Is any TV show immune to the left's agenda?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tolle_Lege
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thorolfr said:
Evolutionary biologists like Harvard’s Edward O. Wilson have offered some examples of how gay people in a kinship group can help ensure the propagation of their sibling’s genes. In his book, On Human Nature (Harvard University Press, 1978), he says (pp. 143-144):
Click to expand...
This sounds like guesswork from 40 years ago.
 
Tolle_Lege said:
40.png
Thorolfr:
Evolutionary biologists like Harvard’s Edward O. Wilson have offered some examples of how gay people in a kinship group can help ensure the propagation of their sibling’s genes. In his book, On Human Nature (Harvard University Press, 1978), he says (pp. 143-144):
Click to expand...
This sounds like guesswork from 40 years ago.
Click to expand...
People here in CAF often defend old theories about homosexuality and its causes that are based on work that is more than 50 or 60 years old. They don’t seem to think that those theories are just “guesswork from 50 years ago”.
 
If there are any, and if the occasion arises yes they will hear Church teachings on homosexuality, unadulterated. Why should I lie to them? Because the perverted secular world believes the lie?
 
Last edited:
VanitasVanitatum said:
Few are the people who take those seriously either.
Click to expand...
Most of the stuff peddled by Joseph Nicolosi and the folks at NARTH is based on old theories about how people become gay because they had distant, absent or hostile fathers and smothering mothers. Those kinds of theories are a mainstay of reparative therapy programs. Parts of those theories go all the way back to Freud. There are a lot of conservatives who still take them seriously.
 
Last edited:
Having worked in the film industry, there is most certainly an agenda among some producers. For other producers it’s strictly money that they are concerned about. As a matter of fact, Ben Shapiro (Conservative Commentator) even wrote a book about this particular point in a book entitled, “Primetime Propaganda.” Producers are trying to condition/indoctrinate society to certain sociopolitical ideologies (it’s all about being “woke” folks). You would think with the amount of LGBT representation in entertainment – that the LGBT community would make up 50% of the population. When in actuality, they make up approximately 4 - 8%. The “gay rights” movement was never about “rights” or “tolerance.” As the renown gay activist, Paul Varnell once wrote:

“. . . the gay movement, whether we acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a sexual liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people’s view of homosexuality.” Source: “Defending Our Morality,” Chicago Free Press, Aug 16, 2000.

If you’ve seen the trailer for the CW’s “Batwoman” it’s only getting worse, as far as ideology being on full display, with a plethora of groan-worthy lines.

As far as homosexuality, the best way to approach it from a Catholic perspective, imho, is how Jason Evert discussed it at “Theology on Tap”:

 
Last edited:
Thorolfr said:
People here in CAF often defend old theories about homosexuality and its causes that are based on work that is more than 50 or 60 years old. They don’t seem to think that those theories are just “guesswork from 50 years ago”.
Click to expand...
Catholics shouldn’t need theories written by anyone since the Bible plainly states the immorality of homosexual acts and effeminate behavior.
 
There is more to the Biblical use of “effeminate” than you write.
 
Tolle_Lege said:
There is more to the Biblical use of “effeminate” than you write.
Click to expand...
They say that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit. I don’t agree. It certainly has its place in making a point in a non-confrontational way as long as it’s done with some humour.

But either I’m losing my touch or it’s a lost cause in these parts. I tend to the latter. But in any case…looking forward to biblical examples of effeminancy that are applicable to the present day.
 
Surely my principal and the school pastor are the only ones in a position to judge how I teach my Religion class.
I’m pretty sure they’ll be just fine with my teaching the Catholic Catechism’s TRUTH about homosexuality.
 
The truth about homosexuality is contained in the Catechism. I won’t be watering it down, sorry.
 
And their orientation is objectively disordered. And homosexual activity is intrinsically disordered and mortally sinful.
I won’t be cherry picking any of the passages, such as the one you quoted, sorry. And funny how you didn’t quote the immediately following line: "Homosexual persons are called to chastity. "
You have zero say in how Catholic teachers teach Religion classes.
 
Last edited:
Think whatever you want about teaching watered down Catholic religious instruction. You’re not going to be evaluating my instruction so, who cares? 🤣
 
The movie Jungle Cruise, to be released by Disney next year, features a gay character who comes out, without using the word gay. The other thing bothering the LGBT community is that the actor is straight.
 
CatholicELATeacher said:
Think whatever you want about teaching watered down Catholic religious instruction. You’re not going to be evaluating my instruction so, who cares? 🤣
Click to expand...
So, if a 12 year old student confided to you that they thought that they were gay, what would you say to them? And how would you say it? Would you be stern or kind? Would you lecture them about how “objectively disordered” their feelings are? Would you tell them that you would have to tell their parents?
 
Last edited:
None of that is your concern. You have exactly this much say in how I teach and how I interact with students:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top