US court rejects FCC broadcast decency limit

[rtwo]

Life, liber[t]y and pursuit of happiness.

But someone's freedom to say whatever foul word they can impinges on my pursuit of happiness.

Yes, I have the freedom to not watch TV and movies based on content I deem immoral - sex, nudity, foul language, blood and guts - but because the media is such an integral part of our society, by not viewing these things I suddenly become a social outcast. Consider how many jokes you have entertained that reference something seen on TV or the movies? Imagine not being able to partake in those jokes because you had not seen those shows/movies? So I have to chose between being an outcast of my own culture or compromising my faith and values. Is that freedom?

Likewise, how do parents teach morality to their children against the pressures of society to be immoral? And yes society is pressuring us to live and talk lifestyles that are contrary to the word of God. (Do I need to give examples?)

You don't have the right to happiness; you have the right to pursue it. Do you really believe you're a social outcast because you didn't watch "Tyra" or "Nip/Tuck"? Scripture says we are aliens and strangers. As Christians we aren't made to necessarily be comfortable in this world. Sorry, but the argument doesn't carry any weight at all.

Parents can teach morality by being parents. I don't know why you feel I don't believe society is corrupt and contrary to Scripture -- I never said any such thing; so your final statement, if it is an argument, clearly isn't one with me.

But on that subject - we -were- simply talking about the F-word... am I to take it by your statement "how do parents teach morality to their children against the pressures of society to be immoral" to mean that you expect the media and all of society to clean up its act so you can train your children better? In spite of Hillary's ridiculously blind-sighted book, it is -not- the village's job to raise a child. It is the parents'.

[nebula]

You don't have the right to happiness; you have the right to pursue it. Do you really believe you're a social outcast because you didn't watch "Tyra" or "Nip/Tuck"? Scripture says we are aliens and strangers. As Christians we aren't made to necessarily be comfortable in this world. Sorry, but the argument doesn't carry any weight at all.

Firstly, I can't go to the local Mall without hearing teenagers using the f-word, the s-word, etc. so the only way I could avoid such language is to be a hermit.

But it isn't just "Nip/Tuck" that using profane speech. Even what is supposed to be children's movies these days contains junk that used to be taboo from children's programing.

But on that subject - we -were- simply talking about the F-word... am I to take it by your statement "how do parents teach morality to their children against the pressures of society to be immoral" to mean that you expect the media and all of society to clean up its act so you can train your children better? In spite of Hillary's ridiculously blind-sighted book, it is -not- the village's job to raise a child. It is the parents'.

Have you heard the reports that the "abstinence campaign" is failing? Christian teens make the pledge, but they don't keep it. Do you honestly believe that peer pressure and constant visuals from the media have nothing to do with this failure?

[rtwo]

You don't have the right to happiness; you have the right to pursue it. Do you really believe you're a social outcast because you didn't watch "Tyra" or "Nip/Tuck"? Scripture says we are aliens and strangers. As Christians we aren't made to necessarily be comfortable in this world. Sorry, but the argument doesn't carry any weight at all.

Firstly, I can't go to the local Mall without hearing teenagers using the f-word, the s-word, etc. so the only way I could avoid such language is to be a hermit.

But it isn't just "Nip/Tuck" that using profane speech. Even what is supposed to be children's movies these days contains junk that used to be taboo from children's programing.

But on that subject - we -were- simply talking about the F-word... am I to take it by your statement "how do parents teach morality to their children against the pressures of society to be immoral" to mean that you expect the media and all of society to clean up its act so you can train your children better? In spite of Hillary's ridiculously blind-sighted book, it is -not- the village's job to raise a child. It is the parents'.

Have you heard the reports that the "abstinence campaign" is failing? Christian teens make the pledge, but they don't keep it. Do you honestly believe that peer pressure and constant visuals from the media have nothing to do with this failure?

Sure they do... but then, how many parents are allowing their teenagers to go to R-rated movies, watch whatever they want on television and bring whatever music they want into the home -- even Christian parents.

Morals begin in the home, not in the classroom, and certainly not on television.

