Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - TFP vs. Focus on the Family!

- General Discussion (https://thetfp.com/tfp/general-discussion/)

- - TFP vs. Focus on the Family! (https://thetfp.com/tfp/general-discussion/113682-tfp-vs-focus-family.html)

TFP vs. Focus on the Family!

Due to a conversation in the shoutbox earlier today, I came across the following website traffic statistics from Alexa:

http://traffic.alexa.com/graph?c=1&f...=3&h=400&w=700
http://traffic.alexa.com/graph?c=1&f...=0&h=400&w=700

That's right, not only is the traffic for the Focus on the Family website decreasing (something to celebrate in and of itself), TFProject is within range to overcome it! You'll notice that, for whatever reason, TFP has already overcome Focus on the Family once before (in 3Q 2004), but I think it's time we passed Focus on the Family again and stayed above them this time!

Why Focus on the Family? Well, it may be my "liberal bias" showing through, but I think they are the antithesis of "the evolution of humanity, sexuality, and philosophy." For those who aren't aware, a little about Focus on the Family, from Wikipedia:

Quote:

Focus on the Family click to show

We all want TFP to regain some of its lost traffic, and if there's one thing I've learned in life it's that you're more likely to succeed at something if you have a goal in mind. So, for now, why not have beating Focus on the Family as our goal? So do what else you can to help promote TFP and bring more traffic to the site. Post ideas here and let us know about your progress. If you have a blog, maybe you could make a blog entry about TFP. The possibilities are endless!

That's right people. We can do this.

when the TFP was higher than FotF... was that by chance, the day after the babe forum was re-opened from a prolonged absence?

Just curious if it's around that time frame.

Perhaps that happened during Halx' massive killing spree, which really brough in alot of good PR for the forum.

I support Focus On The Family, actually. I think they're a great organization. Doesn't mean I can't post here, or don't fit here (well, maybe it does). I just wanted to represent the other side of this pointless bashfest.

This is pretty much Focus on The Family

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5vQvKpj5ThQ"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5vQvKpj5ThQ" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

To each their own of course. Sorry you feel that this thread, which was made in jest to encourage users to help increase traffic, is a "pointless bashfest."

Not to turn this into a discussion on FotF (because, really, I'd like it to be a discussion about the continuing effort to bring more traffic to TFP), but since it is part of the topic of the thread, I'll point out a little more of why I think "beating" their traffic is a good (and fun) goal for us to have here at TFP.

Regardless of political affiliation - liberal or conservative - we all enjoy TFP for a variety of reasons. The fact is, in a perfect, Focus on the Family world, sites like TFP would either not exist, or be extremely hard to get access to. Honest and frank discussion and expression of sexuality among adults would be frowned upon, not celebrated as we attempt to do here. And we could forget about having things like the Exhibition Board.

What follows are some choice statements by "Dr." James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family:

Quote:

Homosexuals are not monogamous. They want to destroy the institution of marriage. It will destroy marriage. It will destroy the Earth.
(On gay marriage, from The Daily Oklahoman, Oct. 23rd, 2004)

Whether or not you think homosexuality is wrong, there aren't many people out there who are willing to say it will "destroy the earth," not to mention statements that are just plain untrue, such as "homosexuals are not monogamous."

Quote:

[The Mark Foley scandal has] turned out to be what some people are now saying was a -- sort of a joke by the boy and some of the other pages.
(http://mediamatters.org/items/200610060004)

Another patently false statement. Someone who was truly concerned about family would take accusations like those that were made against Mark Foley far more seriously.

Quote:

I certainly believe that God is displeased with America for its pride and arrogance, for killing 40 million unborn babies, for the universality of profanity and for other forms of immorality. However, rather than trying to forge a direct cause-and-effect relationship between the [9-11] terrorist attacks and America’s abandonment of biblical principles, which I think is wrong, we need to accept the truth that this nation will suffer in many ways for departing from the principles of righteousness. "The wages of sin is death," as it says in Romans 6, both for individuals and for entire cultures.
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=4257

He stops just short of saying 9-11 happened because America isn't Christian enough.

Finally, if none of that is outrageous enough, how about the homosexual agenda of the movie Happy Feet, which he discussed with Michael Medved on his Focus on the Family radio show?

Of course, we are all free to support whatever organizations we want, and one should certainly not feel like they can't participate on TFP while also supporting Focus on the Family. One should also know, on the other hand, that what Focus on the Family stands for is, in many ways, not what TFP stands for. In fact, with the Erogenous Zone, Exhibition Forum, and frank sexual discussion that takes place on TFP, not to mention that many discussions encourage users to explore their sexuality in ways that Focus on the Family would deem immoral, I feel confident in saying that Focus on the Family would view TFP as a downright evil site.

