CBS, NBC ban ad on gay acceptance

[TastesLikeChicken]

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - The CBS and NBC television networks have banned an ad by the United Church of Christ promoting acceptance, including the acceptance of people regardless of sexual orientation, because the networks believe the ad is too controversial, according to the church.

According to a United Church of Christ statement, the ad says that -- like Jesus -- the church seeks to welcome all people, regardless of ability, age, race, economic circumstance or sexual orientation.

"Because this commercial touches on the exclusion of gay couples...and the fact that the executive branch has recently proposed a Constitutional amendment to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, this spot is unacceptable for broadcast," the church's press release read, quoting CBS.

CBS and NBC did not immediately return calls seeking comment.

"It's ironic that after a political season awash in commercials based on fear and deception by both parties seen on all major networks, and ad with a message of welcome and inclusion would be deemed too controversial," said Rev. John Thomas in the statement.

"We find it disturbing that the networks in question seem to have no problem exploiting gay persons through mindless comedies or titillating dramas, but when it comes to a church's loving welcome of committed gay couples, that's where they draw the line."

The church said the 30-second spot featured two muscle-bound bouncers standing outside a church, selecting people who could attend service and those who could not. Written text then appears saying, in part, "Jesus didn't turn people away, neither do we."

The commercial can be viewed at www.stillspeaking.com, although traffic appears to be high.

The church says the ad has been accepted on a number of other networks including ABC Family, BET Discovery, Fox, Hallmark, TBS and TNT.

TBS and TNT are owned by Time Warner (Research), which also owns CNN/Money.

CBS is part of Viacom (Research) while NBC belongs to General Electric (Research).

The Cleveland-based United Church of Christ claims 6,000 congregations with 1.3 million members.

I'm trying to consider the reply from CBS on this issue as anything else but completely vapid, but I'm failing miserably.

linky

 

[SuperTool]

So much for the liberal media mantra.

 

[kage69]

Depressing, but not entirely surprising. I can't wait to hear the justification for it.

 

[isasir]

I had to read the article a few times to make sure I understood it. So the church says it's welcoming people without discrimination and somehow this is a controversial ad?

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: isasir
I had to read the article a few times to make sure I understood it. So the church says it's welcoming people without discrimination and somehow this is a controversial ad?

Indeed. The church is taking a stance that is both admirable and in line with the spirit of the teachings of Jesus. The controversy is that people don't *really* care about the teachings of Jesus...

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
So much for the liberal media mantra.

Really, but they (the FLL's especially on here) will continue to scream it especially as we near the next General Election.

 

[dahunan]

Gays are just a political tool - This is just one church..

The networks are afraid to lose money from other churches who disagree with what this church is saying.. Most Christians would rather exclude THE FREAKS and continue being bigots and fall short in the glory of their God for their own selfish reasons.

 

[Kibbo]

And they say Chompsky is a radical.

 

[Trevelyan]

Most Christian churches will accept gays into their church, but they will not hesitate to make it clear that they view homosexuality as a sin.

Tolerance of sin is most certainly not the message of Jesus. When Jesus ate with sinners he didn't do it so he could accept their sinful ways, but to offer them forgiveness.

The Bible teaches homosexuality is a sin, a church that follows the Bible believes that, and so to ask them to accept homosexuality as OK simply because of the current social demand for tolerance for all lifestyle choices is NOT acceptable.

http://gotquestions.org/homosexuality.html

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
So much for the liberal media mantra.

you guys have some really thick heads I see....

The bottom line for them is ratings and the allmighty dollar, so while much of the reporting and the programming is highly liberal, they are not going to go about shooting themselves in the ass by upsetting a major portion of their viewers and or dropping popular, ratings attracting stories because they lean right. Liberal Media comment still holds true even though from time to time they do something to contradict this in the name of profits/ratings.

 

[Kibbo]

Originally posted by: Trevelyan
Most Christian churches will accept gays into their church, but they will not hesitate to make it clear that they view homosexuality as a sin.

