Tigermike 3,048 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 OK, I'll admit that I must be out of the loop somewhat. I've seen some references to SpongeBob and Democrats and...I don't get it. Little help, anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
channonc 466 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Many on the religious right say that Spongebob is gay, and his "friend" is Patrick the starfish. The creator has openly stated that Spongebob is not gay. That doesn't seem to deter some from continuing to say it. LINK HOLLYWOOD, January 28, 2005SpongeBob Creator Slams Gay Claims By WENN ............................................ SpongeBob SquarePants creator Stephen Hillenburg has slammed suggestions his yellow cartoon character is gay, insisting the loveable sponge is "asexual". A children's music video starring Spongebob, Barney, Winnie the Pooh and a host of other cartoon favourites has been slapped with a gay alert warning by Christian Conservative groups. The video was created by nonprofit We Are Family Foundation to encourage tolerance and diversity, but has been met with disapproval by American Family Association and Focus on the Family, who claim the promo promotes acceptance of homosexuality. However Hillenburg has laughed off the right wing groups' suggestions, saying, "It doesn't have anything to do with what we're trying to do. We never intended them to be gay. "I consider them to be almost asexual. We're just trying to be funny and this has got nothing to do with the show." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auburn85 432 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 How many religious right wingers are out there? I'm not fond of Fawell or Robertson. I'm Babtist. Does this put me into the religious right-wing agenda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
channonc 466 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 I didn't name you or a particular denomination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Thanks, channon. I don't quite get the connection, do you? I'm Babtist. Does this put me into the religious right-wing agenda 155331[/snapback] I don't know. Does it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auburn85 432 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Usually religious right wing interpretation differs from person to person Like if you think a cartoon character id gay, then you are on the religious right. If you think abortion is murder than that falls under the religious right. If you protest to keep the 10 commandments in public display , you might be on the religious right Someone could make a counter book of these to YOU MIGHT BE A REDNECK..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Usually religious right wing interpretation differs from person to person. 155339[/snapback] But, I asked you for YOUR interpretation. Are YOU a member of the religious right? Like if you think a cartoon character id gay, then you are on the religious right. I'd wonder what would make you think that a children's cartoon character displayed ANY sexual tendencies, much less homosexual ones. If you think abortion is murder than that falls under the religious right. If you protest to keep the 10 commandments in public display , you might be on the religious right. Most people who think and act this way do so for religious reasons, don't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,457 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 If being 100% against abortion and gay marraige makes me a member of the religious right, then those on the other side will be called left wing radicals from this day forward. That is how it works...right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,048 Posted April 12, 2005 Author Share Posted April 12, 2005 If being 100% against abortion and gay marraige makes me a member of the religious right, then those on the other side will be called left wing radicals from this day forward. That is how it works...right? 155361[/snapback] You have hit the nail right on the head! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auburn85 432 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 I'm here to say that Sponge is and is not gay... for obvious reasons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 I'm here to say that Sponge is and is not gay... for obvious reasons 155484[/snapback] And could you tell us what the definition of "is" is, please!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auburn85 432 Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Is in a happy way, is not in a homosexual way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLAG-91 1,483 Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Well, since this thread is all over the place, anyway... Does anyone know if a pope has free reign to select his own name? If so, I wonder if one would just do something completely unexpected and give himself some unusual name like Pope Cletis I? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Well, since this thread is all over the place, anyway...Does anyone know if a pope has free reign to select his own name? If so, I wonder if one would just do something completely unexpected and give himself some unusual name like Pope Cletis I? 155511[/snapback] They do choose their names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,998 Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Well, since this thread is all over the place, anyway...Does anyone know if a pope has free reign to select his own name? If so, I wonder if one would just do something completely unexpected and give himself some unusual name like Pope Cletis I? 155511[/snapback] How about John Paul Ringo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLAG-91 1,483 Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Well, since this thread is all over the place, anyway...Does anyone know if a pope has free reign to select his own name? If so, I wonder if one would just do something completely unexpected and give himself some unusual name like Pope Cletis I? 155511[/snapback] How about John Paul Ringo? 155515[/snapback] Heh... Gator fans would be all over themselves if the next pope is Pope Urban IX. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUJarhead 70 Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Well, since this thread is all over the place, anyway...Does anyone know if a pope has free reign to select his own name? If so, I wonder if one would just do something completely unexpected and give himself some unusual name like Pope Cletis I? 155511[/snapback] They do choose their names. 155513[/snapback] And it was started by Pope John II in 535, who's birth name was Mercury, a pagan God. Unless you count Simon Peter as St Peter the Apostle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auburn85 432 Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 For years, we've been telling you there's something very wrong at the Los Angeles Times (search) and that Howard Dean (search) is an irresponsible person. Today, those two situations crystallized. First, The Times. The editorial director took what I think is a very cheap shot against the Catholic Church. Writing about a local statue controversy in Venice, California, Kinsley began the editorial this way. Quote, "The College of Cardinals elected an ultraconservative pope earlier this week, under a ceiling replete with genitals, breasts and buttocks that apparently gave no offense. Good thing Michelangelo painted his Sistine Chapel masterpieces in Rome and not Venice  California, that is." Now, in trying to make a connection between the art of Michelangelo (search) and the perceived small mindedness of some in Venice, Kinsley labels the new pope an extremist and sets up a disrespectful non sequitur by referencing the Catholic Church, which he apparently sees as a puritanical outfit. Remember, the church has nothing to do with the statue controversy. The cardinals in the Sistine Chapel (search) have no relevance whatsoever. Yet Kinsley chose to put a negative spin on the conclave to make a foolish point about a foolish issue. Now if Kinsley had referenced Islam or Judaism that way, he might be out of a job right now. But denigrating a Christian religion for absolutely no reason is perfectly acceptable at the L.A. Times. Now, I guess I could be overreacting, but I just think this is outrageous. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,154294,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.