But, really, when it comes down to it, I just focused (no pun intended) on Focus on the Family because it was one of the first sites that popped into my head whose traffic statistics were relatively close to TFP's. Once we pass them up, that just means we'll have to get another goal. Maybe it'll be Greenpeace!

oooh, that's a great one. Just above Focus on the Family.

Saw a bumper sticker once that said "Focus on your own damn family". That about sums it up for me.

Ha ha! :lol: :thumbsup: Hee! :D

The only family I'm gonna focus on is one full of hot naked lesbians.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daoust

'course you're welcome here. And appreciated.
TFP is all about differing opinions coming smack up against one another and seeing what intelligent discussions result.

We came really close a couple days ago! I put a graph that zooms into a per day reading in the original post as well. Red Cross is included in that graph: it's our official next target. Keep up the good work - tell your friends, write about TFP on your blog, let people know about TFP and why you enjoy it here :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daoust

I support Focus On The Family, actually. I think they're a great organization.

Same. I used to love watching Adventures in Odyssey when I was younger. I'm not exactly sure what all the senseless FOTF bashing is all about, but that seems to occur whenever someone mentions a Christian organization.

Why is it senseless? People have stated what their problems are quite clearly.

We've overtaken Internet Movie Script Database.

I don't see any bashing. I re-read the original post and all of the following ones until bashing was brought up. There was a statement that FoTF was the antithesis of TFP...but that's hardly what I would consider "bashing", especially because it's pretty much true. In SM's other post, he stated his opinion clearly, carefully, and without inflammatory language. Please, don't turn this thread into a Christians vs. non-Christians battle.

Yay. I'm all for it. I'm all for promoting TFP and generating better traffic.

As for taking sides between TFP and FOTF, I don't think even if one promotes and agrees with the diversity on TFP necessarily means that they have to let go of whatever traditional and conservative beliefs that they may want to hold on to.

I was brought up in a traditional and conservative environment. Lots I don't agree with, lots I hold dear as my strengths. On the other hand, TFP allows my liberal and diverse side to flourish. I like to think that I have the best of both worlds. However, most people are used to the idea of the morals that FOTF supports, but not enough people are exposed to the freedom of evolution in mind, body and soul. This is why I'm all for introducing the greatness of TFP to more people. Go TFP! :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halx

Why is it senseless? People have stated what their problems are quite clearly.

Well, from my knowledge of what occurs on TFP, whenever someone posts something which even remotely concerns conservative Christian organizations or values (Or even the church in general), the overwhelming majority seem delight in getting in their cheap shots (Not always, but a good deal of the time).

Oh, and as to what I was referencing, "Focus on your own damn family" is so, so, so very insightful.

The whole idea is that I want to include christians.. devout, non-practicing, born-again.. in on the conversations. So don't feel persecuted; if you need to say something, people will listen.

Quote:

Homosexuals are not monogamous.

A blatant lie.

The research shows that gay males are less likely to be monogamous than heterosexual men, lesbians are more likely to be so than heterosexual women. Lesbian couples also seem to be about as stable or more stable than straight couples, depending on the research done.

It isn't about heterosexual vs. homosexual, it's about the differences in male and female sexuality. Males tend so seek multiple partners, females stable partnerships.

I was promiscuous when I was living as a straight woman, and I've had two partners as a lesbian, one for six years now that I intend to have for the rest of my life.

Quote:

They want to destroy the institution of marriage.

Another blatant lie. Most homosexuals tend to fall into two camps on marriage, those who want to exapand it, and those who don't care.

Quote:

The science says otherwise. A high density of homosexuals isn't related at all to the incidence of hurricanes, but is negatively correlated to tornado strikes. Christians, on the other hand, seem to attract tornadoes.

Terrorism and natural disasters are not a function of God's will.

I don't know how to do the hidey thing.

http://www.physics.mcgill.ca/~arobic/funny/gays.html

Quote:

]Do Gays Cause Hurricanes?
Do "Unnatural" Acts Cause Natural Disasters?
By Janis Walworth July 16, 1998

Pat Robertson, founder of the Christian Coalition, recently warned Orlando, Florida, that it was courting natural disaster by allowing gay pride flags to be flown along its streets. "A condition like this will bring about ... earthquakes, tornadoes, and possibly a meteor," he said, apparently referring to his belief that the presence of openly gay people incurs divine wrath and that God acts through geological and meteorological events to destroy municipalities that permit gay people the same civil liberties as others. (Robertson also warned Orlando about terrorist bombs, suggesting the possibility that God may also employ terrorists.)

Before Pat and his Christian cronies get too carried away promulgating the idea that people who displease God prompt natural disasters, they should take a hard look at the data. Take tornadoes. Every state (except Alaska) has them - some only one or two a year, dozens in others. Gay people are in every state (even Alaska). According to Pat's hypothesis, there should be more gay people in states that have more tornadoes. But are there? Nope. In fact, there's no correlation at all between the number of gay folks (as estimated by the number of gay political organizations, support groups, bookstores, radio programs, and circuit parties) and the annual tornado count (r = .04, p = .78 for you statisticians). So much for the "God hates gays" theory.

