TOPIC: Vanessa Hudgens Should Be Fired!

Some excerpts from a FOXNews.com article

Following the appearance on the Web of a nude photo of Vanessa Hudgens, an insider reportedly said the "High School Musical" actress once sent risqué photos of herself to Nickelodeon star Drake Bell. "Drake says he never received those photos," Bell's rep, Jill Fritzo, told People regarding the images that began hitting blogs last Thursday.
The Walt Disney Co. is sticking with the star of its wildly successful "High School Musical" franchise, despite her "lapse in judgment" in posing for racy photos that were leaked to the Internet.
Vanessa Hudgens apologized Friday for the photos, which show her smiling as she posed naked and in underwear in a bedroom with a red curtain behind her. "Vanessa has apologized for what was obviously a lapse in judgment," said Disney Channel spokeswoman Patti McTeague. "We hope she's learned a valuable lesson."

Personally, I hope Disney will learn a "valuable lesson" about putting money before morals. I hope they loose the trust of parents across the country; the would-be revenue from HSM3 and its subsequent related marketing (tours, toys, DVDs, CDs, etc).

What Vanessa Hudgens did is WRONG. Unless she took the nude photo after December '06, she was also a minor. Furthermore, her "lapse of judgment" is more than that. It's a betrayal of the values her character represents. Gabriela Montez is a wholesome girl. Hudgens obviously isn't. Why would Disney betray parents seeking to teach their children good values?!?

That's a rhetorical question -- I already know the answer. It's MONEY! If Disney can make this story go away quick enough, everyone will have forgotten Hudgens' porno pic by the time all of the CDs, tours and toys hit the shelves for Christmas. It will be ancient history by the time High School Musical 3 is released. After all, the sequel to 2006's hit High School Musical premiered on Disney Channel last month attracting more than 17 million viewers. That made it the summer's most-watched TV program.

Hudgens is a superstar among the preteen set, and Disney has spun a wide merchandising net around the series with albums and concert tours. She and Efron date in real life, making them big attractions for celebrity magazines. The films' wholesome nature — for a company that has made its name on family-friendly fare for generations — is a big part of its success. Parents can relax with their children watching, knowing it won't make for any uncomfortable questions. If Disney executives had cut ties to Hudgens, not wanting the company's name associated with anything not G-rated, they would have run the risk of upsetting a formula that has made the company millions upon millions of dollars.

BUT, Disney is once again talking out of both sides of their marketing mouth. One on hand, they want to present themselves as a company that cares about family values. On the other, they are counting on the cash cow that Vanessa Hudgens, Zac Efron and the gang represent. It's in Disney fiscal interest to support Vanessa Hudgins. BUT, it's in our best interest, as parents, to tell Disney they should drop Hudgens and support family values, period.

I'm not trying to be mean to Vanessa. She may be full of remorse. Hudgens told her fans she was sorry. "I am embarrassed over this situation and regret having ever taken these photos," she said. "I am thankful for the support of my family and friends." BUT, an apology doesn't excuse what she did -- and it doesn't mean she should not face the consequences of her actions -- especially in light of the developing story that his is NOT the first time she has posed for and sent salacious pictures to sexual interests. And the first set of pictures were taken when she was a minor.

As for comments made by fans and parents of fans...

"That's her private life, not her public life. That picture got leaked by somebody who broke a trust with her," said Michele Smith of Westborough, Mass., whose 8-year-old daughter Kathryn is a devoted "High School Musical" fan.

Mrs. Smith, morals are morals. Vanessa Hudgens showed a lack of moral fiber by taking nude photos of herself. Remember, she isn't married to Zac Efron. They have NO business communicating with each other in a sexual manner outside the bounds of marriage. Private or public life, it's WRONG.

Dropping her from future movies or other "High School Musical" projects would not only be unfair to Hudgens but to fans such as Kathryn, Smith said. "If Vanessa is not in the movie, my daughter would not be so excited to see it," she said. Smith said she hopes that Kathryn doesn't hear about the photo but, if she does, she's prepared to talk about it. She'll say that it's something private for Vanessa that shouldn't have been shared.

