Religious-right organizations, including the American Family Association and Focus on the Family, launched a media frenzy last week when they criticized a pro-tolerance video starring SpongeBob and numerous other children’s TV cartoon characters.
From CNN:
"A short step beneath the surface reveals that one of the differences being celebrated is homosexuality," wrote Ed Vitagliano in an article for the American Family Association….
"Their inclusion of the reference to ‘sexual identity" within their ‘tolerance pledge’ is not only unnecessary, but it crosses a moral line," James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, said in a statement released Thursday.
Confronted by the expected media uproar over his remarks, Dobson postured as if to set the media straight — but may have conveyed a bit of paranoia instead:
But while the video is harmless on its own, I believe the agenda behind it is sinister. My brief comments at the FRC gathering were intended to express concern not about SpongeBob or Big Bird or any of their other cartoon friends, but about the way in which those childhood symbols are apparently being hijacked to promote an agenda that involves teaching homosexual propaganda to children.
But it appears that the cartoon characters were neither exploited nor hijacked by the foundation; they were used with permission to promote a form of tolerance that is conveyed regularly in their respective TV programs.
Dobson persisted:
…the We Are Family Foundation — the organization that sponsored the video featuring SpongeBob and the other characters was, until this flap occurred, making available a variety of explicitly pro-homosexual materials on its Web site.
But Dobson’s "evidence" was benign: Of the numerous groups that support the foundation, some — Dobson claims — are gay-equality organizations. Dobson quotes lesson plans and handouts — none of which "promote" homosexuality. The quoted materials promote the ability of people who disagree about sexuality to navigate their differences with respect.
Dobson claimed that all these quoted materials were removed last week from the foundation web site, but a year-old copy of the site at archive.org does not seem to feature these materials, either.
Dobson attempted to reassure his readers about his own intentions:
Every individual is entitled to respect and human dignity, including those with whom we disagree strongly.
But Dobson, by this point, had criticized pro-tolerance materials, calling them pro-homosexual, and he had accused pro-tolerance Americans of "hijacking" cartoon characters already known for their tolerance. Dobson then proceeded to launch what one media target called a "spam" campaign. That e-mail campaign is hosted here by Focus on the Family.
Was it fair for MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann to call that spam? You decide: Unlike a conventional protest mailing, many of Dobson’s messages were blank; others contained little more than Focus’ instructions for the sender to type a personalized message; and the messages were sent unsolicited to Olbermann’s private office e-mail account, not his public feedback address.
Olbermann, who identifies himself as a man of faith, alleges:
- a barrage of blank, misspelled, and form-letter messages from Focus on the Family to Olbermann’s private e-mail address, and
- exaggerations and misstatements by Focus on the Family editor Gary Schneeberger.
Largely unnoticed during the media frenzy were some far-fetched allegations by exgay AFA activist Stephen Bennett. When he leapt to the defense of Dobson, according to 365gay.com, Bennett asserted that both the Jewish Anti-Defamation League and the anti-racist Southern Poverty Law Center‘s Tolerance.org web site "promote a very strong pro-homosexual worldview." A longer, less controversial commentary by Bennett is available at WorldNetDaily.
Allow me to summarize:
The point that both Dobson and Stephen Bennett make — sloppily, perhaps — is that cartoon creators are using their characters in a bait-and-switch effort to lure children toward tolerant, live-and-let-live viewpoints. (Which is exactly what creators of wholesome family cartoons should do, in my opinion.)
Yet Dr. Dobson is playing the same bait-and-switch.
His innocuous daily radio program on wholesome and practical family living is heard by millions on major commercial radio stations across America. What is the purpose of the free radio program? Quite simply, one might argue, it is to bait-and-switch listeners into subscribing to Focus’ print and electronic services, which promote Dobson’s culture-war campaigns against causes — and people — whom he declares to be immoral.
Worthwhile commentaries by others:
Dobson’s crusade sends a message the media don’t get
By Eric Deggans, St. Petersburg Times
SpongeBob goes to church
United Church of Christ
That Colored Fella notes a few issues that aren’t covered by TV pundits eager to fuel religious-right media circuses.
Dispatches from the Culture Wars fisks Olbermann’s fisking of Dobson and Schneeberger
Jesus taught tolerance (Matthew 22:36-40)
Chuck Currie, United Church of Christ
Stony Point, N.Y., middle schoolers rally behind SpongeBob
QueerDay
"What [Dobson] objects to is tolerance of gay people, or teaching children that gay people deserve respect."
