Stephen Baldwin, who you may or may not know has converted into some manic crusader for religious morality, was on hand to speak at the Values Voter Summit in Washington DC yesterday in order to rail against the immoral values that he believes are promoted by the TV series Gossip Girl. Stephen, with GG ad posters in hand, spoke at the conservative summit of his outrage at Hollywood’s use of provocative images to lure audiences … here are a few pics:
I mean, I’m all for his right to have an opinion on matters like this, just like I can have my opinion … but it does worry me that conservative groups like this tend to rally together in order to work out an agenda that seeks to limit the free speech and expression of others … whether it be in the arts, in film or in television. I suspect, since Gossip Girl is based on a series of books, these conservative-minded people would also like to curtail books that promote, what they believe are, immoral values as well … which is kinda a short step away from book burning, in my opinion. I post my thoughts on this only because, as I said, it really worries me that social conservatives work so hard to curtail freedoms in this country. Just because they believe something is “immoral” or “sinful” then it should be taken away from other grown adults who might have a different viewpoint or may enjoy what they consider wrong. I would be much more comfortable if these folks got together to complain to one another and seek support in their beliefs in one another — and that was that. Make no mistake, these folks want to curtail the availability of things that they find “immoral” and I vehemently oppose their efforts. It’s scary, y’all … ever stop to think what other things these people might find “immoral” enough that they would like to take away from you? Things on the internet perhaps?
[Photo credit: Splash News]
PLEASE! It’s time to get over it. No one ever said that show was gonna be a show about being good. The books are like that too..i mean yes, the showed is strayed away from the books, but come on now. Get over it. So there is making out, no clothes, and lots of sex…get over it =)
I agree. The way that the republican party adresses issues is highly based on their moral standpoints and religious views, things which differ among actual people. I am not a christian, and I find it startling that these people seek to eliminate things that are concidered ‘wrong’ by their religion, when this would force christian views onto the whole of the American public, something that is against the original point of the U.S. anyway. It seriously frustrates me that people think it’s okay to force their beliefs throughout the whole community just to keep their families from it. Forget banning a T.V. show, try monitoring what your children watch instead!!! The government’s responsibility is not to babysit your children. If there was something on T.V. when I was young my parents disliked, they didn’t run and complain to the state for showing it, they changed the chanel. How hard is that? Seriously.
btw, Emily up there with her rant on Palin’s daughter is acting just as bad as the republican party. God.
I’m all for people expressing their opinion, but I think people in glass houses, shouldn’t throw stones. I happen to know Stephen has a few skeletons in his closet and I’m not talking about movies he’s been in.
There is a BIG difference between advocating your controversial opinion and restricting the rights of other’s viewpoint through law and policy.
I can see a ‘sex and violence’ free zone of tv channels created by market pressure (hello conservatives, isn’t this supposed to be your influencing tool of choice?), but not at the expense of others who want access to that at the same time.
Sarah Palin went to her town’s librarian at least twice to find out how to ban books in a U.S. library. She was rebuffed by another strong woman. Palin seeks to censor viewpoints, not disagree. Sounds like the actions of leaders in several countries we want to create democracy in, doesn’t it?
Don’t want your kids to read Gulliver’s Travels (yep, a banned book) or porn or the Communist Manifesto, then censor your kid’s actions as you see fit — that’s your job and freedom.
Censorship minded folks like Sarah don’t believe in the gifts God gave us, including our hearts, minds and personal judgment. They believe they are God by extension and their holy mission to deliver God’s rightful action. That’s deranged thinking (My view = God’s view) and dangerous to peace and prosperity. Just talk to those in communities in the U.S. with censorshipped libraries, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran – do we want our leaders deciding what we should have access to, think and feel and believe in too?
Its amusing how a couple of extreme conservatives represent the whole party.
I think that there should definetly be freedom of speech and in the case disagree with Baldwin. But it amazes me how many comments seem to think that because Baldwin has some very strong opinions these are the same opinions that the whole party has.
