Right wing attacks ‘Dear Abby.’
Right wing attacks ‘Dear Abby.’
In 2007, “Dear Abby” author Jeanne Phillips publicly — and controversially — spoke out in support of gay marriage. Since that time, she has become a target of conservatives. Today, the Washington Times highlights a recent analysis by the right-wing Culture and Media Institute, which concludes that Phillips has repeatedly “rejected traditional morality“:
“Abby has flown under the radar for years dispensing radical advice on matters of sexual morality while enjoying a reputation for hard-nosed, common-sense advice,” says Robert Knight, director of the institute. “We thought people ought to know there’s a pattern here that’s consistent throughout her career.”
“Dear Abby, overall, dispenses good advice on most other matters,” Mr. Knight says, “but when it comes to sex, she is a disciple of the sexual revolution, which basically says if it feels good, do it.”
Last year, PFLAG honored Phillips with its “Straight for Equality Award.” “Dear Abby is one of the most trusted advice columnists in the world and rightfully so,” said PFLAG spokesman Steve Ralls.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
What’s the problem? I think it’s perfectly OK for Republicans to get married.
May 1st, 2008 at 9:55 amWhy is it that other people’s sex lives seem to bother the right wing so much?
May 1st, 2008 at 9:56 am“if it feels good, do it.”
Or as the Right Wing says:
“If it feels good, deny that you do it and make laws keeping other people from doing it”
May 1st, 2008 at 10:00 am“if it feels good, do it” = the alleged left’s mantra
VS
“if you can get away with it, do it” = the proven mantra of the Bush administration
May 1st, 2008 at 10:03 amand what the hell is “traditional morality“ anyway???
May 1st, 2008 at 10:05 amI’m so happy when the fundagelicals are unhappy.
Thank you, Abby Dear!
May 1st, 2008 at 10:05 amYou would think people had more important things to worry about than whether “Dear Abby” supports gay marriage or not.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:06 amHate to be a conservative! ;-}
May 1st, 2008 at 10:08 amDo these people know that Jeanne Phillips is not the original “Dear Abby”? If her opinions changed it might be because she didn’t write the original opinion.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:12 amDo you think these fools like Robert Knight care what anyone else thinks?? He calls Colo. Springs to talk to Dobson three, four times a day to get an idea what he’s suppose to think over the next few hours…
COMPLETE waste of space….
May 1st, 2008 at 10:27 amcynicalgirl Says:
Do these people know that Jeanne Phillips is not the original “Dear Abby”?
Probably not. They probably think Aunt Jemima is a real person, too.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:30 amWell done, Dear Abby! This girl is no fool, she had to know this was going to come her way.
Culture and Media Institute would have said the same thing years ago about interracial dating and marriage. F_ck ‘em.
“You better brace yourself for a whole lot of ugly, coming from a never ending parade of stupid.”
May 1st, 2008 at 10:32 am~Queen Latifah in Hairspray
There needs to be a contitutional admendment banning the purple tellie tubble from getting married, sad thing is, in Georgia it wouldprobably pass overwhemingly..
May 1st, 2008 at 10:37 amNow we have people trying to legislate our sex lives: Here are a few that will give you a laugh…(slightly O/T)
North Carolina has laws against fornication whether you are in a hotel or just at home: “If any man and woman not being married to each other, shall lewdly and lasciviously associate, bed, and cohabit together, they shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.
In Idaho, fornication can get you a $300 fine and six months in jail.
If you’re a man in Oklahoma, and you tell a virgin female you want to marry her, then you two commit fornication, you had better not change your mind about the marriage, Bub, or else you’ve committed a felony. You could go to jail for five years.
Maryland appears to outlaw just about everything except the missionary position between married men and women. The law prescribes 10 years for “any unnatural or perverted sexual practice” like, say, oral sex. Not only that, but, says the law, the state can indict you without naming the particular act it’s accusing you of committing or even the manner in which you committed it.
I’m guessing Robert Knight comes from one of these states. Don’t worry about our souls Bob we are doing just fine..
May 1st, 2008 at 10:39 amFreedom Rebel, I guess even with these laws IOKIYAS (it’s ok if you are straight). How about we start our own Defense of Marriage legislation that prohibits violators of these fornication laws from obtaining a marriage license? I mean, how can these violators bring any good to the institution of marriage?
May 1st, 2008 at 10:50 amTraditional morality:
If God says its okay, do it!
An eye for an eye
Multiple wives are okay
Adulterers must be stoned to death
Slavery is okay as long as you are Hebrew.
Screwing your servants/slaves is also okay.
Killing non-Hebrews to grab their land isn’t murder
Gays must be stoned to death unless they happen to be a king and really good at fighting non-Hebrews, in which case totally okay and totally NOT gay.
