Celebrities as moral teachers

Thinking again of the Carolina Chocolate Drops and the NC marriage question.

Why should they use their celebrity in such a manner; would I have a different opinion if it were Jim Caviezel raising awareness about some issue? Ii shouldn't. The
band takes it upon themselves to be moral teachers, when it is beyond their expertise. They may have knowledge about music, musical history, or the playing of an instrument, but morals is beyond their competence (unless they are also morally wise and virtuous people who know the science of ethics), and their opinion should not matter.

They may believe, like good liberals, that they are noted for their moral goodness and part of this requires advocacy on the part of some victim group suffering injustice. But do they act as citizens of a state, respecting the traditions and beliefs of other citizens? No, as liberals they claim to have reason on their side, and reason, naturally, proves that tradition is wrong.

They make their living off of fans, and it would be a stretch to say that they have some sort of civic friendship with their fans. If anything, it is more of a commercial friendship. Celebrities should not be surprised, then, if fans decide to withdraw financial support because the celebrities have unwisely chosen to become spokesmen for some cause and offended the fans by taking the wrong side. They do not go around from citizen to citizen, engaging in conversation with each as civic friends, but use the mass media to spread the message.

I am reminded also of beauty pageants, in which many of the contestants proclaim their support of same-sex marriage and homosexuality. At the minimum, they want to appear progressive, if they are not really so, cheerleading to display their moral goodness. They use the attention they get because of their beauty to be moral teachers as well. [Physical] Beauty (if it is naturally so) is thus used for ugly purposes, with contestants advocating radical changes in morality.

Given the rampant use of plastic surgery, the false attitude that the question portion of the competition is so important, and the fact that those who remain natural should not take credit and honor for what God has given to them, we should probably do away with beauty pageants - do they continue to serve the original purpose of advertising for the sponsors?

Too many Uhmerican celebrities and aspiring celebrities are status and attention whores, narcissists who pride themselves on the attention they receive from others. They seek to validate themselves even further by it by turning themselves into moral spokespeople, so that their claim to fame is strengthened, and they are not known for ostensibly "shallow" reasons. This applies even to those who supposedly have talent, like artists and musicians.

Might it be that one can use celebrity well or poorly, depending upon whether what one is advocating is right or wrong in itself? It may not be right that we are easily swayed into listening to someone we admire or like for reasons other than character, but is that the fault of the celebrity or our own? Would it be more palatable if they masked their advocacy as a suggestion to an equal, rather than assuming the position of a superior in morals? Still, while it is right to react against the compartmentalization of life, would it be better to maintain those boundaries until true communities are restored? "Let's keep our relationship commercial." Celebrities should realize the power that they have on those who have not tutored their passions and refrain from exercising an undue influence on them. And if they can't help it, then they should ensure that they are reinforcing correct morality as one who has received it, rather than rejecting it. They need a good dose of humility and the realization that one is accountable to God for all of their actions.