Both democrats and republicans have the crazies, and we need to accept that these people are not the voice of the majority. Nor can we believe everything we read about the candidates because everyone is bias and will slant facts everyway.
Cami, for someone so concerned with our freedom of speech you sure seem upset with Americans who exercise it, well, at least those that don’t hold your same viewpoints. Isn’t that just as narrow-minded as the “conservative Christian bigots” you’ve portrayed? Did it ever occur to you that Christianity is just a part of these people’s lives? As a Christian I can say that it affects every aspect of your life, even your politics.
I agree that it should be on an individual basis, protecting our own children and such, and it isn’t the government’s job to babysit, but realistically can we run in and turn the channel every time our child is watching television and a commercial pops up with a steamy sex scene? I know from experience all to well how much more difficult it is nowadays to avoid our children from seeing such things. This kind of advertising was few and far between while we were growing up Cami, but look at television nowadays. It is hard to find any channel that doesn’t depict sex anymore. Our children are becoming more and more desensitized at an earlier age. Girls I babysit who are 8 and 10 years old know rap songs about prostitutes, murder and drugs, things I had never known about at that age. Is it wrong that we should want them to remain innocent during their childhood years? It’s not the shows themselves that people like Stephen Baldwin are trying to get off the air, it’s the advertising that reaches a far wider audience, including young children, that should have some standards of decency. What I think is scary is that no one thinks that this is wrong, they instead bash those who wish to “censor” or “limit free speech” by protecting innocents from this garbage. Shouldn’t the real question be why Christians seem to be the only ones concerned?
But just because you are offended and you want to determine what your family watches doesn’t mean you should be able to impart those beliefs on other people. People who have no children shouldn’t be penalized because it’s too hard for a parent to monitor what their children watches. Christian morality cannot be allowed to govern our nation, which is exactly why our government was founded on the separation between church and state. Conservatives can lobby, can boycott — have many options available to them which I wholly support. Once they start getting into legislating their morality, then I have a huge problem.
Isnt he the one that was one of the main characters in Threesome?? One of the first provocative shows I saw as a teenager.
How are those without children being penalized? What are they missing but a few ads? They’re not asking for the show to be pulled, just to clean up ads that those with children should not have to see. And no, Christian morality should not govern the nation, but shouldn’t some morality govern it? There seems to be a disturbing lack of morality in this nation, and it doesn’t have to do a 360 and become Christian, but shouldn’t a nation have some moral standards? I agree fully with seperation between church and state – because the state will eventually corrupt the church as proven through the history of thousands of years. But just because the church should not be involved in the state, doesn’t mean that the members of the church should not be able to try and push through legislation that voices their opinions and moral beliefs. Everyone else in the nation with their own religious and non-religious beliefs attempts to do the same, why should Christians be the exemption?
i believe that as long as you know what is right and what is wrong and strongly convicted in it, what can these shows do bad for your soul? i’m a christian and i thoroughly enjoy watching GG its like, my most looked-forward to hour in the week. but does it mean i let it affect my spirituality and soul? No! it is just something fun and for me to laugh at.
just like how a few years back, the da vinci code was a big hooha all throughout and campaigns were everywhere to ban the movie and some even say it’ll take down christianity. but hey, a few years after, what has it truly affect and changed? the truth is, nothing.
and as for the parents concerned about their children, come on, this is a broken down world we live in. sex, lust, money, fame is EVERYWHERE. even if you shield your child from all these ads, they’ll still see the reality of this world when they are in high school etc. its just the real world we are living in.
so why not teach them the right values etc, and let them know what is right or wrong, rather than avoiding these things altogether. it doesnt help for them.