Tolerance of sin is most certainly not the message of Jesus. When Jesus ate with sinners he didn't do it so he could accept their sinful ways, but to offer them forgiveness.

The Bible teaches homosexuality is a sin, a church that follows the Bible believes that, and so to ask them to accept homosexuality as OK simply because of the current social demand for tolerance for all lifestyle choices is NOT acceptable.

http://gotquestions.org/homosexuality.html

Yes, but a sense of proportion may be in order. I think that it would be only reasonable to expect the gospels of Christs to hold more weight in any Christian theological structure than any other book in the Bible. Note that that proposition can be supported easily by pointing out a single contradiction in the Bible. If you do not rank the various proscriptions, than the entire system breaks down. Since for many Christians the entire purpose of their lives is to become more "Christ-like," it seems reasonable to give the Gospels more weight than any other book in the Bible.

AFAIK, the only New Testament reference to homosexuality is in Romans (and let's face it, anything out of Leviticus can be thrashed in about 30 secs - that's the comedy section of the Bible). Thus, any system of beleifs that treats homosexuality as a "worse" sin than any proscription of Jesus (as found in the Gospels) is logically inconsistent.

And yet you find many attitudes among some Christians which would exhibit this inconsistency, and if challenged on these attitudes, the Christian will justify themselves by using religious rhetoric. This kind of logical inconsistency leads many non-Christians (and Christians with dissenting opinions) to beleive that theology is not the only source of these attitudes, and that a good deal of the intolerance is due to simple social prejudice.

Please educate me if I've made any errors in my reasoning.

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: SuperTool
So much for the liberal media mantra.

you guys have some really thick heads I see....

The bottom line for them is ratings and the allmighty dollar, so while much of the reporting and the programming is highly liberal, they are not going to go about shooting themselves in the ass by upsetting a major portion of their viewers and or dropping popular, ratings attracting stories because they lean right. Liberal Media comment still holds true even though from time to time they do something to contradict this in the name of profits/ratings.

There is no Liberal Media. There may be liberal reporters, but the media is corporate controlled, and very much conservative.

 

[Orsorum]

What is an FLL?

 

[Kibbo]

Originally posted by: SuperTool


There is no Liberal Media. There may be liberal reporters, but the media is corporate controlled, and very much conservative.

I beleive that if you made an objective study of the content of the media, you would find a consistent bias towards liberalism on so-called-social issues, and a consistent right wing bias towards economic and foreign affairs issues, as well as issues of security and crime and punishment.

Since I've seen studies that focused on the latter and quantitatively determined a right-wing bias, and not a single study that I've read about that demonstrated a left-wing bias has ever controlled for the different issues, I would bet money on it.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Orsorum
What is an FLL?

A few have been asking this lately, more folks that don't pay attention.

Since it is no longer PC (Politically Correct) to use the "N" (Neocon) word I now call them Fearless Liar Lemmings hence FLL.

 

[kage69]

(and let's face it, anything out of Leviticus can be thrashed in about 30 secs - that's the comedy section of the Bible).

Really? Genesis always made me laugh the most.

 

[slurmsmackenzie]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33

Originally posted by: isasir
I had to read the article a few times to make sure I understood it. So the church says it's welcoming people without discrimination and somehow this is a controversial ad?

Indeed. The church is taking a stance that is both admirable and in line with the spirit of the teachings of Jesus. The controversy is that people don't *really* care about the teachings of Jesus...

Jesus did not teach the acceptance of homosexuality. he taught the acceptance of every person, not their actions. while he defended what's her face from the stoning masses, it wasn't that he was accepting her profession, rather that he was condemning those persecuting her as hypocrites. jesus never taught an acceptance of homosexuality, or any other act condemned by his Father. he accepted saul (paul) the murder... not because he accepted murder, but because "Jehovah is forgiving in a large way".

 

[slurmsmackenzie]

Originally posted by: Kibbo

Originally posted by: Trevelyan
Most Christian churches will accept gays into their church, but they will not hesitate to make it clear that they view homosexuality as a sin.