Offering your virgin daughters for a gang bang is okay, if it keeps the mob from annoying your holy guests.
Having sex with your daughters is okay as long as you were drunk and swear you don’t remember a thing. Also okay if the daughters are doing it for “the right reasons”.
oh, and accepting advice about fruit from a walking talking snake WILL GET YOU KILLED, except that it won’t, it will just get you banished from the Greens Department.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:51 amIsn’t this “Dear Abby” the daughter of the late founder of the franchise? I think so…just sayin’
May 1st, 2008 at 10:55 amFreedom Rebel
I think vibrating dildos (dildoes?) are still illegal in Texas.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:56 amI swear those famously beautiful Texan women must have the most-massaged necks and faces in the world!
I always wondered why they look so darn happy all the time on TV.
Ya know, it has been ever so enjoyable to watch the death of the Right Wing. (And yes they are going the way of the dinosaur).
May 1st, 2008 at 11:00 amkaty Says:
——————————————————————————–
and what the hell is “traditional morality“ anyway???
That would be the pretend morality of whichever rightwing fraud is speaking.
May 1st, 2008 at 11:00 amI’m still wrapping my head around an organization called “Culture and Media Institute”, but I did read their screed and have some observations:
1) The “Dear Abby” of the 70’s (you know, when Dear Abby was supposedly promoting the sexual revolution) wasn’t Jeanne Phillips. That was her mother, Pauline Phillips. The two have some different approaches and different styles, but they are both fairly common-sense when it comes to dispensing advice.
2) It’s an ADVICE column, not a morality lecture pulpit. Most advice givers (including Jeanne Phillips) accept certain realities. For example — teens who have sex are likely to continue having sex, no matter what you tell them. However, teens will be open to advice on how to avoid pregnancy and STDs when they are listened to without judgment or being smacked around. People who get clubbed with the morality cudgel will just go elsewhere for advice. An advice columnist whose mantra is “thou shalt not” for everything will soon find herself with no incoming mail.
3) Just because the wingnuts condemn homosexuality doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Furthermore, gays run into the same problems with their love lives as straights do — and are just as likely to write to Dear Abby about it.
4) “Traditional morality” to some of us means living by the Golden Rule Jesus gave us — NOT worrying about the sex lives of everyone else.
May 1st, 2008 at 11:01 amFreedom Rebel Says:
In Idaho, fornication can get you a $300 fine and six months in jail.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:39 am
They’ll never catch me!!! I’m glad I did it!!
May 1st, 2008 at 11:02 amZooey says:
“You better brace yourself for a whole lot of ugly, coming from a never ending parade of stupid.”
~Queen Latifah in Hairspray
This bears repeating!
Excellent, Z!
May 1st, 2008 at 11:03 amThrow the Republicans out of office.
May 1st, 2008 at 11:03 amBoy, that would really feel good.
misshusseinmolly Says:
4) “Traditional morality” to some of us means living by the Golden Rule Jesus gave us — NOT worrying about the sex lives of everyone else.
But, but, then what would have to worry about?
May 1st, 2008 at 11:11 amBringing our brave men and women home?
Mortgages and foreclosures?
Feeding the poor?
Insuring that every child gets a proper education?
Nahhhh!
It’s more important to know if neighbors Jim and Steve are man loving each other.
Sheesh!
Dayum!!! Why does Dear Abby hate America????
May 1st, 2008 at 11:14 amSo I suppose an advice columnist, from the religious right, would have only one answer:
“Get thee to a church and pray for Jesus to cure your evil affliction”.
I think Dear Abby (both of them) makes more sense.
May 1st, 2008 at 11:17 amSince their offspring also tend to be Republicans, I think we should make it illegal for Republicans of opposite sex to have sex. Once Republicans become extinct, gays will be allowed to mary.
May 1st, 2008 at 11:23 amWe are currently safer and better off because the gays are not allowed to marry. If we could stop all that yucky gay sex, the mortgage crisis would surely fix itself. Now if they could only find out who’s doing the fcuking that keeps the price of gas on the rise.
May 1st, 2008 at 11:25 am#15 PatrioticLiberalChristian Says:
——————
Freedom Rebel, I guess even with these laws IOKIYAS (it’s ok if you are straight). How about we start our own Defense of Marriage legislation that prohibits violators of these fornication laws from obtaining a marriage license? I mean, how can these violators bring any good to the institution of marriage?
First, anyone that is engaged shouldn’t have sex? I don’t think that is going to happen in too many cases. The institution of marriage is only as good as the two people in it. If they take their vows seriously, neither one has anything to worry about. (I personally have been married for 20 years)
But having a state legisilate what you do behind closed doors that is a scary thing. You are treading on a very slippery slope. Next, what other rights are they going to take away from you? Any government body trying to take away your inalienable rights to your pursuit of happiness, I don’t think you want to see that happen?
