[LordOpie]

here's the bottomline... are you comfortable with no restrictions, irresponsible parents and the distorted and demented children who'd grow up to potentially affect your life in adverse and potentially serious ways?

 

[BurlyShirley]

They may not be able to because the broadcast spectrum is supposedly publically owned, I'm not sure. Didn't one of the networks refuse to run the Moveon.org ad?

Keep in mind they aren't going to refuse to run them. Money talks. Especially when the candidate gets elected and it's time to write legislation.

I think it was a PETA ad and something about meat factories being like WW2 concentration camps or causing erectile disfunction or something during the superbowl...but the big fuss was that it was about censorship and how they werent allowed to choose sides or something but the network claimed it was just "in bad taste" or something. I dont know, but you're right...money talks, so if cigarette companies want to target youth with their commercials during episodes of Looney Tunes, thats cool with you?

 

[Silver]

here's the bottomline... are you comfortable with no restrictions, irresponsible parents and the distorted and demented children who'd grow up to potentially affect your life in adverse and potentially serious ways?

You're assuming that viewing pornography or racy material is going to turn little Johnny into Ted Bundy, and that is an assumption I'm not willing to concede to you. Personally, I'd argue that not teaching kids about sex and avoiding the topic hoping that avoidance will cause it to go away isn't working at all, looking at teen pregnancy rates.

In Scandanavia you can see some pretty hard stuff on tv at night...the kids there don't seem to be raving sex monsters. Heck, Canadian tv has some stuff on late at night that would cause a riot among the Puritans in the US, and the kids there don't seem to be worse off.

 

[Silver]

I think it was a PETA ad and something about meat factories being like WW2 concentration camps or causing erectile disfunction or something during the superbowl...but the big fuss was that it was about censorship and how they werent allowed to choose sides or something but the network claimed it was just "in bad taste" or something. I dont know, but you're right...money talks, so if cigarette companies want to target youth with their commercials during episodes of Looney Tunes, thats cool with you?

Yep, I'm cool with cigarette advertising as well.

Hey, they put Coke machines in schools and obesity is going to end up killing a ton of those kids. Where are you going to draw the line?

 

[LordOpie]

You're assuming that viewing pornography or racy material is ...

well, i suspose that's another thread... hardcore porn and violence and the affects it could have on children.

 

[Slugman]

Actually, help me out here. Are they? Can NBC just decide to go "we're not running any pro-Bush commercials" and influence an election?

Actually political ads are HEAVILY regulated to insue that one side does block the other from a channel or region.

The Superbowl issue was the Moveon.org ad... they refuse to air it b/c it was deemed by the network to be political (duh) and they refuse to broadcast ANY poitical ads during the superbowl.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Yep, I'm cool with cigarette advertising as well.

I think you've got some seriously screwed up priorities. When the greater good is sacrificed for your little triumph over the man, it shows that you're being nothing but causehead. Personally, I think its my duty as an american to help provide the kind of stable and morally responsible place for our youth to grow up, as they're the most important thing in the world IMO. To sacrifice that for whatever it is you want is not worth it to me.

 

[Tenchiro]

well, i suspose that's another thread... hardcore porn and violence and the affects it could have on children.

Let me get back to you after I study this with Allison Hannigan and that Alizee chick. :evil:

 

[Westy]

Right. Parents should be responsible and all, but are you telling me that society in no way should be promoting a good environment for children to grow up in?

Yes it should, and society should be the one determining what is on TV, not the frickin government. If so many people are offended by a program they won't watch it and the advertizer will pull their money. If some stick up the bunghole delicate flower of a freak writes a complaint about a fart joke, heavy fines are levied.

Remember when Married with Children first came on. Some sexually frustrated house wife got all offended, wrote letters and demanded boycotts on the advertisers. She was a loony and no one cared, the advertisers made money and the show stayed on the air. Today Fox would just be fined and probably have to pull the show off the air. The system has pretty muched worked out until some washed up pop star decided to flash here dried up raisin of a nipple to help sell a bad record.

