Skip to main content

Modern Family




(originally written 1/13/12)

Satan has waged a war against the family, and his artillery of choice has been the media. By making fathers look like buffoons and husbands looking incompetent, the subtle message is made clear: children can talk back and disrespect because they are always right, and the woman has to run the home because her husband can’t possibly make a right decision. Shows like The Simpsons and Everybody Loves Raymond are guilty of this.

Then there are the shows that promote the single life over the married life (I know that being is ok; that is not the point). Shows like How I Met Your Mother show guys who sleep with different women every night (Barney once celebrated the fact that he slept with his 1,000th woman); the reality is people like this are miserable and would have more STD’s then there are names for. The next big theme for TV was the divorced character; the idea here is that everyone gets divorced and we should all just accept it.

But that was not enough for the devil. He had to pull out a new weapon, and he has done it this time with ABC’s Modern Family. This sitcom, now in its third season, follows the lives of three families as if it were a documentary. One of those families has Ed O’Neill as the father (Al Bundy from Married With Children), a man who is divorced and living with his trophy wife who is half his age. Another one of those families is a homosexual couple that has adopted a baby girl.

After the entire first season aired without any affection being shown between the men, the LGBT began to complain. Then a 2nd season episode called “The Kiss” featured just that.

I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but do you see the agenda here? We are now defining the modern family as homosexuals that can adopt. ABC is killing two birds with one stone on this, championing not just the homosexual lifestyle, but also the gay adoption issue. Consider how ABC writes the bio for Lily, the adopted Vietnamese girl:

Her home is with her two loving adoptive dads, Mitchell and Cameron. These two big monkeys fell in love with this little panda the moment they met her…” (http://abc.go.com/shows/modern-family/bio/lily/856842)

Isn’t that sweet? How could anyone have a problem with these two loving monkeys adopting this girl? Despite the fact that the Bible calls it an abomination, you are made to appear cruel and heartless if you disapprove of it.

Homosexuals cannot reproduce so they must recruit (further evidence that God is opposed to homosexuality), and adopting children is good recruiting grounds. Let’s see what kind of job these loving monkeys have done with their daughter.

On an episode set to air next week, Lily, the toddler, will say the F word on TV. Proving once and for all that ABC still has a shred of moral decency, they will bleep the curse word, but the point is still the same. Obviously the real crime is that this child’s real mother is allowing her to say this word, but the point of the episode will make clear that the girls “fathers” are the ones who taught her the word.

If this is what the modern family looks like we are in big trouble. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The “Christians Hate Gays” Myth

During these Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) hearings before the Supreme Court I keep hearing how much Christians hate gay people. This was news to me since I am a Christian and I don’t hate gay people. I also go to church with over 1000 other Christians, and if any of them hate gay people, they sure haven’t told me. Before moving to South Carolina I worked at or attended several churches in Texas; prior to that I spent a decade going to church in Florida. Guess what? No one hated gay people. In fact, I don’t know any Christians who hate anybody. The very uniform of a believer is his love, and if a person does not show consistent love, then he is not actually a believer. Are there non-believers who hate gay people and claim to be Christian? Of course. But that doesn’t represent Jesus or His church. Equating  hateful sign-wavers with Christianity is like equating a kindergarten baseball team to the New York Yankees. They may claim to be playing the same

To Save a Life

(Like my blog about the peace symbol, this blog was written as a default response to all the parents, students, and other people who are asking my opinion of To Save a Life.) By now you have probably heard of the movie To Save a Life, which opened nation-wide in theaters on January 22nd. The movie deals with so many issues that teens face today, like suicide, cutting, drinking, drugs, premarital sex, teen pregnancy, and abortion. At first glance this movie looks like an awesome resource that we should recommend for our teens, parents, youth pastors, and youth workers. But a closer look at the movie reveals a few disturbing things. For starters, according to pluggedin.com, there are 2 uses of the “A” word, 5 uses of hell (used as a curse word), and once the “D” word is used. There are other crude terms used to describe a girl, and crude terms for referring to sexual activity. There is also a bedroom scene that shows a girl removing a boy’s shirt, then afterwards the girl putting he

The Rose of Sharon and Lily of the Valley

If you have spent much time in church you have probably sung some songs with lyrics like these: “He leads me to his banqueting table, his banner over me is love… Jesus is the rock of my salvation, his banner over me is love.” “Sweetest rose of Sharon, come to set us free.” “He’s the lily of the valley, the bright and morning star…” But are those songs biblical? They come out of the writings of the Song of Solomon, but are we to understand those lines as describing Christ? The Song of Solomon is a collection of love poems that were written between two people who were deeply in love and about to be married. While we know that King Solomon is one of the writers, the other’s name has escaped us, and we know her today simply as the Shulamite woman. Some people believe that since this woman is not named then she never existed; some teach that this book is pure allegory, only existing to serve as symbolism. King Solomon, they say, represents