From Rod Parsley's "Center for Moral Clarity." Don't cha just love the pretentiousness....
What Miley’s Come-Hither Picture Tells Us About Its Takers
It’s hard to avoid the image of 15-year-old Miley Cyrus these days – she and
her character, Hannah Montana, are making the folks at Disney, and lots of other
people, bushel baskets of money. From television to films to radio to books to
the stickers your kids buy from coin-operated vending machines, her picture’s
everywhere. Since she’s a professing Christian, and she
projects a wholesome image befitting the Disney name, her popularity should be
good news for the Church.
Last week, however, a decidedly different picture of Miss Miley emerged,
and it revealed more about the people behind the camera than the teenager in
front of it.The June issue of Vanity Fair magazine, which went on sale this
week, features an interview with Cyrus, accompanied by photos shot by the
acclaimed Annie Liebowitz. You may have seen the shot that caused a national
stir last week: it’s provocative and tasteless, but not explicit. If you didn’t
see it, don’t bother: your eye-gate doesn’t need the distraction.
If the subject were a 25-year-old singer promoting a new album or an
30-year-old actress with a new movie arriving in theaters, we’d think nothing
about it. The problem, of course, is that Vanity Fair readers are being invited
to contemplate the allure of a 15-year-old whose every project and product is
targeted toward grade-school girls! What happened? We suspect that amoral
magazine executives, sensing a “Lolita moment,” rushed an inappropriate picture
online to give their newsstand sales a jolt. Our suspicion is that nobody
involved with the shoot – least of all the magazine and the superstar
photographer it hired – considered the implications of depicting an underage
girl, famous or otherwise, as a sexual plaything, because they simply didn’t see
anything wrong with it.
A recent episode of “Hannah Montana” put our heroine in a moral quandary
because she didn’t like the smell of a perfume she had endorsed, but the people
running photo shoot seemed to harbor no such qualms about burning an
inappropriate image of Miss Miley into the minds of millions of consumers. The
publication of this suggestive picture tells us that Vanity Fair executives
either don’t know or don’t care about the wholesome, God-friendly image Team
Miley has created, or about the uncomfortable conversations it doubtlessly
spurred in homes with teen daughters across the nation. Instead, they chose to
publish a photograph that glorifies under-age sex and the amoral world in which
it’s just another lifestyle choice we all have to tolerate.
We’d like to say we expected better from a major secular magazine, but we
didn’t. Let the viewer beware!
Now usually, we take this opportunity to rake Brar Parsley over the coals on this...except on this case, he is, to a point, on the money.
I do believe that the folks at VF thought it would be cheeky to have America's Favorite Piece of Jailbait in that come-hither pose, complete with connect-the-dots goosebumps. But if you think this is a close to kiddie porn as mainstream will get, does anyone understand that there were two people on that set who could have vetoed any pose, any time. These people were on the set with Miley and her dad every moment of the shoot and could have stopped all this at anytime.
That would be..........MILEY CYRUS AND HER DAD, BILLY RAY.
But if you think that's bad, there is another picture, not that much talked about, but, IMHO, even more scandelous.
I'm talking about THIS Masterpiece:
Ahhhh, yes.....little Miley, lazing almost erotically in the strong arms of the hunk who just happens to be his daughter.
Apperently is was all ok with the Cyrueses, who sign off on all this.
Yep, you gotta love those "practicing Christians." Makes you wonder what they practice....