Another dead end

It's no longer all that shocking that a network would get cold feet about airing a program that reflects a normal homosexual couple with children and the neighbors who come to accept them. After all, there are FCC rules against showing any teh gays who aren't fabulous. But ABC's parent, Disney, has begun taking on the characteristics of a battered wife. When the radical clerics raise their voices, Disney instinctively falls into the fetal position (even so, the fact that they won't even sell the finished reality series to another outlet is something the company's stock holders may want to think about).

But most of all, I was struck by a couple of quotes deep into the article.

In a recent interview, Richard Land, an official with the Southern Baptist Convention involved in the negotiations with Disney last year to end the group's boycott of the company, said he did not recall any mention of "Neighborhood." He added, however, that had the show been broadcast - particularly with an ending that showed Christians literally embracing their gay neighbors - it could have scuttled the Southern Baptists' support for "Narnia."

"I would have considered it a retrograde step," Mr. Land said of the network's plans to broadcast the reality series. "Aside from any moral considerations, it would have been a pretty stupid marketing move."

The spiritual concern for the bottom line is touching. But okay, fine. The trillions of fundies who would refuse to go see Narnia because of a TV show's lesson of tolerance and acceptance would certainly be a scary prospect for Disney, a company already in the cross hairs for cartoons that seem to make a case for evolution.

But, then I read this.

Paul McCusker, a vice president of Focus on the Family, which had supported the Southern Baptist boycott and reaches millions of evangelical listeners through the daily radio broadcasts of Dr. James Dobson, expressed similar views.

"It would have been a huge misstep for Disney to aggressively do things that would disenfranchise the very people they wanted to go see 'Narnia,' " he said.

Whaaaa? Disenfranchise? As in "deprived of voting rights? It's that kind of language that so effectively creates the sense -- at least for themselves and their always-angry followers -- that they are always under fire, one cultural slight away from martyrdom. It's not a homosexual couple, or the neighbors who felt that the show was a positive way for them to confront their own prejudices, who have been screwed. It's the small group who, despite having the option to not watch the show, are the offended ones.

Sheesh.

Can't they just beat up gays at an egg roll, or something?