Andrew Sullivan
Choosing SpongeBob over bitterness
Kurt Granzow
(Thanks to SharonB for the Stephen Bennett WND link.)
WHEW! Wow what a post.
*lights up cigarette*
oh but on a serious note, I follow FOTF broadcasts and normally they’re on pretty banal topics like “How To Deal With Your Strong Willed Child” and parenting crap of no threat to me. Then every so often when some brouhaha like this comes along he commandeers the broadcast and turns it into the Dobson vitriol-spewing propaganda hour. Well noted Mike.
Quote FOTF: Let’s “turn our hearts towards home”
I hope that people read Eric Deggans’ column, he makes some salient points. The only quibble I have is that like many journalists, he overestimates the intelligence of anti-gay crusaders and underestimates the intelligence of the public. The public are not going to believe that “tolerance” or “diversity” are talking points for gay rights, especially since those words are also used for people of various religions and races. I also don’t believe that it’s something special or wonderful that Dobson had to use this to rally his believers. Many of them, at least in going to a few message boards in the first days after the flap began, seemed highly irritated that Dobson had picked this battle and felt it turned Christianity into a punch line.
The real problem is when you have so-called liberals like Ruth Marcus who try to overanalyze and oversympathize with Dobson in order to please their corporate masters. She wrote an op-ed in Washington Post a few days ago where she said that his opinions were absurd but should be given a closer look because her kids’ school talked about incest and transgenders. She skillfully and subtly implied to every “moderate” and “liberal” parent reading the paper that homosexality is the same as incest and that parents should be on the lookout for any program or game or book or recording because it may lead to homosexuality/incest.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45992-2005Jan28.html
What really irks me about Dobson’s anti-tolerance campaign is that, at least from what I have heard and read, the media basically got it right. Sure, they may have led into their coverage with quotes like “Is SpongeBob gay?” but the actual news reporting was that Dobson, et. al. were concerned about a pro-tolerance video, not that they were doing a Tinky-Winky on poor SpongeBob.
However, the coverage didn’t turn out the way Dobson thought – probably because most Americans know and appreciate gay people – heck, even senior leaders at the RNC are openly gay (both the CFO and #2 political director). It is only by exposing his own hypocrisy that Dobson has come in for criticism, and that is his own fault.
This display and the actions of the newly nominated Secretary of Education show that the religious right aren’t approaching this as a live and let live position, but instead one of complete elimination of gays from societal view. Previous to this the public perception could have been that they don’t want to teach kids that being gay is okay. I think that’s a ludicrous position, but they are free to have it. However Dobson is concerned that children pick up that it is okay to tolerate gay people, regardless of if you agree with the moral position gay people take. It wasn’t a pledge to accept being gay as normal, to like gay people but to simply tolerate the presence of gay people in a civil manner. This apparently is too extreme for the new #1 spokesman for the religious right.
This same sentiment crept in to the PBS broadcast hoopla with the Secretary of Education, who has no business censoring PBS anyway. A cartoon bunny visits a maple syrup farm that happens to be run by lesbians. They are never referred to as lesbians, they aren’t seen kissing or holding hands, they never say, “being gay is okay,” they are simply showing their maple syrup farm. Her objection therefore is to the mere presence of lesbians in the video. It is the same message that they want every trace of homosexuals or perceived homosexuality stricken from their sight.
As the vitriol against gay people is ramped up I hate to imagine where this sentiment is going to take these people. With control of the most powerful government in the history and a populace who cares little for their own civil rights much less those of others (catch that AP article on the first amendmant poll) I’d say that gay people are in a lot of trouble in this country. It’s sad we’re going to watch yet another wave of demonizations and witchhunts in this country.
I don’t really trust the results of that poll. Actually I should say that the results weren’t very pleasing but they probably mirror the reaction teens have had for decades. That old question about “what rights should we have? You stupid people don’t know the Bill of Rights??” is always set up in a way that will get the answer which gets the most publicity.
I do agree with the rest of your comments, although I do think that there is only so far these hatemongers can go in their anti-gay crusading. You should worry more about the individual states and some of the lunatics who are ruining lives there. Virginia, Georgia, etc.