This Mrs. Smith also missed the point. This story is really about sexual relations between unmarried teenagers. Mrs. Smith, do you want Kathryn having sex with some random teenage boy when she's 17 or 18? I doubt it. If you TRULY espouse traditional family values to your daughter, you'll tell Kathryn to wait until she's married. Vanessa Hudgens is NOT the poster child for those values!

The best thing for Disney was to do nothing, said Michael Levine, a Hollywood image consultant and author of 18 books. "What they shouldn't do is make a bigger deal out of it than is necessary," he said. "The picture is not salacious."

So, just because Vanessa is not doing a Paris Hilton head-bob or a Pamela Anderson groan-fest, there's nothing wrong with what she did? Mr. Levine, I seriously question your moral acuity. Do you even know the difference between right and wrong?

The bottom line is that Vanessa Anne Hudgens is obviously not the typical girl-next-door -- unless you live next door to the Playboy Mansion. Hudgens is not the poster child for the kind of values portrayed in HSM or HSM2. Her "lapse of judgment" should have REAL CONSEQUENCES.

Here are a couple questions to ponder --

How many parents would so easily excuse their young teenage daughters sending amateur porn pics to boys via email or over the Internet?

How many parents would say it's a private matter if their son was receiving porn pics from an underage girl they worked with for a week or two?

Disney should fire Vanessa Hudgens and send a message to all other would-be juvenile seductresses: "We will support traditional family values. If you're not on-board with those values, then you're not on-board with us."

TOPIC: Young Girls Going Wild, But at What Consequences?

Article from FOXNews.com

“Role models” like amateur porn star Paris Hilton and her underwear-challenged cohorts Britney Spears and Lindsay Lohan are prompting more and more young girls to “go wild,” but with negative consequences. Mental health experts say more and more youngsters are being influenced by the “sexualization of girls,” a term coined in a report released earlier this year by the American Psychological Association.
The research analyzed the content and effects of virtually every form of media, including television, music videos, music lyrics, magazines, movies, video games and the Internet. It also examined recent advertising campaigns and merchandising of products aimed toward girls. What they found was a sort of “Girls Gone Wild” effect in which young girls are succumbing to the pressure of sexualization by posting nude pictures of themselves on the Internet, allowing boyfriends to photograph them in the nude and making their own amateur porn videos. “The consequences of the sexualization of girls in media today are very real and are likely to be a negative influence on girls’ healthy development,” said Eileen L. Zurbriggen, PhD, chairwoman of the APA Task Force and associate professor of psychology at the University of California, Santa Cruz, earlier this year in reference to the report.
As a result of an over-sexed society, young girls are reaping the following mental health issues:
Cognitive and Emotional Consequences: Sexualization and objectification undermine a person’s confidence in and comfort with her own body, leading to emotional and self-image problems, such as shame and anxiety.
Mental and Physical Health: Research links sexualization with three of the most common mental health problems diagnosed in girls and women—eating disorders, low self-esteem, and depression or depressed mood.
Sexual Development: Research suggests that the sexualization of girls has negative consequences on girls’ ability to develop a healthy sexual self-image. “As a society, we need to replace all of these sexualized images with ones showing girls in positive settings—ones that show the uniqueness and competence of girls,” said Zurbriggen. “The goal should be to deliver messages to all adolescents—boys and girls—that lead to healthy sexual development.”

SOPEBOCKS: I've been saying this for a couple of years now. The sexualization of young girls is detrimental to their health and society as a whole. When we see human beings, especially precious young women, as nothing more than sexual objects to be used, abused and then left behind, we damage the very fabric of life. Abercrombie & Fitch, Bratz, LonelyGirl15, The-N.com and pretty much ALL hip-hop music -- are current examples of sexualization of girls for the sake of entertainment and money. Prosti-tots are everywhere -- just go to your local mall and walk around any evening. Blame the parents for much of what you see, but blame yourself for allowing images of young girls to be put into the marketplace as a means of sexual excitement and gratification.
Again, we will reap what we sew -- and America is sewing the seeds of sexual abuse, depression, murder and rape into young boys and girls from every angle. We need to change the images being presented in media and music NOW.

