PUBLIC OPINION > 'The New Normal' Is Not Harmful to Society
SodaHead TV
2012/07/24 21:00:00
One Million Moms has a bone to pick with NBC's newest sitcom, "The New Normal." The show depicts a single mother who agrees to be a surrogate parent for a gay couple, but OMM is calling it "harmful to our society" and "damaging to our culture." OMM has been known to take issue with things that promote homosexuality as "normal," such as a lesbian kiss found in an Urban Outfitters catalog earlier this year. But is "The New Normal" really harmful for society? We asked the public.
One Million Moms are not without their supporters, but "The New Normal" has them out-numbered. Nearly twice as many people agreed the show would not be damaging to our culture. But this particular poll was extremely divided across several different demographics, so before we get into the reasoning behind the results, let's break it down.
Hesitant Men
Some of the demographic responses were predictable, and to some extent we could expect male voters to be more resilient to the show. Typically, the male vote is more hesitant when it comes to promoting homosexuality. However, they were especially resistant to this one. They were more than twice as likely as women to think "The New Normal" is harmful to society.
Kids Don't Care
The age breakdown was a little bit more predictable, but even here the proportions were surprising. The difference between the oldest age group (65+) and the youngest age group (13-17) was more than 60%, and its support dropped off pretty consistently throughout. That seems to lend credibility to the show's title -- it is becoming more "normal."
Modern Families
One of the more interesting juxtapositions wasn't even within a single category. Given the age breakdown, it was obvious that single voters would respond to the show more positively than married voters; likewise, voters without kids responded more positively than parents. However, there was a notable difference between parents and married voters. Parents actually responded more positively to the TV show by about 12%.
If you'd like to vote on this question, dig deeper into the demographics, or engage in existing discussion about the topic, visit our poll about "The New Normal." We'd love to hear from you!
One Million Moms are not without their supporters, but "The New Normal" has them out-numbered. Nearly twice as many people agreed the show would not be damaging to our culture. But this particular poll was extremely divided across several different demographics, so before we get into the reasoning behind the results, let's break it down.
Hesitant Men
Some of the demographic responses were predictable, and to some extent we could expect male voters to be more resilient to the show. Typically, the male vote is more hesitant when it comes to promoting homosexuality. However, they were especially resistant to this one. They were more than twice as likely as women to think "The New Normal" is harmful to society.Kids Don't Care
The age breakdown was a little bit more predictable, but even here the proportions were surprising. The difference between the oldest age group (65+) and the youngest age group (13-17) was more than 60%, and its support dropped off pretty consistently throughout. That seems to lend credibility to the show's title -- it is becoming more "normal."Modern Families
One of the more interesting juxtapositions wasn't even within a single category. Given the age breakdown, it was obvious that single voters would respond to the show more positively than married voters; likewise, voters without kids responded more positively than parents. However, there was a notable difference between parents and married voters. Parents actually responded more positively to the TV show by about 12%.If you'd like to vote on this question, dig deeper into the demographics, or engage in existing discussion about the topic, visit our poll about "The New Normal." We'd love to hear from you!
We are slaves.
OMM needs to smarten up and spend more time on real issues affecting their kids--and there's plenty a HELLuva lot more important than a tv show.
It usually IS NOT
If there IS such a thing as real evil, marketers is what that does be. :O)
All you liberals can send me hate mail/death threats and whine and moan to me all you wan. but it won't make a difference. My views are stagnant and I don't care what you think of me. Ha ha this probably won't stop you from commenting and insulting me just for expressing my opinion even though it is different than yours. This site is after all for that very purpose and it isn't like we'll agree on all terms all the time. Call me what you wish, as juvenile as that would be. I will never apologize for my beliefs.
1. Marriage is an invention. It's definition is adaptable, it is a word and a concept... not a physical thing. Marriage technically be whatever we want it to be. For example... freedom. Everyone has a different view on what freedom is.
