is not a just law.

At some point people need to realize that when one person’s right is taken away, it gives the government permission to take away all of our rights.

Should You Be Suspended From Your Job For Telling The Truth?

Not everyone believes the Bible and not everyone takes it literally, but some people believe and some people believe literally. That is as much their right as it is anyone’s right to their own beliefs. But should you be suspended from you job for telling in your own words what the Bible says?

Yesterday the Hollywood Reporter headlined their story about Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty‘s remarks:” ‘Duck Dynasty’s’ Phil Robertson on Indefinite Hiatus Following Anti-Gay Remarks.” That was followed by a smaller headline: “he news comes after the reality star compared being gay to bestiality, drawing ire from LGBT groups including GLAAD and the Human Rights Campaign.” Well, that’s not exactly what he said. He didn’t compare being gay to bestiality, he simply described, in his own words, the downward spiral of sin: His remarks were not anti-gay–they were simply pro-Bible.

According to an article on the subject posted at CBN News:

When asked for his definition of sin, Robertson told GQ, “start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there,” he said. “Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men.”

Why did GQ ask Robertson for his definition of sin? What did they expect to hear?

Later in the GQ article Robertson further explained:

Quoting a passage from Corinthians, he said, “‘Don’t be deceived. Neither adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers — they won’t inherit the kingdom of God.  Don’t deceive yourself.  It’s not right.'”

Again, isn’t his right of free speech as good as everyone else’s? The LGBT groups that are screaming about this need to realize that their gripe is not with Phil Robertson–it is with the book he is quoting. However, the LGBT groups will be more successful at their fundraising and political activities if they go after Phil Robertson than the Bible and they are well aware of that.

There are forces of good and evil in the world. Did we really believe that a television show that preaches God and His saving grace every week and prays on television would not be attacked in some way by organizations that choose not to believe in the Bible?

Enhanced by Zemanta