I do understand your point, however, but marriage legislation would infringe on a person’s rights to privacy. Plus, all of us have made mistakes. I didn’t wait til I was married, does that make me guilty? Or am I less guilty because I ended up marrying him? Food for thought. Just things to think about. Have a great day PatrioticLiberalChristian!!!
May 1st, 2008 at 11:25 amExit Stage Left Says:
Now if they could only find out who’s doing the fcuking that keeps the price of gas on the rise.
That would be the oil companies sodomizing all of us.
May 1st, 2008 at 11:29 amWhere’s Daryll telling us that it’s OK to be homophobic because the Bible says so?
May 1st, 2008 at 11:32 amshoeless Says:
That would be the oil companies sodomizing all of us.
Silly me….I should’ve known that ;)
May 1st, 2008 at 11:33 am“Gays are hell-bound,
This I know,
Because the Bible
Tells me soooooo….”
~ Darryl
May 1st, 2008 at 11:35 amCal Malenky Says:
Where’s Daryll telling us that it’s OK to be homophobic because the Bible says so?
Daryll went to talk to his Senator about banning gay sex. He’s waiting for him in a Minneapolis airport bathroom.
May 1st, 2008 at 11:39 amFreedom Rebel, I had my tongue secured in my cheek with my last post. I guess I should have closed with “/snark off”. Sometimes I forget to do that when I’m being sarcastic and snarky, forgeting that my screenname can lead people to think I’m being serious. Sorry about that. For the record, I am absolutely, unequivocably in favor of a high, thick wall of separation for church and state, for the protection of both. I am also driven to oppose the oppression of government on the human right to love whomever and however you want and to be equally entitled to all the protections and advantages of civil institutions, such as marriage, regardless of sexual orientation.
May 1st, 2008 at 11:40 amSince the original Abby also supported gays, I don’t see what the trouble is.
May 1st, 2008 at 11:50 amCal Malenky Says:
Where’s Daryll telling us that it’s OK to be homophobic because the Bible says so?
Daryll is very busy these days. He became a gay prostitute so he could get into White House press conferences.
May 1st, 2008 at 11:52 amtokin librul Says
May 1st, 2008 at 10:55 am
Isn’t this “Dear Abby” the daughter of the late founder of the franchise? I think so…just sayin’
___________________________
“Late” founder? Let’s not kill off the original “Abby” just yet. Pauline Phillips, the original “Abigail van Buren”, started passing the majority of the writing duties onto her daughter Jeanne in the mid-90’s, due to the onset of Alzheimer’s Disease. However, she (Pauline) is still alive.
Her identical twin sister, Eppie, better known as the advice columnist Ann Landers, DID pass away in 2002, however.
May 1st, 2008 at 12:01 pmshoeless, you’re on a roll this morning; keep it up!
May 1st, 2008 at 12:10 pmwhy should I use my brain when there are so many out there to think for me? I just do what the T.V. set tells me to do, and wow…I sure have a lot of stuff to buy. Dear Abby:, please help me!
May 1st, 2008 at 12:14 pm“Morality” based on nothing but religious belief is better described as superstition.
And racial discrimination is a form of “traditional morality” too.
As for marriage, well divorce, cohabitation and out-of-wedlock parenthood are not only legal, but widely accepted. The idea that allowing gays to marry would be the real threat to marriage is pretty ridiculous.
May 1st, 2008 at 12:27 pmYou just have to laugh at the Reich and it`s HYPOCRITICAL WAYS and VALUES, they kill me over this Gay marriage and being gay in general they still think homosexuality has just come out of the closet last week.Hypocrits should learn how to police their own (all the pervs that goy caught with the child porn and gay sexual interludes with congressional pages)sickass mother phuckers each and every one of them.They just have to HATE all things that are not neoconsevative and DOGMATIC.
May 1st, 2008 at 12:31 pmAs opposed to the modern conservative Christian ethos of:
“If it feels good, demonize it, THEN do it when you think no one is watching..”
May 1st, 2008 at 12:38 pm“The two have some different approaches and different styles, but they are both fairly common-sense when it comes to dispensing advice.”
The current one gives especially crappy advice most of the time. I often use her columns in a high school religious ed class to show how not to handle a situation. Much of the advice is evil and nasty – retribution, holding a grudge forever, etc all seem to be a-ok in her book.
May 1st, 2008 at 12:44 pmCal Malenky Says:
Where’s Daryll telling us that it’s OK to be homophobic because the Bible says so?
Daryll is busy. He’s acting as substitute scoutmaster for Mark Foley’s Boy Scout troop.
May 1st, 2008 at 12:56 pmIf this logic is so offensive to Republicans, let’s have them agree that they will abstain from any sex with their spouses unless the purpose is to concieve children.