To be honest, prior to the SpongeBob flap, some Chirstian sites were reporting SpongeBob was gay. Later, Dobson came out and said that he was against the video. But sites like Child Action Protection Alert stated that SpongeBob was gay because he held hands with his friends, lost his pants frequently, and supposedly made homoerotic references. I actually think Dobson is trying to spin this now differently. I was aware of the controversy prior to the newsreports.
I’ve said it once, and I’ll say it again:
The objective of Dobson and his ilk is to force all queer identifying individuals back into the closet, the gulag, and to some of them, the Koncentrationlager. They are working for the felony [re-]criminalization of homosexuality in all its forms, regardless of its cost in terms of employment, children, rights, or life to the accused.
This attack on ‘tolerance’ underscores my point; that mere tolerance is seen as both threat and anathema. When Dobson states that he believes that gay marriage and gay rights are leading towards the destruction of society and western civilization, he is not exaggerating his belief.
His pocket-exGays are just tools to his end: providing a patina of reasonableness to his final solution. They, especially, the paid ones, are kapos!
Good points guys (and gals),
Thank God Lawrence V Texas came along when it did or the next four years could be even uglier. Of course further rulings will come down in the next four years that will help determine just how wide of a precedent Lawrence is allowed to set, which I fear won’t be interpreted as far as the equal protection issue.
Regan:
I believe his son, Ryan Dobson, was adopted.
[URL]https://www.harborhouse.org/banquet/sharingbanquet2003.htm [/URL]
Surprised the Ayatollah didn’t mention that. Probably he was flustered because someone had the unmitigated gall to call him as they saw him.
Ryan’s latest book: Be Intolerant: Because Some Things are Just Stupid
The nut doesn’t fall far from the tree, even if grafted on.
Regan, I’m inclined to delete your last comment — calling someone a “mean-spirited beast” isn’t constructive, and it’s potentially libelous.
But I welcome feedback. Are there any objections?
Yes. Dobson is mean-spirited. Beast is overkill, and deprives him of the responsibility he must take as a human being. As for potentially libelous, is he likely to want to bring or have standing to bring a suit in the British legal system? He certainly wouldn’t have a leg to stand on in the US. Larry Flynt could do a cartoon of him schtupping someone, and it wouldn’t be libelous according to US law, since Dobson is a public figure, and a political figure.
Give her the option to allow an edit, or just realize that it was a rhetorical figure of speech? I’m inclined to let folks speak for themselves unless it’s actually inciting, or clearly abusive.
To D Gonzales:
Actually, the Supremes have begun to gather in their robes on Lawrence. The last coupla cases that came up for their review, like the challenge to FL adoption bar for gays, they let slide.
“mean-spirited beast” isn’t even REMOTELY libelous
I agree with Nancy — “beast” is overkill, and it absolves Dobson of human (and Christian) responsibilities that he has eagerly shirked.
Regan,
I appreciate the thoughtfulness and first-hand experiences raised in many of your posts.
At the same time, I’m not going to allow people to be called beasts, pigs and supremacists here. There are other forums available for that.
Sincerely,
Mike
Hey, I’m not defending it as a tasteful or appropriate comment but it’s not even remotely libelous.
I agree.
I’ve simply decided, “No namecalling.” Surely that’s something that supporters of “No Name-Calling Week” can go along with. 🙂
If anyone recalls past instances of name-calling at XGW that merit deletion, please let me know — publicly or privately.
I agree. If we’re going to decry name-calling, its important to be consistent.
You had an earlier post outlining some commenting guidelines (link to sources, no spam, etc). You might want to collect them and put them somewhere so people can read them and you can refer to them when policing is necessary.
You do realize that Dobson has his OWN cartoon to promote?
He is in direct competition with Spongebob.
I haven’t seen this reported elsewhere yet, but a comment over on the Ship of Fools board caught my eye.
The poster (Go Anne Go) notes:
“I also just came from listening to Jim Wallis speak. He had his own tale to tell about Focus on the Family. He sat in a room with the heads of them for hours and hours and finally got them to admit that really and truly gays were NOT responsible for the breakdown in the heterosexual family. According to him, they did indeed admit this. Of course their next line was:
‘But we can’t speak on behalf of our fundraising department.’ Tells you just what you need to know.”
Indeed.