Tolerance of sin is most certainly not the message of Jesus. When Jesus ate with sinners he didn't do it so he could accept their sinful ways, but to offer them forgiveness.

The Bible teaches homosexuality is a sin, a church that follows the Bible believes that, and so to ask them to accept homosexuality as OK simply because of the current social demand for tolerance for all lifestyle choices is NOT acceptable.

http://gotquestions.org/homosexuality.html

Yes, but a sense of proportion may be in order. I think that it would be only reasonable to expect the gospels of Christs to hold more weight in any Christian theological structure than any other book in the Bible. Note that that proposition can be supported easily by pointing out a single contradiction in the Bible. If you do not rank the various proscriptions, than the entire system breaks down. Since for many Christians the entire purpose of their lives is to become more "Christ-like," it seems reasonable to give the Gospels more weight than any other book in the Bible.

AFAIK, the only New Testament reference to homosexuality is in Romans (and let's face it, anything out of Leviticus can be thrashed in about 30 secs - that's the comedy section of the Bible). Thus, any system of beleifs that treats homosexuality as a "worse" sin than any proscription of Jesus (as found in the Gospels) is logically inconsistent.

And yet you find many attitudes among some Christians which would exhibit this inconsistency, and if challenged on these attitudes, the Christian will justify themselves by using religious rhetoric. This kind of logical inconsistency leads many non-Christians (and Christians with dissenting opinions) to beleive that theology is not the only source of these attitudes, and that a good deal of the intolerance is due to simple social prejudice.

Please educate me if I've made any errors in my reasoning.

dumb that down for me a bit.... i'm not sure i understand where you're going.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Originally posted by: slurmsmackenzie

Originally posted by: Kibbo

Originally posted by: Trevelyan
Most Christian churches will accept gays into their church, but they will not hesitate to make it clear that they view homosexuality as a sin.

Tolerance of sin is most certainly not the message of Jesus. When Jesus ate with sinners he didn't do it so he could accept their sinful ways, but to offer them forgiveness.

The Bible teaches homosexuality is a sin, a church that follows the Bible believes that, and so to ask them to accept homosexuality as OK simply because of the current social demand for tolerance for all lifestyle choices is NOT acceptable.

http://gotquestions.org/homosexuality.html

Yes, but a sense of proportion may be in order. I think that it would be only reasonable to expect the gospels of Christs to hold more weight in any Christian theological structure than any other book in the Bible. Note that that proposition can be supported easily by pointing out a single contradiction in the Bible. If you do not rank the various proscriptions, than the entire system breaks down. Since for many Christians the entire purpose of their lives is to become more "Christ-like," it seems reasonable to give the Gospels more weight than any other book in the Bible.

AFAIK, the only New Testament reference to homosexuality is in Romans (and let's face it, anything out of Leviticus can be thrashed in about 30 secs - that's the comedy section of the Bible). Thus, any system of beleifs that treats homosexuality as a "worse" sin than any proscription of Jesus (as found in the Gospels) is logically inconsistent.

And yet you find many attitudes among some Christians which would exhibit this inconsistency, and if challenged on these attitudes, the Christian will justify themselves by using religious rhetoric. This kind of logical inconsistency leads many non-Christians (and Christians with dissenting opinions) to beleive that theology is not the only source of these attitudes, and that a good deal of the intolerance is due to simple social prejudice.

Please educate me if I've made any errors in my reasoning.

dumb that down for me a bit.... i'm not sure i understand where you're going.

Aside from your above post, then your next post, I'll "dumb it down"

He's saying that 'Jesus's accept everybody philosophy' holds more weight than 'burn the homos because god hates the(ir)m (sins)'

 

[upsciLLion]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Gays are just a political tool - This is just one church..

The networks are afraid to lose money from other churches who disagree with what this church is saying.. Most Christians would rather exclude THE FREAKS and continue being bigots and fall short in the glory of their God for their own selfish reasons.

I really don't think that's true. While it's quite stereotypical, it's truly is the loud-mouthed bigots (which are most certainly a very small minority of Christianity) that cause people to have that generalization. I consider myself a conservative Christian and don't mind gay people at all. Even my dad who's even more conservative feels the same way.

