Here’s the thing I often wonder about One Million Moms and groups like theirs: what would happen if we all quit talking about them? What if we just treated them like the crazy people with no power that they are?

It seems to me that these groups get more air time and screen time because people against them insist on talking about them.

Just a thought.

It’s easier to talk about “bigoted views”, but not so easy to think about people who have different moral concepts based on different worldviews. The author has one that leads him to say “placing gay characters on pedestals in a positive light that’s a good thing”, and the moms group another one, that leads them to disagree with that and manifest on that. So, as well as the author of this post has his right to manifest his opinion in his approval of gay marriage, and Marvel and DC also to do so in their comic books through stories, other people with a different thinking also have right to manifest it, and publicly.

Some people hold to different moral principles, based in different moral concepts in this matter (yes, some considered it a moral issue – me included), and each group must in the end tolerate each other: no one should have the right to prohibit each other to manifest each other disagreements in these moral principles.

I’m saying this because I do have problems with the “shut up” part of this post. This shows that a level of intolerance may happen in both sides of the debate. I don’t think he intended to prohibit anyone in their rights, but it’s a “shut up” anyway. If this group of moms want to complain, let them complain. If they are wrong to do so, talk about that, but not with a “shut up”.

As a Mother of Four, let me just state for the record that these women don’t speak for me. I brought my kids up to read comics, as all well-adjusted children should. I’d prefer, that instead of raging about comic books, these moms could teach their adorable little moppets a few manners, and stop stuffing them full of self esteem.

I really hate self-esteem. I don’t mind self respect, which is a whole ‘nother kettle of fish.

I know nothing about “One Million Moms”, but I know that one has the freedom to disagree on moral principles with someone else, and manifest it publicly; likewise, one has also the freedom to publicly condemn something that may be acceptable in society, but not right according to his or her worldview, and therefore, to teach and inform his or her children in that way.

Given that, that’s my problem with the “shut up” and “bigoted views” part in this post. In fact, I may have also problem with the first point, then I think children still read comics (@Sallyp?), or are at least still influenced in some way by them. I think of that when I remember the post-DC New 52 Starfire and a 7-year-old girl, as show in the following link:

http://io9.com/5844355/a-7+year+old-girl-responds-to-dc-comics-sexed+up-reboot-of-starfire

If I was a father and had children, I wouldn’t join “One Million Fathers” in such a campaign, but I’d also disapprove gay marriage, and tell about it. As many others do; and they have the right to do so, in the same way the author has the right to say “gay marriage is a good thing”. That’s my point.

I agree that OMM should have the right to say what they want to say, but since it’s hateful and vile, we should also have the right to tell them to shut up. Just like we have the right to tell the Klan to shut up. And they can tell us to shut up, too. In fact, they have–just not in so many words.

You have to realize that these people aren’t content merely to voice their opinions. They want to pressure networks to cancel TV shows and comic book companies to change their publishing plan in order to match their view of the world. This isn’t a question of free speech, it’s a question of a group trying to use economic pressure to bully companies into doing it their way. If it were about free speech, they would be content to allow artistic works to go on as long as their audience permits, and to protest and complain and quote the bible at it along the way. The fact that they define “victory” by removing anything they disagree with from the public sphere amounts to them telling anyone who doesn’t agree with them, “Shut up.” More than that, they’re saying, “Shut up, or we’ll get you fired from your job.”

I see your point @Russ, and it’s a good one, worth of thinking: they are trying to enforce their agenda, so to say. As I said, I know nothing about this OMM, although I’ve read in its purpose page that it’s a group who searches for 1 Million Moms to support their cause, i.e., to protect children from media exploitation.

I saw here a general “shut up… you have bigoted views, go read X-Men” sort of thing. In this post it was said to OMM, but was it only because of the letters? I don’t think so. This group’s public stance on gay marriage is handled in the end of the day as someone else’s with the same stance. Look the title of the post: isn’t it implied that these children will have shame on their mothers because of their opinion on gay marriage? So, if I also disagree on it, won’t my children have shame of me too?

Nowadays, homosexuality is not seen as morally bad anymore in society; I’m not specialist, but maybe we could consider it as a shift to a sort of “post judeo-christian” society on the matter. But there are still people who holds the traditional judeo-christian worldview on the matter, and always will, and I to consider them as automatically villains because of that is wrong. “You have moral principles about sexual orientation which says that gay marriage is no good, then you’re vile, so shut up?”

Accusing someone to be “hateful”, to be “vile”, “hypocrites”, similar to the Klan people, because of a different stand on gay marriage, this also sounds to me as “to demonize”, and one must be careful with that, to automatically consider all of them as William Strykers or Graydon Creeds in this “X-Men story”, who deserves a “shut up”, which seems an oversimplification to me.

This is about point #3. About point #1: one can argue that this number is decreasing, but I still think, and actually see, children reading super-hero comic books, or being influenced by it, as pointed out in OMM’s excerpt; and I don’t think this is a group of old mothers trying to protect their 30 year old sons and daughters. So, I don’t entirely agree with point #1. About point #2: as someone who already is saying a big “no” to many other aspects I’m finding in super-hero comic books, yes, I think the author do have a point.

One last remark: the “learn to count” seems not correct, then 98,500 + 1,502 followers in Twitter = 100,002, not 1,000,000, if this was what it’s meant.

I understand comics trying to act as though they are the same level of art as movies or TV shows, or that they can promote whichever message they decide. This is just ridiculous. Saying that kids don’t read comics is a moot argument. They do. So do teens and adults. Why don’t comics’ creators/producers try to satiate their readers’ desires? They dared to take a poll to kill Robin twenty some odd years ago. Does the audience want to see a character out himself or another marry a man?
They are just forwarding their own PC agenda. How about getting back to good stories about the swashbuckling adventures?