Nile Rodgers, the man behind We Are Family Foundation, has said in the news that the only part of WAFF that had any sexual reference was the “tolerance pledge”. One of the things on The We Are Family Foundation website is the “Write For Change” teacher lesson plans. The lesson plans contain subjects such as:
– heterosexuality leads to the notion of women as inherently “weak,” and the institutionalized inequality of power: power of men to control women’s sexuality, labor, childbirth and childrearing, physical movement, safety, creativity, and access to knowledge.
– Help students examine assumptions about the “natural order” in gender relationships.
– Write the first sentence in a description of the term “lesbian”
– Specify the characteristics that learners think define a person as homosexual.
– Talking About Being “Out”
– Uncovering Attitudes About Sexual Orientation
– Introduce the concepts of homophobia and compulsory heterosexuality
The “Kids” section of the We Are Family Foundation website leads the “5 years old and up” into tolerance.org, which has material questionable for children 5 and up. The “10 years old and up” also leads kids into alternet.org which has pornographic material such as:
* Masturbate Online! – In the “we’re not sure we’re part of the United States” Bay Area, we like to enjoy a little masturbation with our free speech – http://www.masturbate-a-thon.com
* You Sexy Animal, You – Bestiality is back, and its hotter than ever, now that famed bioethicist Peter Singer has taken up “the love that dare not bark its name.”
* The World’s Weirdest Sex Machines – What do you get when you cross a bicycle rim, three pairs of used women’s shoes, and a metal chain gear? Why, the best masturbation device available in 1920s Germany, of course. Such curious inventions dot the landscape of the little-known history of sexual machinery.
Then some of these articles have links to other sites. For example, once you’re on http://www.masturbate-a-thon.com, there are links to other pornographic websites.
Your point Rzebro?
You actually dug through links from website to website and expect the one you started with to be responsible?
I can go from Yahoo.com to kiddie porn in 2 clicks.
First of all Rzebro,
What is most important in responding to your two posts, is corroborating it by checking the WAFF site. However, the fact that most of their content has been taken off the site, leads me to believe they’ve been subjected to familiar mischief by those on the Right none too happy being embarrassed, yet again.
So, I’ll guess you purposely omitted what is probably posted as the recommended age range for the ‘Write For Change’ lesson plan. Also, on the FOTF site you can link to a US and World News Report article on Dobson, where the page contains Google ads, that if you clink on them may give you pop up ads with adult content, unless you set your preferences on their homepage.
I wanted to say thanks Mike, for including my post in your thorough piece! Taking into account the recent humiliating events visited upon Dobson and his ilk, I’m confident in pronouncing him almost fully Kerik-ed! When it comes to watching your credibility disappear in an instant, at least Armstrong Williams will always have a gig at Fox. Dobson has gone from leader of the Evangelical Movement, to Dan Quayle.
The whole episode is not only enjoyable, but it came at just the right time!
Dobson is unassailable among his intended audience. He’s only Keriked among the liberal news hounds who tend to be ignorant of the major religious players. Dobson had a “soft” reputation to ignorant liberals and mushy-middle folk due to his 5 minute show on child-raising tips aired on secular stations – these were very bland and reassuring in nature, and he didn’t go on about gays or abortion, as he does on his 1 hour show aired on Christian radio stations. So don’t “misunderestimate” Dobson’s continuing appeal.
Well NancyP,
I’ll go you one better – I’ll pronounce Dobson now completely Chalabi-ed!!
He can go right on preaching his hate and intolerance to his ‘intended audience’, because eventually they will all fit in his compound in Colorado Springs. This scope of his ‘continuing appeal’ suits me just fine!
Those of us on the Left only need to be on guard, when Dobson’s rhetorical bile becomes championed by the Conservatives, the GOP and Karl Rove. He may still be unassailable amongst his flock, but he’s now considered an embarrassing joke to the party in power. You’re actually the first defense of Dobson I’ve come upon, while the rest of the Conservative Echo Chamber is either silent or laughing right along with us!
Unfortunately, TCF, I don’t believe Dobson is done.
Did anyone notice in the Super Bowl lead up, Steve Largent, by-lined as from Focus on the Family, was one of the reciters of the Declaration of Independence?
I nearly choked on my disgust.
Regan, to the extent that you seek to silence or kill your enemies, your own ideology comes across as supremacism.
I don’t care whether a supremacist is gay-tolerant or antigay. Supremacism is supremacism, and it is not welcome here.