Sesame Workshop Trying To Have It Both Ways(Bert/Ernie issue)

[Drtooth]

"I'd still rather not have openly gay people on Sesame Street for the reason that it presents the message to children that this sin is an acceptable choice."
Again, stated as fact. There is no empirical evidence that it is, in fact, a sin. That is a religious conviction on his part. Just because a book says it's so, again does not make it fact! It's his personal beliefs.

Yeah... that's exactly why I don't see it happening. Not even as a human couple that doesn't say anything. People are welcome to their beliefs, but sometimes I think there's a clear distinction between biblical code of conduct and (at the risk of this sounding mean, I can't think up a better term) superstition. And the little tiny footnotes are just as, if not more valid than than the rest of the text condemning passing judgement on others. Plus, as Rev. Lovejoy said in the Simpsons, "Did you ever sit down to read this thing? Technically we're not supposed to go to the bathroom."

Biblical Scholars will be arguing this stuff for years. There are a lot of mistranslations and misinterpretations they'll go back and forth on for years to come... I find South Park put it best... that religious text are a series of stories (historical or not) that are supposed to give us guidance. That's what EVERYONE gets wrong. They see the small bits and take it as the message, rather than the big picture... that's why religion in the wrong hands does terrible things.

Still... in Biblical times, wasn't.. well... let's say hedonism (it's a certain word that begins with O that I doubt will get past the swear filter) a huge trend and to further society they were trying to illegalize/pressure against that in cases?

 

[CensoredAlso]

I find South Park put it best... that religious text are a series of stories (historical or not) that are supposed to give us guidance.

South Park put it brilliantly! Thank God for that show, seriously, lol.

 

[GonzoLeaper]

Jesus hanging out with sinners did not mean he was presenting their behavior as acceptable. Just that he wasn't going to shun them. That's what I'm saying.

well said. I totally agree.

 

[GonzoLeaper]

You don't agree with it and neither do I. But it's not illegal for him to say it. That's all I'm saying.

Thank you.

 

[GonzoLeaper]

However, GonzoLeaper chose some inflammatory words stating that homosexuality was an "indulgence" and a "choice that people make" and that it is a "sin".

There are a lot of things I could respond to here, but I will try to reply to some of this. First of all, let me apologize to fragglerockr for upsetting and offending you. This is never my intent and I am sorry to make anyone feel angry or hurt. I realize that some do not believe homosexuality is a choice or a sin, but as a Christian, this is what I read in The Bible. I am not sure why stating this should be considered inflammatory. It's obviously a tender issue for you and again I am sorry to have upset. But just because my belief on this is the opposite of yours, that should not be viewed as inflammatory. When I see a statement like this, it just makes me think that while most people I know say they believe in the freedom of speech, it seems if the free speech in question is not a popular viewpoint, then it is rejected.
I am not sure how to state what The Bible says about homosexuality without being inflammatory honestly- because it's definitely going to anger anyone who views it differently. And to not do so does not allow me to explain why I have the view that homosexuality is a sin.
I don't recall bringing up the Levitical law, but in answer to that- I do believe in all of The Bible. You are right in saying that the Law was primarily given to the Israelites and we are no longer under law, but under grace when we are saved by Christ. However, out of love for Him, we should obey what He commands. (This is what He tells us directly in John 15. And to clarify, I post the Bible verses so that if anyone is interested to read this for themselves, they will know where to look and know that I didn't just make something up. So don't just take my word for it.) This is another thing I don't understand as to why it would be considered an inflammatory thing. I would think it would be good to have the reference for what someone is saying available to back up their beliefs.
Regardless of whether anyone thinks The Bible has errors or not, it is still the basis for my beliefs and thus I thought it important to state that basis.
And anyway- Jesus states the model for marriage in Matthew 19. And there are further places I could quote as well.
I'm curious as to your interpretation of 1 Corinthians 6:9-11. Would male prostitutes be having sex with women or men then? Or perhaps both? If the implication is still same sex relations, then the condemnation remains. I would have to research the Greek some more on that, but consider this.

The word in the original Greek is: "aresenokoite". It's word that was coined by (who most biblical scholars believe) Paul. It's two different words smashed together. It literally translated means "male" "bed". It is used in other passages in the Bible when referring to the young male prostitutes at the temple of Molech. This was not the accepted Greek term for same sex couples. It is unclear what "Paul's" intention were. He could have been condemning temple prostitutes. He could have been decrying pederasty.