TOPIC: Statement from Schoolgirl Following Purity Ring Ruling

Article from ChristianToday

Statement from schoolgirl Lydia Playfoot following the High Court's decision to uphold a ban on her wearing a purity ring by her school, Millais School in West Sussex.

"I am very disappointed by the decision this morning by the High Court not to allow me to wear my purity ring to school as an expression of my Christian faith not to have sex outside of marriage. I believe that Mr. Justice Supperstone’s decision will mean that slowly, over time, people such as school governors, employers, political organisations and others will be allowed to stop Christians from publicly expressing and practising their faith.

Over two years ago, I was concerned at the number of teenagers who were catching sexually transmitted diseases, getting pregnant and/or having abortions. The Government's Sex Education Programme is not working, and the pressure on young people to 'give in' to sex continues to increase. This is often because of the media’s focus on sex and the expectations of others.

As a Christian I do not agree with sex before marriage. I believe I have a right not only to state my Christian views on sex, but also to demonstrate my Christian faith and commitment to God and my future husband not to have sex before marriage, through the wearing of a purity ring.

I, along with 11 other Christian girls at Millais School decided before God that we would make a commitment not to have sex before marriage, and as a sign of that commitment, to wear a simple silver ring from the ‘Silver Ring Thing’ movement. The wearing of the ring was to me, a demonstration of my Christian faith and values, which are based on the Bible – which clearly teaches that sex outside of marriage is wrong and therefore not God's best for us. Despite the fact that Muslims girls at our school wear headscarves, and Sikhs wear Kara bangles, the school refused to allow me to manifest my belief through the wearing of a ring.

The School Governors originally said it was for Health and Safety reasons that purity rings were banned from school, but have offered no evidence to support the view that wearing a ring could physically harm another pupil or staff member. I still believe the decision by the Governors of the School goes against the Article 9 rights to Freedom of Religion and my right to express my faith in word or deed, in a democratic, Christian-based country. I shall be consulting my legal team to consider whether to appeal.

Finally I would like to take this opportunity to thank my parents, family and friends who have stood by me though all of this, and to the many hundreds of people, both locally in Horsham, across the UK and throughout the world who have sent me letters of support and assured me of their prayers. I would also like to thank the national press and media for the balanced way in which they have covered this story, and have portrayed it for what it is; another example of the loss of the right of Christians to demonstrate their faith in public.

Lastly, but by no means least, I would like to thank my barrister, Mr Paul Diamond, and Mrs Andrea Minichiello Williams of the Lawyers' Christian Fellowship for all their advice, guidance and support through what is a legal and political minefield for a 16-year-old schoolgirl to walk through. I would also like to thank Paul Eddy, of Paul Eddy PR who has guided me through the maze of working with the national press and media.

To everyone I offer my thanks, and I deeply regret that I could not persuade the Court to consider upholding the religious liberty of Christian people in the United Kingdom.

As a Christian though, I live for another Kingdom, and serve another King, Jesus Christ, and therefore I shall continue to live and speak for what is right and true.
Thank you.
Miss Lydia Playfoot
July 16, 2007"

TOPIC: Outrageous Homosexual Bill Passes California Senate
SB 777 a serious assault on religious freedom in schools
by Christiansunite.com Staff
The California State Senate voted Thursday (23-13) to pass SB 777 (Kuehl), legislation that will ban textbooks and teachers from any instruction that "reflects or promotes bias against" homosexuality, transgenders, bisexuals or those with perceived gender issues. SB 777 is similar to last session's highly controversial SB 1437, which passed the legislature but was vetoed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.
"SB 777 is designed to transform our public schools into institutions that disregard all notions of the traditional family unit," said Karen England, Executive Director of Capitol Resource Institute. "This reverse discrimination is an outright attack on the religious and moral beliefs of California citizens." Earlier this month homosexual advocacy group Equality California attacked CRI's opposition to the bill. A board member for the radical group sent an e-mail and video to CRI declaring that they would "bury" CRI if we "continued our efforts" in opposing this outrageous legislation. CRI also received hate mail from the so-called "tolerant" supporters of Equality California and the homosexual "tolerance" agenda.