Denise, I am not singling out Christianity, any religious group that seeks to legislate their moral beliefs is wrong in my eyes. Why is it that instead of pushing legislation, you can’t just turn off the TV or be more vigilant in policing what your children watch? Yes, it’s more of a burden on you to be more proactive but that is what comes from having and raising children. Saying “they’re not trying to remove the show, just the ads” is how it begins … a slippery slope is a slippery slope. You seem to believe that your morality is the the “some” morality that should govern it. Morality cannot be determined for all people, which is why it should be left up to the individual. Enacting laws that take that choice away is the most anti-American thing I can think of.
Why should people have to keep the tv in case an inappropriate ad airs on tv? Parents can be vigilant and not let their kids watch gossip girl, but they don’t know when the inappropriate ads will air and cannot always block them.
As much as freedom of speech and choices is great we have to have someone make some moral judgement for us. It sounds harsh in words, it is why we have ratings boards for tv and movies, in fact the whole justice system is based on morals someone has to decide what actions are good and bad aka morality.
Morality has nothing to do with religion, I’m an athiest yet view myself as a moral person with moral beliefs. Lets leave religion out of it.
Stephen Baldwin coming out against Hollywood’s use of this kind of marketing is laughable at best and utterly hypocritical at worst! Check out his IMDB resume folks . . . the man has been in some movies that leave this position in question! Amazing how he has “flip-flopped” isn’t it?
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000286/
I absolutely do not agree that we need “someone” to decide morality for us — hell no! The justice system is based on laws, judges sometimes use their morality to interpret those laws … which is why it’s important to vote for a President who will select judges with the ability to adjudicate lawfully not morally. A conservative President is not likely to do that.
“Because of the very common usage of the “separation of church and state phrase,” most people incorrectly think the phrase is in the constitution. The phrase “wall of separation between the church and the state” was originally coined by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists on January 1, 1802. His purpose in this letter was to assuage the fears of the Danbury, Connecticut Baptists, and so he told them that this wall had been erected to protect them. The metaphor was used exclusively to keep the state out of the church’s business, not to keep the church out of the state’s business.
The constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Both the free exercise clause and the establishment clause place restrictions on the government concerning laws they pass or interfering with religion. No restrictions are placed on religions except perhaps that a religious denomination cannot become the state religion.”
source- http://www.allabouthistory.org.....-state.htm
Just so we’re clear on that.
http://www.expertlaw.com/libra.....dment.html
And a straight up legal website for you as well.
I agree that in the end it is truly left to the individual to decide, from what their children watch to their own morality. I know we each have our own moral compass, but wasn’t our nation also founded upon a broader, more general one as well? When did setting standards for what is right and wrong become an infringement upon our civil liberties, our freedoms? I’m not saying that my own personal ideas of morality should govern by any means, or even that of Christians or atheists. I’m saying the American government has always had some moral standard, and we have forever seen attempts from both sides, liberal and conservative, to loosen or tighten that moral boundary. In the recent decades we have seen liberal thought saturate our morality as a nation and naturally we are experiencing a conservative reaction to that swing to the left. And while Christians and other religious interest groups may spearhead such efforts, isn’t it their right as Americans to do so? In my eyes, yes America is a symbol of freedom, freedom of speech and choice, yet it is also a beacon of democracy. To get involved in the workings of American government, express your opinions, and vote to put through legislation, whether influenced by religion or any other factor, is what it truly means to be American to me. I do think that religious legislation is tricky, I personally believe that religion should be separate for its own good. I can’t speak for other religions, but Christianity was forever called out to be different, unique, and separate from the empire lest it be tainted. But what few understand is that Christianity is not just a way of thinking but it’s a way of life, it’s a relationship. It’s not something that is involved in certain parts of our lives and stands on the wayside for others, it is a constant. To ask us to keep our religious beliefs out of our politics is impossible. It is our right as Americans to stand for legislation that coincides with our beliefs just as everyone else in this nation has the same right as well.
Absolutely agree, which is the crux of this whole election. Of course you have the right to advocate your position as do I … and in November we’ll decide which way we want to go next.
Here is what I have to say, If you don’t like the show, then don’t watch it! no one is putting a gun to your head to watch it!