[nebula]

I have to leave from the computer for now, but before I do I just have to say that it breaks my heart to read Christians justifying the right to sin. Paul had very harsh words to say about the body of believers allowing sin into the assembly. Jesus hates sin. Yet how do we treat and regard sin?

[rtwo]

I have to leave from the computer for now, but before I do I just have to say that it breaks my heart to read Christians justifying the right to sin. Paul had very harsh words to say about the body of believers allowing sin into the assembly. Jesus hates sin. Yet how do we treat and regard sin?

The US isn't the assembly. I'm not advocating allowing sin into the church. I'm advocating letting the Spirit work through non-Christians by not shoving our beliefs down people's throats and loving them/evangelising them instead.

[nebula]

Sure they do... but then, how many parents are allowing their teenagers to go to R-rated movies, watch whatever they want on television and bring whatever music they want into the home -- even Christian parents.

Morals begin in the home, not in the classroom, and certainly not on television.

But this goes back to the dilemma I mentioned before - most movies out there contain sexual innuendos, foul language, sex scenes. More and more TV shows are infiltrated with these things. The only way a parent these days can keep their children pure is to not own a TV and not see 98% of the movies that are out. This leaves the child as a social outcast in school.

If you don't think that's tough and lonely, you should try it sometime. I was a social outcast because of my Christian faith and values. It is a very painful and lonely life.

So I have a hard time "tolerating" Christians advocating letting the non-Christians of Hollywood dictate the airways.

[Marnie]

Grace to you,

Might I add, the OP was about the FCC being restricted from allowing the F-word on Television. Over public airwaves. There are certain shows available on Cable Television which people pay to watch. They use all manner of obscenity and vulgarity yet people pay to watch it and to have it invade their homes. This should not be legislated. However the public airwaves should be. There are also sattelite radio programs now available which people pay to hear. They have that right. Should we be bombarded with it on the public airwaves?

Peace,

Dave

Dave, thanks for bringing us back on track. Man, I was about to hijack my own thread!

You mentioned "public airwaves." What does that mean? Really, they aren't public at all; advertisers buy blocks of time to sell you a product; the TV show is there so you'll watch the commercials inbetween the show's segments. So, for a certain span of time, a block of "public air" is owned by the advertiser. But the choice is yours to (a) watch the show or (b) buy the product(s) advertised. YOU are in total control of what comes into your house.

We have satellite here, and of the 300 channels we have access to, we block 80% of them for the reasons you cited. We also block PBS, but for other reasons, with a nod to forrest. We also have XM, satellite radio, and we block the "adult" stations. Again, we are in TOTAL control of what comes into our home. I mean, nobody is bombarded by anything unless they turn the TV on.

Now, if you want to talk about billboards, that's different; everybody can see them. Who wants to see a naked woman on a billboard?

Why should the so-called public airwaves be regulated? Can the consumer not make the choice? If the majority of citizens finds a program offensive, it will eventually leave the "public airwaves" and go to a subscriber-based format, or whatever.

I'm just throwing out academic thoughts here.

[nebula]

I have to leave from the computer for now, but before I do I just have to say that it breaks my heart to read Christians justifying the right to sin. Paul had very harsh words to say about the body of believers allowing sin into the assembly. Jesus hates sin. Yet how do we treat and regard sin?

The US isn't the assembly. I'm not advocating allowing sin into the church. I'm advocating letting the Spirit work through non-Christians by not shoving our beliefs down people's throats and loving them/evangelising them instead.

Meanwhile, they shove their crap down our throats and make us swallow. Oh joys.

[nebula]

And yes I am angry and emotional. I have too many wounds to deal with.

I'm out of here.

[forrestkc]

Are not environmental laws "legislating morality"?

No, not at all. The quality of the environment we live in impacts every individual in the nation, or world for that matter. Environmental laws prevent one individual, group, or organization, from overly degrading the quality of the air, water, or soil, and thus impacting the quality of life for others, and thus impeding their rights. Property rights also come into play here. For example, if I just poured out my used oil into a stream that ran through my property, my actions would then degrade the water flowing through other property owners down stream.