 

[upsciLLion]

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: slurmsmackenzie

Originally posted by: Kibbo

Originally posted by: Trevelyan
Most Christian churches will accept gays into their church, but they will not hesitate to make it clear that they view homosexuality as a sin.

Tolerance of sin is most certainly not the message of Jesus. When Jesus ate with sinners he didn't do it so he could accept their sinful ways, but to offer them forgiveness.

The Bible teaches homosexuality is a sin, a church that follows the Bible believes that, and so to ask them to accept homosexuality as OK simply because of the current social demand for tolerance for all lifestyle choices is NOT acceptable.

http://gotquestions.org/homosexuality.html

Yes, but a sense of proportion may be in order. I think that it would be only reasonable to expect the gospels of Christs to hold more weight in any Christian theological structure than any other book in the Bible. Note that that proposition can be supported easily by pointing out a single contradiction in the Bible. If you do not rank the various proscriptions, than the entire system breaks down. Since for many Christians the entire purpose of their lives is to become more "Christ-like," it seems reasonable to give the Gospels more weight than any other book in the Bible.

AFAIK, the only New Testament reference to homosexuality is in Romans (and let's face it, anything out of Leviticus can be thrashed in about 30 secs - that's the comedy section of the Bible). Thus, any system of beleifs that treats homosexuality as a "worse" sin than any proscription of Jesus (as found in the Gospels) is logically inconsistent.

And yet you find many attitudes among some Christians which would exhibit this inconsistency, and if challenged on these attitudes, the Christian will justify themselves by using religious rhetoric. This kind of logical inconsistency leads many non-Christians (and Christians with dissenting opinions) to beleive that theology is not the only source of these attitudes, and that a good deal of the intolerance is due to simple social prejudice.

Please educate me if I've made any errors in my reasoning.

dumb that down for me a bit.... i'm not sure i understand where you're going.

Aside from your above post, then your next post, I'll "dumb it down"

He's saying that 'Jesus's accept everybody philosophy' holds more weight than 'burn the homos because god hates the(ir)m (sins)'

I've never read anything in the New Testament or the Old Testament that said being a homosexual is sinful. However, committing homosexual acts (as I have interpretted from reading) is sinful.

e.g. Two gay men having sex is a sin just as a man and a woman that are not married having sex is a sin.

Does that make sense?

 

[venk]

NBC bans the commercial yet they run programs like Will and Grace.

 

[Red Dawn]

Jesus preferred the company of men over women. He probably was a bone smoker but it would throw the whole Christian world in a tailspin if the truth came out! Well maybe not the Catholics, at least not their Priests.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Originally posted by: upsciLLion
I've never read anything in the New Testament or the Old Testament that said being a homosexual is sinful. However, committing homosexual acts (as I have interpretted from reading) is sinful.

e.g. Two gay men having sex is a sin just as a man and a woman that are not married having sex is a sin.

Does that make sense?

I didn't have a problem understanding that part.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: slurmsmackenzie

Originally posted by: Astaroth33

Originally posted by: isasir
I had to read the article a few times to make sure I understood it. So the church says it's welcoming people without discrimination and somehow this is a controversial ad?

Indeed. The church is taking a stance that is both admirable and in line with the spirit of the teachings of Jesus. The controversy is that people don't *really* care about the teachings of Jesus...

Jesus did not teach the acceptance of homosexuality. he taught the acceptance of every person, not their actions. while he defended what's her face from the stoning masses, it wasn't that he was accepting her profession, rather that he was condemning those persecuting her as hypocrites. jesus never taught an acceptance of homosexuality, or any other act condemned by his Father. he accepted saul (paul) the murder... not because he accepted murder, but because "Jehovah is forgiving in a large way".

Homosexuality is not an action, nor is it a choice. One either is homosexual or one is not.

If Jesus has forgiven a homosexual for who he or she is, then what? With forgiveness comes acceptance; otherwise, nothing at all is actually "forgiven", and the very concept is meaningless.