The "aresenokoite" Greek word you mentioned is indeed a compound word that most likely Paul coined. It is taken from the words "aresenos" (meaning "male") and "koiten" (meaning to have sexual intercourse with) These words are used in the commands in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, which is what the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old Testament) uses. Given Paul's framework, and the fact that he had just previously quoted from Deuteronomy in 1 Corinthians 5, communicating it as a command still in effect today, (regarding expelling the immoral brother from the church), the context of the words communicate it as normative for the church. The command against homosexuality in Leviticus is not limited to male prostitution- in its context of listing prohibited sexual relations in chapter 18 (including incest and bestiality)- rather, it covers any and all homosexual relations. Leviticus 20:13 is quite clear on this matter- it is a sin.
Since this is the source that Paul is using, the same context applies in the word usage in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11.
Of course, as I said before, this is why I love how verse 11 comes right after the list of sins in verses 9-10. This is what some of you were! That is exactly what I was! But I have been washed, sanctified and justified in the name of The Lord Jesus Christ and in The Spirit of our God. Praise God for His love that gave us salvation from all sin, death and the eternal fire through Jesus' death and Resurrection!
I hope everyone on here knows Christ as Savior and has the assurance of going to Heaven at the end of life rather than Hades. It is the most gracious offer ever made to man- and the choice everyone has to make regarding what they will believe about Jesus. And that is the motivating factor behind God's command- it is out of love. If someone has trusted Christ as Savior and interprets the verses regarding homosexuality differently, as I said before, I would have to respectfully disagree with them on that. But I do want everyone to have the opportunity to truthfully consider what Christ has to say.
That is the basis for my beliefs and why I am concerned when it seems that Sesame Street is trying to have it both ways regarding homosexuality and why, though I acknowledge that the show and society will do as it will, I would prefer that homosexuality not be presented as acceptable.
But none of that is to convey any disdain, hatred or anger for or at those who identify with homosexuality. God loves everyone and through His love in my life, so do I. As I said before, to those who disagree with me on what I've said before, then we will have to agree to respectfully disagree and I sincerely wish you nothing but the best. Go in peace and God bless.

 

[GonzoLeaper]

"I doubt homosexuality would be presented on the show as something that some people choose to indulge in, though Christians and Muslims and other religions alike condemn it as being wrong".

This is a slippery slope here. Nowhere in that statement was it stated that it was an opinion.

Just to quickly clear something up here. When a speaker states anything, it is generally implied that it is obviously his point of view, unless he specifies that he is quoting someone else or elsehow makes clear that he is being sarcastic or such.
Christians do condemn homosexuality as being wrong. I've already quoted Bible verses that form the basis for why Christians believe this. If you like, I can also research some surahs from the Quran to give basis to the statement of Muslims condemning homosexuality- though I would think the capital punishment for this in many Muslim countries would speak to that as well. Other religions would include Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses. (who, I know some would claim as part of Christianity but for many and probably most Christians, they are viewed as cults. Nonetheless, they do hold to The Bible in some degree or another and thus, I could quote the same verses they would use to condemn homosexuality.) I do not see how there is a factual error regarding this. It is still my opinion that Christians, Muslims and other religions condemn homosexuality and that opinion is based on facts.
As to how homosexuality would be presented on Sesame Street, that is my opinion- I doubt that it would be presented as something people choose to indulge in. I didn't say that it was a fact that this is how things would play out- just that I feel that this is what would happen. It is a fact that that is my opinion and my opinion is based on the fact that I have noticed a number of mainstream TV shows (albeit no children shows that I can think of right now) that do not portray homosexuality in this fashion.

"I'd still rather not have openly gay people on Sesame Street for the reason that it presents the message to children that this sin is an acceptable choice."

Again, stated as fact. There is no empirical evidence that it is, in fact, a sin. That is a religious conviction on his part. Just because a book says it's so, again does not make it fact! It's his personal beliefs.