God seems almost neutral on the subject of sexual orientation. I say "almost" because if we look at the density of gay groups relative to the population as a whole, there is a small but statistically significant (p < .05) correlation with the occurrence of tornadoes. And it's a negative correlation (r = -.28). For those of you who haven't used statistics since 1973, that means that a high concentration of gay organizations actually protects against tornadoes. A state with the population of, say, Alabama could avert two tornadoes a year merely by doubling the number of gay organizations in the state. (Tough choice for Alabama's civil defense strategists.)
Although God may not care about sexual orientation, the same cannot be said for religious affiliation. If the underlying tenet of Pat's postulate is true - that God wipes out offensive folks via natural disasters - then perhaps we can find some evidence of who's on God's hit list. Jews are off the hook here: there's no correlation between numbers of Jews and frequency of tornadoes. Ditto for Catholics. But when it comes to Protestants, there's a highly significant correlation of .71.

This means that fully half the state-to-state variation in tornado frequency can be accounted for by the presence of Protestants. And the chance that this association is merely coincidental is only one in 10,000. Protestants, of course, come in many flavors-we were able to find statistics for Lutherans, Methodists, Baptists, and Other. Lutherans don't seem to be a problem-no correlation with tornadoes. There's a modest correlation (r = .52, p = .0001) between Methodists and tornadoes.

But Baptists and Others share the prize: both groups show a definite correlation with tornado frequency (r = .68, p = .0001). This means that Texas could cut its average of 139 tornadoes per year in half by sending a few hundred thousand Baptists elsewhere (Alaska maybe?).

What, you are probably asking yourself, about gay Protestants? An examination of the numbers of gay religious groups (mostly Protestant) reveals no significant relationship with tornadoes. Perhaps even Protestants are less repugnant to God if they're gay. And that brings up another point - the futility of trying to save the world by getting gay people to accept Jesus. It looks from our numbers like encouraging Protestants to be gay could more effectively reduce the frequency of natural disasters.

Gay people have been falsely blamed for disasters ever since Sodom was destroyed by fire and brimstone (we have been unable to find any statistics on disasters involving brimstone). According to a reliable source, the destruction of Sodom was indeed an act of God (see Genesis 19:13) and was perpetrated because the citizens thereof were, according to the same source (see Ezekiel 16:49-50), "arrogant, overfed and unconcerned [and] did not help the poor and needy" - not because they were gay. Now Pat would have us believe that gays are the cause of tornadoes (as well as earthquakes, meteors, and even terrorist bombs) in utter disregard for evidence showing that Baptists are much more likely to cause them.

I say "Kudos!" to Orlando. Despite Robertson's warning that Orlando is "right in the way of some serious hurricanes" (hardly a revelation), note that it was not struck by the very destructive Hurricane Andrew a few years ago. And amid the recent conflagrations (that's fires) in central Florida, which occurred just after Pat sounded his alarm, Orlando was spared. Keep those flags waving!

As any statistician will tell you, of course, correlation doesn't prove causation. Protestants causing tornadoes by angering God isn't the only explanation for these data. It could be that Baptists and Other Protestants purposely flock to states that have lots of tornadoes (no, we haven't checked for a correlation between IQ and religious affiliation). But if Pat and his Christian crew insist that natural disasters are brought on by people who offend God, let the data show who those people are.

As to the Happy Feet thing, it's about being an outcast, not homosexual. Sure, it works as a homosexual subtext, but it's more general than that. It works as a metaphor for anything that puts you outside the mainstream.

Gilda

Did FoTF endorse these comments of Pat Robertsons? I don't know myself. I don't even know if Pat Robertson is connected in any way with FoTF.

Gilda - who are you arguing against?

Shame on all of you. The family might be out of focus because they need glasses.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...FocusOnTFP.gif

Don't make fun of glasses.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carno

Gilda - who are you arguing against?

I was responding to some of the comments from FOTF quoted by SecretMethod70.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daoust

Did FoTF endorse these comments of Pat Robertsons? I don't know myself. I don't even know if Pat Robertson is connected in any way with FoTF.

Pat Robertson's relationship with Focus on the Family is not at all relevant. The point of Gilda's article was merely to refute the claim that sin (homosexuality, in particular) produces natural disasters.

However, I am keenly interested in hearing any defenses of FotF, especially considering the founder's comments on the destruction of Earth. I hope that was deliberate hyperbole on his part...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gilda

Christians, on the other hand, seem to attract tornadoes.

Interesting observation. That may explain why Tornado Alley is smack in the middle of the Bible Belt. (sorry Kansas) Sounds like good fodder for a spin off thread: "Is God trying to tell Evangelicals something?"