Two stories that broke today set the Twitterworld afire. Each of them taken individually was sufficient enough to dampen the brightness of even Hollywood's plastic sun. However with the confluence of the events in one day, it was enough to cause succinct twits about the dreadfulness of this day. A day which forever shall live in infamy.
Not only did the California Supreme Court uphold the voter approved Proposition 8, establishing marriage as being between one man and one woman, but news leaked that filmmakers were contemplating relaunching the Buffy the Vampire Slayer franchise with a movie that would not involve the actors who made the TV show a cult hit or creator Joss Whedon. Oh the humanity, how could they possibly survive these two assaults in the same day?
If you find my above treatment of the gay marriage issue to be insulting to the seriousness of the issue, I agree. If you find my equating the two news items today to be dismissive of the actual new story's magnitude, I agree.
I didn't make the analogy or the equation, it was young twittering liberals.
I saw that "Buffy" was one of the most twitted words, so being a fan of the show, I clicked to see what everyone was talking about. There I found people lamenting and complaining about even the possibility that someone would dare make a Buffy movie without the TV cast or involving Whedon. I expected that, psychotic fans are psychotic fans and there is always something to complain about.
What I didn't expect was to see half of the twits equating the movie announcement with the gay marriage decision – both being equally "AWFUL." Just in case, you doubt my interpretation of their angst over both:
RBCAllHeart: First CA upholds Prop 8 and now a Buffy remake without Joss. Today FAILS.
Jean_Wennlund: Today sucks. Prop 8 is upheld and they're making a Buffy movie without Joss Whedon and the rest of cast.
timryder: Don't know what I'm more upset about – Prop 8 being upheld (http://is.gd/FihG) or a Whedon-less Buffy relaunch (http://is.gd/FijU).
In the small time I invested in looking at the Buffy related twitterings, I found similar posts by rhoprox, NRCallie, seashanty and others. Ms. Wennlund was also gracious enough to say that she was "tired of the Dr. MLK approach" and that she "hope[s] there are riots."
If this is an issue that is of utmost importance and is an matter of basic human rights, it deserves to be elevated above rumors about upcoming films.
I am well aware that this does not speak for all, or even a majority, of Prop 8 opponents. This is not an attempt to tar the whole with the sins of the part. (Even though that has often been a ploy used against supporters of traditional marriage.) This is less a comment on the issue of gay marriage than it is a criticism of younger activists of both sides (though it seems more prominent on the left for various reasons) to equate immensely important political moments with barely worth mentioning entertainment news.
This is the negative side for the left in Hollywoodizing their movement. When you allow celebrities, with little to offer except their celebrity, to become the spokespeople for your issues you devalue the seriousness of the issue.
Yes, gay marriage is an important issue to any up and coming liberal, but so is seeing the Buffy character reunited with Joss Whedon. Both carry equal importance as pop issues du jour. All the cool kids are against gay marriage and all the cool kids want the real Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Same thing.
What a weird post. So a few airheads connect the two unrelated topics? Though you are at pains to deny tarring every opponent of the anti-gay Prop 8 with the superficiality of these twits, you seem to be trying to have your cake and eat it too. Twittering, by its nature, seems to attract such nonsense. Who cares what they think?
What disturbs me profoundly is that the CA Supremes think its okay for the rights of an unpopular minority to be trampled under guise of law and democracy by simple, majority vote. I hope, for your sake, that you evangelicals never become such a minority in CA that the rest of us can vote your rights away, making you a second-class citizen (as you were in Roman times).
>>> Who cares what they think?
Who cares what anyone thinks? The "airheads" are a large part of the culture and therefore should be answered and critiqued.
When liberalism allows movie stars to speak for their movement and enjoys the fruits of that (the votes of these twitters) then they also have to accept the idiocy that results from it (the reasoning of these twitters). You basic statement is, "Thanks for the vote, now shut up. You make us look bad."
>>> I hope, for your sake, that you evangelicals never become such a minority in CA that the rest of us can vote your rights away, making you a second-class citizen (as you were in Roman times).
It's happened before (as you state), it is happening across the world even now and it will happen again in places where it is not currently. If I am alive when that day comes, I will fight against it, but hopefully I will ultimately be as the first century believers in Rome and consider it a joy to suffer for my Savior.
But specifically to your point, I'm interested in knowing what right do Christians currently have that you think could be taken away in the future?
When liberalism allows movie stars to speak for their movement and enjoys the fruits of that (the votes of these twitters) then they also have to accept the idiocy that results from it (the reasoning of these twitters).
Okay. But as conservatism allows the likes of Lou Sheldon, Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, Dobson, Coulter, Gingrich, and the rest, to speak for it they also must answer for their idiocy. To paint all with the nuttiness of the few of unjust.
But specifically to your point, I'm interested in knowing what right do Christians currently have that you think could be taken away in the future?
You miss my point. I don't want Christians to lose any civil rights, especially at the hands of an ignorant and bigoted majority of one. I hate the idea that the supremes here in CA held that process to be legal and just. whatever you may think about gay rights, I certainly hope that you would join me in expressing horror that the rights and lives of an unpopular minority can be expunged by a simple majority vote.
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out – because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak out for me.
– Martin Niemoller
Though he did not choose to mention us, "they" also came for the gays, and we were considered below Jews in the camps.
Hi Aaron:
I'm am having trouble getting your post. It seems to me that you say quite a few twittering people who were big fans of a TV show made what you think are dumb comments and that this somehow reflects badly on entertainers being involved in politics? Why not draw the conclusion that Buffy fans are (on average with notable exceptions) morons? I don't watch the show (I watch other dumb shows like CBS Big Brother:-) and none of the people I know would seriously equate taking away basic civil rights with bad casting decisions in a movie. Hollywood people are often intelligent and articulate and informed–t least as well-informed as radio talk show hosts–so other than the fact that so many celebs are liberal, why do conservatives get so worked about about them speaking out on issues the care about. What they say is as intelligent as any other people say as far as I can tell.
your friend
Keith