 

[Silver]

I think you've got some seriously screwed up priorities. When the greater good is sacrificed for your little triumph over the man, it shows that you're being nothing but causehead. Personally, I think its my duty as an american to help provide the kind of stable and morally responsible place for our youth to grow up, as they're the most important thing in the world IMO. To sacrifice that for whatever it is you want is not worth it to me.

Really, I missed that part in the Bill of Rights.

You're in bad shape when a Canadian cares about your constitution more than you do...

 

[BurlyShirley]

Yes it should, and society should be the one determining what is on TV, not the frickin government. QUOTE]
The government is a direct representative of the people's wants.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Really, I missed that part in the Bill of Rights.

You're in bad shape when a Canadian cares about your constitution more than you do...

Freedom of speech and expression are only allowed when they dont cause harm to others right? Showing cigarette commercials during cartoons is just yelling "FIRE" in a much bigger theater IMO.

 

[Westy]

Yes it should, and society should be the one determining what is on TV, not the frickin government. QUOTE]
The government is a direct representative of the people's wants.

Not really. The two party system just give us the choice of craphead A or bitchtit B. Most people make their voting decision on the major issues or simply along party lines. Side topics like FCC policy can be way off the mark of public opinion and have little effect on who is elected.

 

[Silver]

Freedom of speech and expression are only allowed when they dont cause harm to others right? Showing cigarette commercials during cartoons is just yelling "FIRE" in a much bigger theater IMO.

Do you really think that Nicolodeon is going to take money from Marlboro to advertise smokes? Parents would have a fit, stop watching, ad money would dry up and the network woud die.

Just to make sure, you're fine with a product that contributes to dental disease and obesity marketing to kids, correct? Trix, the commercial tells me, are for them anyways...

Taking offense at something doesn't constitute harm either. You don't have a right to go through life without being offended.

 

[LordOpie]

Personally, I think its my duty as an american to help provide the kind of stable and morally responsible place for our youth to grow up, as they're the most important thing in the world IMO. To sacrifice that for whatever it is you want is not worth it to me.

very well said

 

[BurlyShirley]

Do you really think that Nicolodeon is going to take money from Marlboro to advertise smokes? Parents would have a fit, stop watching, ad money would dry up and the network woud die.

Just to make sure, you're fine with a product that contributes to dental disease and obesity marketing to kids, correct? Trix, the commercial tells me, are for them anyways...

Nickelodeon isnt a network affiliate local station, is it? We've already stated that most parents suck, so they're not going to run to the TV every time Joe Camel takes a drag.

And equating Trix to Marlboros is a stretch at best. You know that. If eaten responsibly they can be fine as part of your diet. I dont know too many people addicted to 64 bowls of trix a day, dying of emphasima or related illnesses.

 

[Silver]

Nickelodeon isnt a network affiliate local station, is it? We've already stated that most parents suck, so they're not going to run to the TV every time Joe Camel takes a drag.

And equating Trix to Marlboros is a stretch at best. You know that. If eaten responsibly they can be fine as part of your diet. I dont know too many people addicted to 64 bowls of trix a day, dying of emphasima or related illnesses.

So is equating a nipple or a bad word to hardcore sex. You started it, so it's hardly good form to throw rocks at me for making a stretch.

 

[Westy]

So should we censor the internet too? Much worse stuff here than on TV, kids have just as much access to computers as TV's these days.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Not really. The two party system just give us the choice of craphead A or bitchtit B. Most people make their voting decision on the major issues or simply along party lines. Side topics like FCC policy can be way off the mark of public opinion and have little effect on who is elected.

Well apparently then, most people are happy enough with the way things are going than to make a bigger issue of it, else it would be one of the deciding factors in voting. Your issues with the 2-party system are another debate completely, but I'll go ahead and say that most candidates fall in line with one of 2 distinct lines of thinking. In this case, for or against these regulations...when people make a vote, they're showing which side they're on. Sorry if you dont like it. Maybe you can move in with silver in the great white wonderful grand liberation that is life in oh-spectacular, cant be beat, bastion of freedom Canada.

 

[BurlyShirley]

So is equating a nipple or a bad word to hardcore sex. You started it, so it's hardly good form to throw rocks at me for making a stretch.