I am again uncertain as to how this is being stated as fact. By virtue of my own typing it, with no indication of quoting another source or sarcasm, this is my own opinion. Although if you're referring to my referring to homosexuality as a sin here, the empirical evidence for this is found in various verses in The Bible, many of which I have already quoted. You may not agree that it is a fact, but it is a fact that The Bible does indeed have these verses printed within and thus I can see how you would construe my declaration of homosexuality as sin to be fact. As I have stated before, The Bible forms the basis for my beliefs.
But it is my opinion and my feeling that I'd still rather not have openly gay people on Sesame Street for the reason that it presents the message to children that homosexuality is an acceptable choice. Perhaps you may prefer that wording. But it doesn't change the fact that The Bible calls homosexuality a sin.
Again, you may argue the point, but those are my beliefs and I don't see the need to state that every time I post something.
As I said previously, the virtue of my saying it implies that.

 

[CensoredAlso]

But it is my opinion and my feeling that I'd still rather not have openly gay people on Sesame Street

But the thing is, they already have done so in the past.

As for the different translations of the Bible and what it really means, etc., you can drive yourself crazy trying to figure all this out. For me it comes down to this: Me being attracted to men does not make me a good person. A man being attracted to a woman does not make him a good person. You can stick with the opposite sex your entire life and be the biggest jerk or monster in the world. So I don't see why attraction to the same sex would have any moral bearing either.

Being a good person is about compassion and unselfishness, not who you think is cute in a magazine.

 

[fragglerockr]

GonzoLeaper & All,

First of all, I don't need your apology. You can state your opinion without quoting chapter and verse. I'm a big boy and I can tell you exactly what part of the Bible you are sourcing as "evidence" to support your beliefs and theories. Since this is not a trial, nor a research paper, I'll kindly remind you that you don't need footnotes to have an opinion, as evidence. You can simply say "I believe it because it's in the Bible", or even "they are my personal convictions". That would suffice. I grew up in the Church and I know the Bible backward and forward so you don't have to spell it out for me or anyone, else here. I certainly didn't see where anyone asked you to quote scripture! This is a Muppets forum. Go post on a religious forum if you need a pedestal.

While I defend your right to think as you will, neither myself or anyone else here has attacked your beliefs. Not one person has even asked me what I believe, including you! At this point it's not even relevant. You've MADE me be the bad guy just because I asked you to be considerate and accountable for your words and actions. I didn't ask you to censor them, I simply stated to not present them as facts or at least give us all the courtesy to denote it differently. You've all read way too much into my meaning.

Whether you think so or not you have made statements and opinions in this very thread that can be harmful and taken out of context when you espouse your personal views without stating them as such. Not everyone "thinks" like you. (Thank God, for that!) Apple said it best - "Think Different"!

You have placed no weight or thought into how your opinions could be very damaging to impressionable minds. For example: A young person who stumbles on this forum may be having trouble with their sexuality, gender identity, or questioning who they are, and reads your posts that imply your thoughts are facts, They think: "He's an adult (or so I'm assuming) so, he must know what he's talking about". Perhaps, they don't share the same "bigoted" views as your particular religion, and don't feel like praying to "your" God but now they have seen what you've posted, supposedly as "fact", and now have reason to hate themselves more, because of guilt. They reason, "most people believe in the Bible" and "it's popular enough so it has to be authoritative proof". They probably haven't studied the Bible cover to cover like you and I have. They only have face value.

If it's in the Bible it has to be true, right?!? Well let's look. I mean slavery should be ok, right? It's in the Bible. Slaughtering entire nation's "In God's Name", check! Murder for disobedient children, it's in there. Treating women and children likes slaves or property, it's in there too. Stoning to death a woman whose hymen doesn't break after consummating a marriage (regardless of medical history or medical science) It's in there! Killing witches? Done! Castrating men to become Eunuchs. Why not? Ritual beards? Ok, I guess.

Heck, there's just so many fun things that it does command us to do (the least of which would probably land us in jail today) but we conveniently forget those. We OVERLOOK what we choose to as changes in societal attitudes shift. Yet, we still wish to follow some of the archaic outdated laws to justify our bigotry and fear. I don't buy it. You either have to do it all or not at all. You can't pick and choose what you want to believe or practice. "I like and support this part but I don't support this part". You can't use the book as a whole source to back you up when you oppose other parts it "commands" you to do. Jesus said "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them". There! Jesus said to follow the old Law. Or do we follow: "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new" and not have to follow the law. Hmmm???? In that case O.T. doesn't apply at all.