"The shocking hate mail we received shows that those behind this legislation do not promote true tolerance," stated England. "Only politically correct speech will be tolerated. Those with religious or traditional moral beliefs will not be allowed to express their opinions in public schools."

SB 777 not only affects textbooks and instructional materials for kindergarten and grades 1-12, it also affects all school-sponsored activities. School-sponsored activities include everything from cheerleading and sports activities to the prom. Under SB 777 school districts could potentially be prohibited from having a "prom king and queen" because that would show bias based on gender and sexual orientation.
"Los Angeles Unified School District has already implemented the policies in this bill," said Meredith Turney, Legislative Liaison for Capitol Resource Institute. "In that district, boys who perceive themselves as girls may enter the girls' locker room and restroom. Teachers and school officials are required to hide the gender identity of a transgender student if the parents are unaware of what's taking place at school. This astonishing policy will be expanded to every school in the state if SB 777 becomes law."

The Sope-Bocks: Californians need to contact their state representatives NOW! The slippery slope that SB 777 provides is one that many generations will pay a heavy price for -- if this sort of intolerant legislation is allowed to become law. EVERYONE should be protected by the First Amendment -- not just those who choose to engage in the homosexual lifestyle.

TOPIC: Adolescents With High-risk Sexual Attitudes Attract Peers With Similar Attitudes

Article from ScienceDaily

High-risk sexual behavior in adolescents appears to be influenced by the sexual attitudes of peers, and young people select friends whose attitudes about sex are consistent with their own attitudes. These are the conclusions of a new study conducted by researchers at the University of Illinois at Chicago and published in the May/June 2007 issue of the journal Child Development.
The study addressed issues of peer influence. Researchers sought to determine how adolescents come to resemble their peers in risky attitudes and behaviors, attempting to learn whether they are encouraged by peers to adopt certain behaviors or gravitate toward others with similar attitudes and behaviors. They also examined the role of peer attitudes in the development of high-risk behaviors. The study analyzed data on 1,350 15- to 18-year-old male and female students taking part in the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, a nationwide study of individual, peer, family, school, and community factors related to health.
High-risk sexual behavior was defined by the number of partners with whom adolescents had intercourse without a condom, since having multiple sex partners without using condoms puts adolescents at risk for contracting HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases [STDs]. The researchers also constructed a measure of attitudes about the undesirable consequences of sex. These measures of sexual behavior and attitudes, from individual adolescents and their friends, were compared over time.
Some of the study's findings showed that peers influence adolescent attitudes and behavior. Adolescents whose friends had intercourse without a condom were more likely to have intercourse without a condom the following year. Those whose friends believed that sex had undesirable consequences were likely to change attitudes to be similar to those of their friends, and were less likely to have intercourse without a condom the following year. The effect of friends' attitudes on sexual behavior was stronger for females than for males.
Other findings showed that adolescents choose new friends with attitudes that are similar to their own. Teens who believed that sex had undesirable consequences were likely to choose new friends and retain existing friends with similar attitudes. This occurred to a similar extent in males and females, but occurred less often among Hispanic adolescents than among non-Hispanic white and African American adolescents. "This study has two implications for prevention," according to David B. Henry, associate professor of psychiatry at the University of Illinois at Chicago and the study's lead author. "First, it supports the use of adolescent leaders for preventive interventions. Second, it suggests that interventions that use attitude change to change behavior may be more effective among females than among males."
The study was funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Summarized from Child Development, Vol. 78, Issue 3, Peer Selection and Socialization Effects on Adolescent Intercourse without a Condom and Attitudes about the Costs of Sex by Henry, DB, Schoeny, ME, Deptula, DP, and Slavick, JT (University of Illinois at Chicago). Copyright 2007 / The Society for Research in Child Development, Inc. All rights reserved.

Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by Society for Research in Child Development.