Im sorry, please find the quote from me where I equated the two and we'll talk.

 

[Silver]

Good.
Regular TV aint the place for such crap. Im OUTRAGED every time I see it.

That's your first post in the thread. Your second post basically said that if you're ok with the nipple (mentioned in the first post by Slugman) then you'd obviously support hard core sex on network tv.

Did you directly equate nipple=hardcore sex? In the sense that you didn't write it down that way, no. Is that what you meant? If certainly appears to be.

 

[BurlyShirley]

So should we censor the internet too? Much worse stuff here than on TV, kids have just as much access to computers as TV's these days.

The internet is a different animal, as its international and would be tough to regulate, but bear in mind that it's not free for kids to see unless their parents purchase access to it, in which case, its easily contained by parental controls and usually censored by the organizations at which kids can readily access them.
So I dunno if its the same.

 

[BurlyShirley]

That's your first post in the thread. Your second post basically said that if you're ok with the nipple (mentioned in the first post by Slugman) then you'd obviously support hard core sex on network tv.

No, i dont think that's whay i said at all, I think it was:

Surely you all would be opposed to showing Hard-core porn on network TV right? Well then, you all have some standards, and everyone's are different, so its easiest to just go the non-offensive route. WTF is so hard about this?

That to me suggests i was saying exactly the opposite of what you suggest, that there's a difference between a nipple and porn, and that you'd recognize SOME need for standards. You just a bit slow today or what?

 

[Silver]

No, i dont think that's whay i said at all, I think it was:


That to me suggests i was saying exactly the opposite of what you suggest, that there's a difference between a nipple and porn, and that you'd recognize SOME need for standards. You just a bit slow today or what?

So are you outraged over the nipple? Appears to me that you are. And if you're happy enough with fining a network for that, it really doesn't matter where you set the bar, because you've already put it pretty low.

 

[BurlyShirley]

So are you outraged over the nipple? Appears to me that you are. And if you're happy enough with fining a network for that, it really doesn't matter where you set the bar, because you've already put it pretty low.

Ok dude, where I said "outraged" IN ALL CAPS was a direct play on the thread titled "im not outraged about beheadings" to be kind of ironic. I guess I thought you'd get that little joke. Apparently I give you too much credit.

 

[golgiaparatus]

Phucking puritans need to move to another country and study normal culture for a while.

 

[Silver]

Ok dude, where I said "outraged" IN ALL CAPS was a direct play on the thread titled "im not outraged about beheadings" to be kind of ironic. I guess I thought you'd get that little joke. Apparently I give you too much credit.

I can't tell with you.

You've gotta stop watch Bill O'Reilly's show. You're starting to argue just like him.

 

[El Jefe]

I have a 6 year old daughter. When i'm in the truck with her, I put on her Hillary Duff cd, or radio Disney. When she's not with me, I turn on Howard Stern, or pop in any one of many cd's with "explicit lyrics" I bought her a new tv just so I could enable the lock-outs for ratings above PG....and 90% of the time, I'm watching the show with her, or at least checking it out.

I have porn at home stored away from where my kid can get it, and it's available if I want on pay per view...the same pay per view system my daughter knows how to order from...but she doesn't because I monitor what she does.

If porn were on tv, I'd block those channels from her, and promptly unlock them after she went to bed. I'd have absolutely no problem with it. Also, even on regular shows like Nip Tuck, what's the big deal with boobs and ass? America is so frikking prudish. If we didn't make a big deal out of seeing nudity, it would lose it's taboo status. Trust me, before I could get my hands on porn as a teen, you think I didn't snag the Sears underwear ads fromthe Sunday paper and take them to the bathroom? Come on, a guy can get turned on by anything.

"Protecting" people from nudity isn't going to do anything to affect anyone's appetite for sex or their morals. I asure you that all the business in Chatsworth, CA will be around for a good long time. :evil:

Censoring media for content is a parental responsibility to be executed in the home, and is a personal choice for adults to make. The government has no place legislating morality.

 

[BurlyShirley]

The government has no place legislating morality.