It happens all too often. Young people who are hurt, betrayed, or different without a support system feeling dejected, or suicidal go looking for answers. Where do they turn, the parents, who they think won't listen or worse who have dis-owned them? No. Their friends who might have shunned them at school? Think again. The Bully or teacher who's causing the problem. Not even close. The church and the Bible that says they are immoral and sinners? Wrong. The internet! They make their way to the web and read posts like yours in a seemingly innocent topic about Muppets and merchandise and suddenly they become even more depressed and feel there's no way out. Think about how desperate someone can feel when they are told that they are a "sinner", or an "abomination", or made to feel less than normal, less than human. That's not a way to win converts or save souls. Now we have compounded the problem and added a potential new statistic to the numbers.

Don't even start with that whole they should "pray the gay away" because you can suppress your feelings but a person can't change how they feel inside. Praying and asking God for forgiveness (of who they are?) or to change them, doesn't change someone's sexuality. Ask teens that have tried. They'll tell you. Show me one person that's worked for? (see statistics below) Leave that for the loonies like Pat Robertson and Michelle Bachmann to regurgitate and believe.

Gay people can TRY and live straight lives, just like straight people can TRY and live a gay lifestyle. (Why would anyone ever want to do something like that? Because that would be awful?!? God forbid we learn that gay people are normal like everyone else.) Deep down they are still who they are. Simply lying to themselves and everyone else doesn't "fix" them. Conditioning themselves to believe "this is what God wants".

That's why The Exodus Former-Gay Ministry is such a sham! Ask how many times it's members "fall off the wagon", so to speak. Oh, wait. They cover up the true numbers of the "supposedly cured" that leave the organization and "revert" back to homosexuality. Brainwashing can work for you too!

Their success rate is 15% for conversion and even then the people surveyed said were not completely cured of homosexual thoughts. (Are heterosexuals ever cured of heterosexual thoughts?) How about 23% who only remain chaste but unchanged? Meaning they are still gay. Then the largest area of "success" is 29% of it's members. But of those members they stated they had "modest decreases in homosexual attraction but were not satisfied with their degree of change" and that they continue to work on it. That's telling! The largest percentile can't achieve their goal? Now why is that? Because it's who they are!

Then there is the popular twisted belief that gays can be gay but they just can't "act on" homosexual feelings. See the 23 percent above. They can be 'celibate' for Christ and still get into heaven. Sorry, one of the basic human needs is love! We crave social interaction and affection. A life of isolation, self-loathing, and fear-mongering is just inhuman. That's what many churches would have people do.

Bottom line *I* follow what Jesus said about homosexuality. In Matthew, er, Mark, Wait, I meant Luke, or John. Oh, wait. That's funny! Jesus had NOTHING to say, what so ever about it. Four Gospels and not a word? That's odd. Four accounts of his 33 years on earth and his teachings and not a single reference to this "sin"? Huh? And I'm not talking rules for marriage, ("For this reason, a man shall leave his mother"....) I'm talking homosexuality. Don't get me started on marriage equality. That's a total separate issue. (I think the current divorce rate of over 50% for first marriages and 65% second marriages, with sterling examples of marriage like Britney Spears and Kim Kardashian, are doing just fine of ruining the institution. We don't need gay people for that. LOL)

So, since I'm not a Levite, heck... I'm not even Jewish, I'll skip the O.T. since Christian people can't decide which laws we'll keep and which we will throw out. Also, since Paul was not greater than Jesus (and he personally never met the man, other than a spiritual encounter on a roadside) and only wrote letters to churches for suggestions on how he *THOUGHT* they should be run, I'm gonna over look his writings in the N.T. since he was a foul-able human and side with the Big "J", since he's God incarnate. I think HE knows best!

Maybe you do mean well, but WORDS (and opinions) can do a lot of damage in this day and age. Why do you think they started the "It Gets Better Campaign" to begin with? We are adults and our words have heavy responsibility. So the next time you present your beliefs as fact be aware than they are ONLY FACTS TO YOU. That's why religion is supposed to be about. Your personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Yes, I get it and fully understand the Great Commission, but it never says beat people down with the Bible or your interpretation of whats right or wrong. It is only God's place to judge, not yours, nor mine. If most Christian's spent half the necessary time working on their own problems instead of judging others and pointing out each others flaws, no one would have time enough to even notice what other people are doing, let alone preach to anyone.