If it feels good, do it. Isn’t that kind of a basic tennet of the Declaration of Independance. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
You should do all the ‘feel good’ stuff you can, as long as it doesn’t impact the liberties of your neighbors. Here’s the thing: homosexuals aren’t impacting conservative liberties; they are only upsetting their bigotry.
May 1st, 2008 at 1:18 pm@22,Zooey Says: They’ll never catch me!!! I’m glad I did it!!”
That was YOU?????
May 1st, 2008 at 1:22 pmbackup, you keep posting stuff like #47 and people might get the impression that you’re reasonable. Nicely said!
May 1st, 2008 at 1:24 pmEvery once in a while, Cap’n, you make sense.
May 1st, 2008 at 1:26 pmIt doesn’t happen often, but I’ve challenged myself to pipe up, not just when I disagree, but also when I agree.
Conservatives that think they stand for liberty, need to consider the liberty of those they disagree with.
May 1st, 2008 at 1:43 pmConservatives that think they stand for liberty, need to consider the liberty of those they disagree with.
Again, I find this to be succinctly profound.
May 1st, 2008 at 1:47 pmThis is the basis for much of my liberal/progressive stand on issues – including the U.S.’s misguided foray into Iraq and, to a lesser extent, Afghanistan.
I feel that liberty is not the specific domain of either party.
Examples:
conservatives want to protect your liberty to own a gun.
liberals want to protect a woman’s liberty to reproductive rights.
conservatives want to protect you right to spend your own money vs. empowering the government to spend it for you.
liberals want to protect you from government intrusion into your personal life (be able to marry who you want to marry, be free from government wiretaps, to not be censored from pornography or other forms of expression, etc)
Obviously, there’s more on either side. I generally come down on the side that I preceive that promotes more individual liberty.(I admit there are strong anti-liberty arguments for the forray into the war on terror).
I am also amazed out how generally, both ideologies seem to use the founding father’s as the foundation of their various principles (the founder’s seem to enjoy universally strong approval).
I just had a discussion with a guy I work with that is convinced the founder’s (who he believes where all Christian) would be appalled at what he sees as the lefts attempt to rid Christ and religion from what he believes is a Christian nation.
I disagreed with him, basically in total, but I found it interesting that I also used my perception of the founders to make my case.
May 1st, 2008 at 2:27 pmWhy is it that TP has a boycott on using the words “Sun Myung Moon” in any post? If they have I haven’t see it. Commenters do but not TP. How old is this blog? We need a countdown clock about your refusal to even use the name of the single most reason hard right politics has absorbed the nation.
This is Moon’s homophobic agenda being pushed here pure and simple. You don’t even mention what a rabid homophobe the WT owner is – as if there is no connection. Moon has pushed his homophobia in many ways, like funding Falwell and other religious extremists. Moon brags about using his paper and “other activities” to “influence” America. Moon has paid billions in overseas and often swindled cash – to push his ideology and most certainly has done so through his propaganda media. He has been wildly successful but TP won’t point a finger at him or even use his name.
You don’t honestly believe Moon is not the one who set the agenda for the paper do you? More so than say Rupert Murdoch, who you will criticize, does for his media. Yet, TP won’t even use Moon’s name in a post.
In a way you are misleading your readers and covering for Moon’s agenda whether you see it or not. The nation is blind to how much influence Moon has had over the political direction of the country the last 25 years. Moon has been the backbone of hard right politics that long. No one outspent him bringing this horror to our country. Moon is not even a citizen. NOT a citizen. Go ahead; imagine our nation absent the WT and Moon’s other fronts like the American Freedom Coalition or his billions in overseas cash funding people like Richard Viguerie, LaHaye and Falwell. How “close” do you think the 2000 election would have been absent his mind molding efforts? But TP, which supposedly has a goal to get the truth or reality out, is either naïve, uninformed on the biggest scandal and national security problem the nation has never faced, or they are just too stupid to see the guy who has been kicking their world view in the nuts all these years.
If you are too frightened to take on the man behind the curtain, what good are you?
Here let me show you how it is done.
Then you could try pointing out that the paper is funded with billions in overseas cash that former members attest is laundered into the country by the bagful.
I dare anyone to watch this panel discussion featuring three former editors of Moon’s media and then tell the Washington Times is not Moon’s tool to screw our nation.
Here’s a quote from the talk given by the frost editor of the WT, James Whelan. He knows what he is talking about.
Seriously TP, like so many others, how long can you continue to look at something and not see it? This is in no way a freedom of speech or religious issue, if you think that you are grossly uninformed as to who Moon is.
http://tinyurl.com/yqqbmz
May 1st, 2008 at 2:43 pm
I think it’s ok for heterosexuals to get married, as long as they don’t flaunt their sexuality in public.
May 1st, 2008 at 6:28 pm