How many times must I explain this? The ENTIRE PURPOSE of a government is to legislate the morality of the people it governs. ALL MAJOR LAWS ARE BASED ON MORALS. (ie, stealing, killing, raping)

 

[Silver]

How many times must I explain this? The ENTIRE PURPOSE of a government is to legislate the morality of the people it governs. ALL MAJOR LAWS ARE BASED ON MORALS. (ie, stealing, killing, raping)

No, the purpose of government is to ensure there is some kind or order in society. Stealing, killing, raping all have detrimental effects on some other citizen, by definition.

Viewing pornography does not.

 

[BurlyShirley]

No, the purpose of government is to ensure there is some kind or order in society.QUOTE]

And this order is determined DIRECTLY by the morality of the people who make it up. This is why you vote for the guy who most closely shares YOUR morals, because you wish those views put on the rest of society.

DUH! :nuts:

 

[LordOpie]

How many times must I explain this? The ENTIRE PURPOSE of a government is to legislate the morality of the people it governs. ALL MAJOR LAWS ARE BASED ON MORALS. (ie, stealing, killing, raping)

keep saying it until it sinks in.


btw, just because YOU may be a good parent doesn't mean everyone else is

 

[Silver]

My morals or the morals of a politician that I vote for don't matter sometimes. I hate to keep beating you over the head with this, but that is why there is a constitution. It helps out with that tyranny of the majority thing a little bit.

For the sake of argument, if more than half the country doesn't like interracial marriage, that doesn't mean that a vote tomorrow can make it illegal.

Unless you want to rip up the constitution, that is.

 

[BurlyShirley]

My morals or the morals of a politician that I vote for don't matter sometimes. I hate to keep beating you over the head with this, but that is why there is a constitution. It helps out with that tyranny of the majority thing a little bit.

Yes, but this goes back to my spot about yelling FIRE in a theater. If the majority feels the current situation mimics that, as I do, then we're working well within the limits of the constitution. Your situation with interracial marriage is not relevant here.

 

[Slugman]

My morals or the morals of a politician that I vote for don't matter sometimes. I hate to keep beating you over the head with this, but that is why there is a constitution.

As much as it hurts to agree with Burly and Opie :

What do you think the constitution was based on... reading tea leaves?

The constitution reflects the morals of the leaders on this country when it was a fledgling nation...

 

[Silver]

Yes, but this goes back to my spot about yelling FIRE in a theater. If the majority feels the current situation mimics that, as I do, then we're working well within the limits of the constitution. Your situation with interracial marriage is not relevant here.

Yelling FIRE in a theater when there is no fire causes people to get hurt and trampled to death, correct? Causes a stampede for the exits, and panic. What you are proposing is more along the lines of making it illegal to mention the word fire in a conversation with a friend.

Once again, where is the proof that viewing pornography causes people to harm others in a statistically significant way?

 

[Silver]

As much as it hurts to agree with Burly and Opie :

What do you think the constitution was based on... reading tea leaves?

The constitution reflects the morals of the leaders on this country when it was a fledgling nation...

Yes, but it is a set of ground rules. It's hard to amend the constitution for a reason. It keeps the country from changing the laws every time a new president gets elected.

 

[RhinofromWA]

I can't wait until Sesame Street comes on and that shows special guest is doing Grover from behind.......

And Mr Snuffelufagus is getting a BJ from Oscar.

Don't even get me started on Burt and Ernie....lol

Actually are any of the main puppet charactures on SS female? Not that you can really tell on some of them....never really thought about it before.... There are some generic little puppets but any other females?

 

[LordOpie]

As much as it hurts to agree with Burly and Opie

haha, you're screwed now! Next thing you know, you'll be having sex with women you hate and riding a triple roadie.

 

[valve bouncer]

Yes, but this goes back to my spot about yelling FIRE in a theater. If the majority feels the current situation mimics that, as I do, then we're working well within the limits of the constitution. Your situation with interracial marriage is not relevant here.

"Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner" James Bovard 1994.
Just because the majority wants it, doesn't necessarily make it the right thing to do.