3. Does a child need a mother and father? or just a loving home?
4. What is wrong with validating the homosexual lifestyle. Isn't the Christian thing to be accepting? As for promoting it? I don't see this as the case at all.
6. The traditional family doesn't exist. There is only the perceived idea of what you think it is. As for them having children, isn't it better a child could get adopted from a loveless place and taken in and cared for and loved by two adults?
7. The words normal and moral are again not things that exist. They are concepts, not physical things. They will change over time, and in fact have change over time. What is 'normal' now wasn't 1000 years ago, nor will it be in 1000 years time.
8. No it doesn't. The only people that have to accept it are those involved. I see now reason how it affects anyone else than tose involved.
9. Do we really think the next logical step from homosexuality is incest, pedophillia and bestiality? Homosexuality is love between two concenting...
1. Marriage is an invention. It's definition is adaptable, it is a word and a concept... not a physical thing. Marriage technically be whatever we want it to be. For example... freedom. Everyone has a different view on what freedom is.
3. Does a child need a mother and father? or just a loving home?
4. What is wrong with validating the homosexual lifestyle. Isn't the Christian thing to be accepting? As for promoting it? I don't see this as the case at all.
6. The traditional family doesn't exist. There is only the perceived idea of what you think it is. As for them having children, isn't it better a child could get adopted from a loveless place and taken in and cared for and loved by two adults?
7. The words normal and moral are again not things that exist. They are concepts, not physical things. They will change over time, and in fact have change over time. What is 'normal' now wasn't 1000 years ago, nor will it be in 1000 years time.
8. No it doesn't. The only people that have to accept it are those involved. I see now reason how it affects anyone else than tose involved.
9. Do we really think the next logical step from homosexuality is incest, pedophillia and bestiality? Homosexuality is love between two concenting adults.... the other 3 are not.
10. This one I do find frustrating. Throughout these lists it has been stated that homosexuality is being forced upon people, forcing acceptance etc etc. Isn't it the same to enforce a god that you believe in on other people? What is different here?
3. Children separately need a father and a mother, love isn't always enough, (an example of that fact is because many loving relationships still fail because something else is missing)
http://www.fatherhood.org/med...
4. "Isn't it the Christian thing to be accepting". The same could be said for why many other immoral acts are not accepted. Simply because they are wrong. It would be a contradiction to be accepting of something against God's word.
If a man also lies with a man, as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:13
6. The traditional father is and always will be one mother, one father and varied amount of offspring if any. This is the most common, the most preferred and also referred to in biblical text.
7. Yes I agree normal is a interchangeable and subjective term. I actually prefer the term "natural".
8. if accepted, it could encourage many in society to take part in it, decreasing the birth rate and eventually the population as a whole, (not everyone is for alternati...
3. Children separately need a father and a mother, love isn't always enough, (an example of that fact is because many loving relationships still fail because something else is missing)
http://www.fatherhood.org/med...
4. "Isn't it the Christian thing to be accepting". The same could be said for why many other immoral acts are not accepted. Simply because they are wrong. It would be a contradiction to be accepting of something against God's word.
If a man also lies with a man, as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:13
6. The traditional father is and always will be one mother, one father and varied amount of offspring if any. This is the most common, the most preferred and also referred to in biblical text.
7. Yes I agree normal is a interchangeable and subjective term. I actually prefer the term "natural".
8. if accepted, it could encourage many in society to take part in it, decreasing the birth rate and eventually the population as a whole, (not everyone is for alternative methods)
9. There is an organization called Man Boy Love (MBL) and it is for the purpose of omitting the age of consent so that little boys and grown men can have sex shamelessly. Yes, I would say this is escalating. Also bestiality and incest are acceptable in certain locations already.
10. No one can force anyone to accept it, but I grow weary of the bombardment of something I completely disagree with in my face. Homosexuality has consequences, whereas learning about religion does not.
7. Again... natural is hard to define.
8. People being gay won't decrease the birth rate. There have always been gay people. it just now people are realising they don't need to be ashamed of who they are. Plus with the liks of artificial insemination and adoption... i don't think the human race will be dying out any time soon.