I could argue back and forth all day about the meaning and translation of the passages you mentioned. For example, the KJV of version of 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 reads entirely different. It's translated as 'effeminate' not 'homosexual'. There is a huge difference. I know straight men that are effeminate but not homosexual. So now, they are going to h*e*l*l* too? The various translations of the Bible can't even decide on a 'definitive' translation or correct meaning. That is inconclusive proof, so sorry!

In the end no one here gives a rip what you believe. I certainly don't. No one cares what I believe. Religion is a personal matter, to each his own. This conversation has so long derailed it from it's original intention.

Maybe it's the fact that I'm sensitive because I work with kids all the time and have to weight the consequences of my words. You on the other hand, are an anonymous name on a message board and don't really seem to care what you say because as you and others have stated you have the right to say it. I support your right to say, no matter how wrong or right I may think it is. I simply wish you'd think about it's impact on others. Regardless, I have nothing else to say or add to it, nor will I further comment on anything posted herein. So I'm taking the high-road and leaving. If you SO need to discuss your wonderful, life-changing religious beliefs, do us all a favor and stop being so lazy and start a new topic for it!

I personally live my life, as I should, in accordance with the teaching of Betty Bowers: America's Best Christian! Look her up on Youtube!

FR

 

[CensoredAlso]

Go post on a religious forum if you need a pedestal.

This is what I'm talking about though, you can't tell someone to not quote a religious book. That is a kind of censorship, whether you intend it or not. This is not a public school or government building.

Jesus said "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them". There! Jesus said to follow the old Law.

Not exactly. Jesus was saying he came to fulfill what the laws should have been. That means he occasionally felt it necessary to correct the old laws.

Think about how desperate someone can feel when they are told that they are a "sinner", or an "abomination", or made to feel less than normal, less than human. That's not a way to win converts or save souls. Now we have compounded the problem and added a potential new statistic to the numbers.

Here we do agree. You convince people through your actions and example, not by name calling and condemnation.

This conversation has so long derailed it from it's original intention.

I think if the entire conversation had stayed focused on why the Bible was wrong, you wouldn't have minded. I'm not trying to be being rude, just saying.

 

[Drtooth]

This is what I'm talking about though, you can't tell someone to not quote a religious book. That is a kind of censorship, whether you intend it or not. This is not a public school or government building.

I see what both of you are getting at, and I have to agree with a meeting of half way. On the one hand, I see the importance of not censoring speach, yet on the other hand, I find quoting specific passages in the Bible for rationalization of conduct very... well... Brainy Smurf like. Brainy Smurf finger wagging is a turn off. I respect faith in Christianity, I can even respect the to the letter stuff if people believe in it for pure reasons. But sometimes you feel like shouting "YEAH! We get it already!" I almost wanted to make a stamp on Deviant art that says "I'm Christian too, but I choose not to shove it into everyone's face." Sort of as a response to people that put Bible verse or "post this in your signature if you believe Jesus Christ is your savior" the last one feels like spamming, even though well intentioned.

In fact, that's why our signatures in our posts are so short... some members did put an excessive amount of Bible verse in their posts. And by which, to the extent that the signature took up a couple screens!

Now this argument is very enthralling and all, but there's already that "Love, The Bible, and Christians" thread in another portion of the forum. That's where things go, not out of censorship, but rather out of organization and to prevent threads from blowing up into angry religious based flame wars.

But to bring this post back up to the section it was, and get the topic back on track and keeping it civil on all accounts... just because it's on a T-shirt doesn't really mean SW is going to make it a part of the show, and make it the characters motivations. The Ernie and Bert thing is, and always will be a meme. A spoof, a gag, a joke, interpretation, but a meme nonetheless. SW is exploiting it for T-Shirts... in fact, the only thing in their hands is license approval, and clearly they have some sense of humor about it, certain sexual innuendos, and gangsta culture. I still demand a Telly Monster shirt that says "Neurotic" (or a Boober shirt from Henson... surprised there's no Eeyore, George Costanza, or even Larry David Curb your Enthusiasm shirts that say that)... mainly because that's the shirt I'd tend to wear... I LOVE the Charlie Brown shirt that says "I'm just a freakin' ray of sunshine" with a very unenthusiastic picture of Charlie Brown on it.