9. Man Boy Love? A small organisaton that will never get any grounding because no majority of any political spectrum would ever accept it. That said... the legal sex age is different worldwide so it is a very sticky area of discussion. I'd also be interested to see which parts of society see bestiality as acceptable? It may happen but those people aren't normal anywhere near a majority, nor would it be allowed ever.
10. Does it not work both ways? You feel that they are pushing an agenda on you.... would it not be that you are pushing yours on them? I think the difference is that people are trying to surpress homosexuality because they don't like it.... whereas homosexuals are trying to be equal. It won't affect anyone but those involved.
9. I thought you implied that normal was not a sold term. http://www.omg-facts.com/Anim...
10. I do not personally push my ways on people unless we are discussing them and then it is a simple discussion not bombardment. Therefore, not it doesn't work both way and I don't see how the acknowledgement of faith is at all potentially harmful or risky. Homosexuality will affect people, pretty much everything we do affects people. People have always been like sheep, mimicking each others behavior.
and just to be facetious for a second. Humans invented a way for humans to fly? they invented the internet. They invented money. They invent religions and other such things. None of these happen in nature.
Surely the fact that animals will have sex with same sex animals (and masterbate etc) proves that it happens in the animal kingdom. Furthermore humans are one of the few animals that 'love' and pair for life. Are you suggesting it is not in any way possible that in this process humans developed the ability to love same sex? Moreso the fact that technological advancement not available to animals or 'nature' as a whole puts humans at an advantage... by that token humans that are capable of cognitive thought, and the ability to invent aeroplans are capable to creating new ways of inception outside of so called 'nature'?
(sorry if any of that is worded wrong...)
10. I do find the idea that people are sheep and will following anything rather interesting. With the greatest respect... is this not a definition of religion too? People are born in to it, and are just told to believe... without question.
It is true that these did not happen in nature, but they do not pertain to the human body. Even back in cavemen times, there were inventions such as the wheel. A normal progression of technology that is solely for the benefit of human kind. Other than "expressing who you 'really' are" how is homosexuality beneficial?
Certain animals will also hump stuffed animals just for the pleasure not necessarily attraction (just as people do with some other people). Loving the same sex is something I cannot understand personally since with many other things in nature, opposites attract. The difference between humans and animals is that animals lack the judgement and understanding of how to go against their instinct in many aspects.
"Moreso the fact that technological advancement not available to animals or 'nature' as a whole puts humans at an advantage... by that token humans that are capable of cognitive thought, and the ability to invent aeroplans are capabl...
It is true that these did not happen in nature, but they do not pertain to the human body. Even back in cavemen times, there were inventions such as the wheel. A normal progression of technology that is solely for the benefit of human kind. Other than "expressing who you 'really' are" how is homosexuality beneficial?
Certain animals will also hump stuffed animals just for the pleasure not necessarily attraction (just as people do with some other people). Loving the same sex is something I cannot understand personally since with many other things in nature, opposites attract. The difference between humans and animals is that animals lack the judgement and understanding of how to go against their instinct in many aspects.
"Moreso the fact that technological advancement not available to animals or 'nature' as a whole puts humans at an advantage... by that token humans that are capable of cognitive thought, and the ability to invent aeroplans are capable to creating new ways of inception outside of so called 'nature'? " With the natural progression of human thought and learning also comes the learned behavior of homosexuality. The difference is that we have the natural ability and instinct to be able to learn, (as a means of survival and improving life quality). Homosexuality like I stated is a learned behavior but not a natural survival tactic.
10. People are not told to believe without question, they learn about it themselves and decide for themselves, regardless of whether they were born into it or not, (depending on how oppressive their religion and culture is). You decide what you believe and while one may strongly recommend or even force you to participate in certain practices, they cannot make you believe something. People are more likely to follow other people rather than God anyway (evidently), because of human nature. We go mainly by what we SEE unfortunately and we cannot see God.